eCommerce Summit Q&A: Part 1

Jason RakowskiOn April 24, 2008 at 5:11 pm Said:

Good Layout and design. I like your blog. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. .

Jason Rakowski

implogOn April 24, 2008 at 5:29 pm Said:

Matt Halprin said about hiding the identity of buyers’ DSR ratings of sellers:

“Matt: This is a tough issue and it’s one that we haven’t settled on inside eBay yet. I’ll explain why they are the way they are now but also talk about the fact that they may be changing. First of all, why wouldn’t we make it completely transparent? The answer is that we have seen sellers who send emails after receiving a negative, (for example, they have received a 3 or 4 from a buyer) and the seller begins to harass the buyer. I get examples of this sent to me from buyers all the time. The harassment is what we’re really trying to get away from.”

Go after the few sellers who harass buyers. Don’t punish all sellers.

Go after the few sellers who leave retaliatory negative feedback for buyers. Don’t punish all sellers.

Why drop an atomic bomb when technology allows, no, demands, surgical strikes?

If there are a few bad eBay corporate employees should all eBay corporate employees be punished?

TWOn April 24, 2008 at 5:29 pm Said:

A comment on free shipping:

1. I would have to raise my starting prices to cover.

2. eBay would be payed FVF’s on what my item sold for.

Both would mean more money for eBay and less for me. If eBay keeps this up I will have to quit selling here. I simply can not afford it any more.

Is this what you want?

implogOn April 24, 2008 at 5:38 pm Said:

Dinesh Lathi said:

Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: “The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.”

Is that so?

Really?

So why did I just pay for shipping of the 2 lbs of Stilton cheese (yum) I bought through Amazon?

Why did I pay for shipping for 3 MP3/multimedia players I bought from QVC?

Why does eBay’s own store, The eBay Shop charge for shipping?

What am I missing?

DagnyOn April 24, 2008 at 5:50 pm Said:

“Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now. Sellers who want to meet buyer expectations need to aspire to that. It is our job, the people here on stage, to help you do that. So, there are definite things in the works at eBay that will help you accomplish that. Look for that soon.”

Gee maybe it’s just me, but I do a fair amount of online buying (not on eBay) and I don’t find that “free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now”. I guess I am not shopping at the right places.

DagnyOn April 24, 2008 at 6:23 pm Said:

“Lorrie: We announced this change back in January and it goes into effect in May. My advice is as soon as your buyers pay you, give them positive feedback.”

Why do buyers need to receive feedback at all? If sellers can not be honest in the feedback they, how does it have any meaning to the buyer? It is a positive coerced by eBay.

At the time of payment all I can say about a buyer is “Paid”. What is the point? Why not just do away with it. Richard, ask Lorrie that.

If I don’t leave feedback first and the buyer leaves negative feedback saying “Seller does not leave feedback first.” will eBay remove it under the abuse policy? That type of feedback has nothing to do with the transaction or the item or my customer service and will greatly affect my ability to do business on eBay. Ask Lorrie that.

JewelrySellerOn April 24, 2008 at 7:54 pm Said:

‘Free Shipping’ certainly is not the standard of the internet. And if it was, historically, with rising fuel prices, shipping costs will skyrocket, too.

We can absorb basic level shipping as free within our product pricing. If the customer wants ‘rush’ shipping, we can’t subsidize that cost for last minute purchases as holiday or birthday gifts.

And we definitely can’t absorb the $22 to $26 (prior to the USPS May 12th increases) for USPS Express International export shipments. We can’t build this into our pricing, just in case the sale turns out to be outside the USA. We may have to discontinue export business. Why risk the DSR hit?

JewelrySellerOn April 24, 2008 at 8:41 pm Said:

Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: “The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.”

Let’s ask Mr. Lathi to supply a list of the eCommerce community and products avaiable with free shipping -

It’s not -
Amazon
Sears
WalMart
Sharper Image
etc., etc., etc.

JJHOn April 24, 2008 at 8:46 pm Said:

Dinesh Lathi said:

Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: “The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.”

What the Hey?????

My family buys stuff online all the time. THERE IS NO FREE SHIPPING ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!

Where do STUPID COMMENTS AND IDEAS LIKE THIS COME FROM?

You people must be on some kind of California designer drugs.

DaveyOn April 24, 2008 at 8:53 pm Said:

“Free Shipping?” How does one pull that off when one ships domestically and internationally with the same item BIN price, yet shipping costs including indemnity are quite different? Or, do we deny free shipping to our cross-border buyers? Yep, that will make them happy.

Free shipping is NOT the ecommerce standard anywhere I shop (Amaz*n, Newe*g, OfficeM*x, etc.), except for promotions or very high minimum orders. And then, it is usually for 2 week shipping with no rush, with constant pressure to upgrade. Again, faulty facts and numbers used. Does eBay not know we see through this?

Why do many free shippers still have less than 5’s for shipping cost? Why doesn’t offering free shipping get you an automatic 5 on that DSR? All fairness says it should! And, eBay is getting their pocket lined from inclusion of shipping costs into the item price, so they should be happy to return some favor.

Why do I hear Lorrie and Matt always talking about how they will roll something out, THEN learn about it? Why aren’t they working with sellers actively FIRST and save us bruises from paying their “tuition” to learn?? These kind of post-release discussions shouldn’t even be happening! What a lousy way to run a business! Beat your customers up until you perfect your business model.

Why can’t the Shipping Time DSR be automatic between payment release and acceptance by the shipper? Lots of problems solved both domestic and cross-border, and everyone is happy. This is not stroke-of-genius thinking…

I still have not seen anything so far that proves eBay is actively listening and willing to work with their sellers to reach the site goals mutually? It may be gratifying to look out and see nodding heads, but I’m looking for results. They quite obviously do not have a working connection to the marketplace they are trying to revive. Sorry, but that is the arrogance we sellers talk about so often.

DaveyOn April 24, 2008 at 8:58 pm Said:

Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: “The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.”

This needs to be interpreted in the light that I believe eBay management sincerely thinks they are the center of the eCommerce universe, therefore they set the standards by speaking them into being.

The only other regular source of free shipping I know of is b*y.com, also one of the leading customer service bottom-feeding companies. Last thing I got from them was an MP3 player sent Media Mail 3 weeks after order, rolling around in an otherwise empty box.

TheBrewsNewsOn April 24, 2008 at 9:08 pm Said:

From the Keynote address:

“1. Back in January, eBay said that the goal was to have 60% of PowerSellers qualify for at least a 5% discount and in Q1, 63% did qualify for at least the 5%.
2. It was estimated that 15% of all PowerSellers would qualify for the higher, 15% discount. In Q1, PowerSellers actually doubled that. 30% of all PowerSellers qualified for the 15% discount.”

From the Summit Q & A Part 1:

“Todd Lutwak, Sr. Director of Seller Development and Programs: The sellers have done an excellent job raising their DSRs. I think that sample that you took locally is definitely different from the metrics we’re seeing. Over 80% of PowerSellers have 4.5 DSR or above. We’re continuing to monitor as we progress to that July date.

Lorrie: I’d like to add that we really appreciate the work that PeSA is doing here. The educational work is going to be really important for sellers that want to get their high DSRs. To Todd’s point, 80% are doing it now and we want to have more.”

************************

************************

So, if I understand eBay’s statistics:

Approx 30% of Powersellers with DSRs 4.8 or above (15% discount)

Approx 33% of Powersellers with DSRs between 4.6 and 4.8 (5% discount)

Approx 17% of Powesellers with DSRs between 4.5 and 4.6

Approx 20% of Powersellers with DSRs below 4.5

If the eBay Pulse best store listings sellers have a percentage of 40% with DSRs below 4.5 that means the the bottom tier of Powersellers (based on DSRs) are more likely to be the higher volume sellers. Within the 4 tiers, what is the breakdown of Powersellers? In other words, in the top tier of Powersellers, those receiving 15% FVF discounts, how many are bronze Powersellers? How many are Titanium Powersellers?

And if 1/5 of current Powersellers are in danger of losing their status today, how many would have been in the bottom tier (lower than 4.5 DSRs) BEFORE eBay’s Seller Performance requirements were enacted last year? There are many Powersellers who left eBay voluntarily or who were forced out last year that would also have fallen in the bottom tier (lower than 4.5 DSRs) of all Powersellers. Ex: B-Land

********************
********************

“Lorrie: We announced this change back in January and it goes into effect in May. My advice is as soon as your buyers pay you, give them positive feedback.”

So, if I understand you correctly, buyers “deserve” feedback when they pay? I guess that makes sense from eBay’s perspective because, in the current eBay environment, making payment appears to be “optional” for the buyer and so those who do actually pay should receive positive feedback. Buyers who decide not to pay for several items can simply create a new eBay ID and start over again, “buying” several items and then deciding later which ones they will pay for.

********************
********************

“Matt: With the new system I think everyone in this room will get more specific information on a transaction that has not gone perfectly well. Buyers will now have 80 characters to provide feedback and detail all without the fear of a negative retaliatory feedback.”

Sellers will no longer be able to evaluate a buyer based on their eBay feedback, which will be completely irrelevant since buyers will ONLY be able to receive positive feedback. Does eBay REALLY think eBay sellers won’t find other ways to evaluate their potential buyers? Websites such as Rottenbidders.com are springing up everywhere.

The question eBay should be asking is why do eBay sellers feel the need to leave negative feedback for buyers. Only on eBay do sellers feel they NEED to leave negative feedback because only on eBay do sellers NEED to review buyers’ feedback to know whether (and how) to protect themselves. The reason eBay sellers feel the NEED to do so is because eBay and Paypal are not providing the protections for the sellers.

One major thing that sellers seem to be asking for is for eBay to verify new buyers and to link any new IDs created to previously created IDs so that when a seller blocks one ID then all current and future bidder IDs will be blocked. Why is eBay opposed to making “new” buyers verify their identity? How can eBay be a safe place when one party to the transaction can create throw-away IDs at will?
“New” sellers are required to accept Paypal so they are, in essence, required to verify who they are and buyers are protected from “new” sellers since they are able to have Paypal protections. “New” eBay buyers have no such requirement. How can ebay say that the marketplace will be a safer place in the future without that requirement for buyers?

Patricia 1On April 24, 2008 at 9:11 pm Said:

“Dinesh Lathi, VP of Seller Experience: “The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.”

Will they ever make sense! They squeeze the life out of us with fees and now they want free shipping too? Why not just give them the items and walk away - we’d probably be ahead of the game. Sheesh…folks - we’re adults here…make sense please!

Also, if free shipping is the standard then why did the Ebay store charge over 5.00 to mail a 6.00 keychain that weighed less than an ounce! Like I said, MAKE SENSE!

JewelrySellerOn April 24, 2008 at 9:38 pm Said:

I knew if I attended this eCommerce summit I’d either turn RED or PURPLE depending upon whether I said what I thought or kept biting my tongue and holding my breath.

As before, even the executive team can’t ’shovel it’ and get the sellers or PowerSellers to buy it from them.

MechelleOn April 24, 2008 at 10:27 pm Said:

I’m taking a leap and am asserting that those of us who do business on eBay exponentially to the millions surpass the eBay work force executives included- in outside of eBay e-commerce purchasing activity. The insults never stop with these people. you people clearly imagine that we are of the basest experience and intellect. How dare you tell me that free shipping is the standard, and how dare you say that the whole of those of us selling on eBay out due the rest of e-commerce in shipping costs. You are so black and white- short sided- hollow in mind.

You can’t say free shipping is the standard- free shipping is only available on any online retailer site when there is a promotion and only with 75- 100- 150 dollars spent. As mentioned that is for 2 week ground, and I personally always just pay for my shipping so I can have it in a week.

Also, those companies are large retailers that can assume the cost of paying the postage, but who also get business postage rates that we on eBay do not benefit from. Your out of your minds

Do you know how many regular customers I have- do you think they may feel alienated if I jacked all my prices up by 4.60 each and told them they were now lucky to be shopping at my store because I am so excited to announce they will now be receiving free shipping? Are you freaking crazy???? I’ll be damned if I’ll disrespect my customers the way you do yours. My customers mean something to me not because they buy from my store, but because they are people and no descent person treats people the way you people treat other people. My effort is to always find a way to give them a better deal not to slap them in the face with higher prices and hyped up superficially enthusiastic BS trying to convince them that they are getting a better deal with free shipping but paying an additional 4+ per each item.

Sounds familiar doesn’t it- free gallery big hike on FVFs. A decrease a decrease a decrease a decrease- Every time you spit out your BS you loose on a low estimate a dozen customers. Keep your business advice to yourself- when you do it better than I come talk. That is an invitation I’ll never have to host, because you will never reach this high.

[edited]

Patricia 1On April 24, 2008 at 10:42 pm Said:

I have a feeling what they’ll try to do is standardize shipping costs like some of Amazon’s wares. I know when I buy CD’s or Books on amazon the shipping charge is the same for each seller. I look for ebay to try that one….though I don’t think they can do it site-wide. Arts, for example cannot ship the a large painting for the same price as a book even though they may weigh the same. Just kind of thinking out loud here.

Patricia 1On April 24, 2008 at 10:49 pm Said:

Brews:

“One major thing that sellers seem to be asking for is for eBay to verify new buyers and to link any new IDs created to previously created IDs so that when a seller blocks one ID then all current and future bidder IDs will be blocked. Why is eBay opposed to making “new” buyers verify their identity? How can eBay be a safe place when one party to the transaction can create throw-away IDs at will?”

I don’t see that happening any time soon. Then they would have a clearer and more accurate count of how many users they really have ;-)

MechelleOn April 24, 2008 at 10:54 pm Said:

The stupidity of it is- my customers get a better shipping deal the way I have it- free after the initial 4.60 for cosmetics- the majority take advantage of this. They would pay much more if I were as base in character as eBay and offered them “free shipping” than to just pay the freaking 4.60 flat.

[edited]

implogOn April 25, 2008 at 5:22 am Said:

“So in summary, everything we’re doing this year is to
help us achieve our goals of: making eBay easier and safer, improving value and selection and extending PayPal to create a safer buyer experience.”

L. Norrington PESA eCommerce Shing Ding 4/23/08

Look at the feedback for member jim_tien who is having an “excellent buying experience”. What would be more valuable to the eBay community, the honest negative feedback left by sellers warning other sellers of this crook or positive feedback left immediately as suggested by Ms. Norringoton “My advice is as soon as your buyers pay you, give them positive feedback”?

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=jim_tien&ftab=AllFeedback

How out of touch with the reality of eBay’s auction buyer/seller process do you have to be before you are asked to clear your cube and walked out the door?

The Trust & Safety (Safe Harbor) discussion board receives posts about new scams and scammers on eBay almost daily. A recurring part of many posts is “I reported this to eBay and did not hear back/they did nothing.”

There is a thread anchored at the top of the T & S board titled “Today’s Scams In Progress” and it was NOT posted by any eBay employee to help the community or to make an “excellent buying experience”.

Ebay’s security problem was created and is well maintained not by sellers but by eBay’s abject failure at taking action against thieves.

Richard — Learn more of your new home. Spend some time reading the T & S board posts. See how community members NOT eBay help folks who have been scammed. Count the number of times you read about eBay inaction on reported site crime.

Then try to keep your integrity and hold your lunch next time you hear a chirpy eBay exec, mgr or “team member” talk about making eBay “safer”.

TheBrewsNewsOn April 25, 2008 at 5:47 am Said:

Perhaps eBay is basing their comments on “flawed” data.

For example, I quickly surveyed eBay, Amazon, and the eBay Store (direct) to get the shipping price on an individual mug:

*************
From Amazon - Diner Coffee Mug - $7.45 shipping

From eBay - individual Mug - $5.50
(auction 190215944967 - uses calculated shipping so could be higher depending on your zip code)

From eBay store (direct purchase from eBay) - $6.84 shipping
*************

However, if you use the keyword search “coffee mug” on eBay and then calculate the average shipping price per auction, per item, you would get very skewed results. On the first page of results that were returned, I found several listings for mugs which contained multiple mugs in the listing. NOT ONE of these listings were correct in their listing — they all listed their offerings as being a quantity of 1 instead of the a quantity of 4
(1 lot with 4 items is how the listing is supposed to appear).

Therefore, anyone running “statistics” would think that these buyers were charging $10.50 PER MUG, for example, rather than $10.50 for a set of 4 mugs.

So, on the surface it might appear that the shipping costs on eBay are higher than elsewhere simply.

110245827214
220225555212
120249207827
120249222944
150238628792

I stopped writing down the auction numbers after the first five but the vast majority of eBay listings with multiple items are listed incorrectly on eBay.

Because of the incorrect “input” into the system, of course the “output” would be flawed — Perhaps shipping PER ITEM is not really higher on eBay. Perhaps instead, the eBay system is flawed in its gathering of statistical information.

But I am assuming that eBay management’s statement about shipping being higher on eBay is based on actual numerical data. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps their statement is simply based on one of their eBay user surveys — “Do you think shipping costs on eBay are too high in comparison to other ecommerce sites” and because a majority of buyers answered YES, eBay management now has the “factual” data they need to enact policy changes forcing sellers to lower their shipping costs.

JewelrySellerOn April 25, 2008 at 8:55 am Said:

I think this eBay’s way to force us sellers to help eBay look better (more competitive) when compared to Amazon.

Force the sellers to offer free shipping and pay the costs out of our pockets. Then -

Buy from eBay and get free shipping. Buy anywhere else on the internet, pay for shipping.

Patricia 1On April 25, 2008 at 9:13 am Said:

I don’t particularly think ebay is trying to get sellers to lower their shipping prices….underneath it all I believe they want sellers to hide their true shipping costs in the opening price (and advertise free shipping) then ebay gets a cut on it in their fees….sorry…but that’s what I’m thinking about the whole shipping problem. There really is NO outrageous shipping costs that can’t be handled by educating the buyer. Nobody should ever be gouged on shipping if they just use a little bit of effort to find out the shipping costs and agree to them BEFORE they bid. No whining afterward, etc. I base that firmly on the fact that so far - “enhancing the buyer’s experience” is doing nothing but lining ebay’s pockets!

TWOn April 25, 2008 at 9:22 am Said:

So let’s compare eBay to Amazon since eBay seems to want to be Amazon.

A less than 1 lb. item (earbud headphones) on and from Amazon costs $5.58 to ship “standard” shipping. If an order exceeds $25 you get free “standard” shipping. I can attest to the fact that “standard” shipping is excessively slow. If a PS on eBay took that long to ship their stars would be none too good and they would not be a PS long.

The same item on eBay can range from $10 to ship (ridiculously high) to $4 to ship (a little low). There was one that shipped for free but the item was flat out retail price which could be expected.

The question is do the buyers want bargains and fair shipping prices or do they want retail prices and free shipping? It’s not going to be both ways and the lowest prices total on eBay turned out to be the item with reasonable shipping.

And this is for consumer goods not HTF collectible/antiques which IMO will be a financial hardship for a seller, especially a small seller, to ship for free not to mention for eBay to control the shipping price on. The bots will be overloaded and make mistake after mistake as the aforementioned multiple coffee mugs pointed out.

Amazon owns and ships products they own while eBay does not. I am all for some type of standardization for shipping but to expect free shipping is going to make sure the eBay marketplace will lose all that makes it unique as small sellers of HTF items slowly migrate to other marketplaces.

As eBay continues to rest control away from the seller, the seller is going to continue the slow migration away from eBay and onto venues that allow the seller the freedom to operate in a fashion that the seller deems as beneficial to their business.

Patricia 1On April 25, 2008 at 9:38 am Said:

This is how much ebay cares about buyer’s experience. Ebay allows buyers to buy fakes from China - why? This is more of the same…art fraud…that I posted before that still has not been addressed.

150238837936 - original painting
Original MADART Painting ABSTRACT ART Modern SURREAL

220222901365 - chinese fake - he even mentions her in his title!!!
Original MADART Painting ABSTRACT ART Modern SURREAL

The chinese seller is a powerseller - maybe untouchable? Else why are ALL these Chinese powersellers getting away with openly selling fakes?

Randy SmytheOn April 25, 2008 at 11:05 am Said:

The “Free Shipping” comment comes directly from the only competitor out there that matters to eBay — Amazon

Mr. Lathi, could just as easily have said “Amazon” is the standard in online commerce.

Amazon offers “Free Shipping” for orders of just $25 or for Amazon Prime Customers who pay for their membership. Everybody else they charge S&H.

But that is the standard that is working.

JewelrySellerOn April 25, 2008 at 11:45 am Said:

Now, if eBay had said to the Seller community, ‘Offer free shipping and eBay will roll back the February price increases’, I’d be much more eager to participate.

eBay, you don’t seem to have any hesitation in causing sellers ‘pain’. But you don’t have any willingness to ’share’ in the ‘pain’ you want to inflict!

TWOn April 25, 2008 at 12:43 pm Said:

Amazon owns their own items they offer free shipping on. Those 3rd party companies that sell on the Amazon site all charge shipping as far as I can tell. Amazon might control the shipping cost from 3rd parties to an extent but I just checked one supplier and the regular shipping rate was higher with the 3rd party supplier than it was for Amazon.

“The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now.” is a statement without validity.

JewelrySellerOn April 25, 2008 at 12:44 pm Said:

Next thought - Who pays insurance?

Signature verification of delivery is $1.75 for First Class or Priority Mail.

I can offer/build in free ’standard’ shipping for my products.

I can offer ‘discounted’ priority or express shipping by discounting the value of standard shipping from these rates.

This could create a buyer choice of free standard shipping with the option of discounted shipping at a faster delivery rate.

We currently require insurance for USA shipments starting at $1.75 up to $50 in value (the cost of delivery signature verification).

SandiOn April 25, 2008 at 1:09 pm Said:

I’m sorry but I think ebay is totally missing the mark on what their biggest public relation nightmare is - it’s not shipping, it’s not item not received - it’s clear and as posts here have shown, ebay is NOT addressing the real problem with the resources it must if it wants to remain viable.

=======================================

PARIS (Reuters) - L’Oreal, the world’s largest cosmetics group, has launched legal action against eBay, alleging the online auctioneer does not do enough to combat the sale of counterfeits, the company said on Monday.
======================================================
Fed Up With Fakes
LVMH and other luxury brands are aiming big guns at online purveyors of knockoffs

A recent listing on eBay reads: “Brand new authentic Louis Vuitton holdall, $188!” Offers another: “Authentic Dior sunglasses, $23.30.” Too good to be true? You bet, says Paris-based luxury giant LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton. LVMH has filed a lawsuit against eBay Inc. (EBAY ) contending that nearly all Vuitton and Dior items sold on the auction site are fakes.
====================================================

Fake - Ona Yote Dance Team Jacket Patch on eBay

=====================================================

Identify Royal Vienna Fakes on eBay
My World April 4th, 2008
I am appalled at the many incorrectly identified pieces of porcelain for sale on eBay and elsewhere. The fakes and frauds are numerous.

================================================================

Sunday 28th January - Ebay finally took some action against one of the biggest sellers of fakes - Eftis aka Bidancient - after the UK Sunday Times exposed him. He brags about how he regularly shill bids - uses friends to bump up a bid price against the real buyer - and then tries to backtrack rapidly when confronted.

There is clear evidence of this taking place and many bona-fide dealers have complained to Ebay about this and his fake items, especially his Greek Hoplite helmets that sell for several thousand dollars and originate from China. (made last week.)
It took exposure from a quality national newspaper to push Ebay into taking action. The power of the press!!

====================================================

Watchdog Group Gives Live Demo of eBay Security Vulnerability

Mar 13, 2008 … Falle-Internet.de was able to display reporters’ eBay account information on a special page once reporters had visited an eBay Germany

=====================================================

$490 million worth of Fake Sneakers Found in Germany
When all was said and done just under 1 million (945,384) pairs of knock-off Nikes were apprehended and thrown in the dump (see picture above). So if you’re in the market for some Jordans and are cruising ebay, if it’s too good to be true most likely it’s not.

=====================================================

eBay Gets Sued For Selling Counterfeit Goods
French cosmetics company L’Oreal is suing eBay in 5 European countries - Belgium, France, Germany, UK and Spain - for selling counterfeit bottles of perfume. L’Oreal claims they’ve tried to reach an agreement with eBay on this matter, but in the end had no choice but to sue them.

This is definitely not the first time eBay has been sued over fake goods: in this case from 2000, they’ve been sued for sale of fake sports memorabilia. eBay’s stance then (and probably now) was that they merely offer a platform for selling goods and that they cannot be held accountable for the authenticity of individual items on sale.

=====================================================

Tiffany Sues eBay over Fakes

===========================

Just do a search on ebay and fakes, you will find countless news articles from AP, Reuters and every other news source.

You can browse hundreds, if not thousands of collector sites that list seller after seller who are known to be selling fakes - some of these sites even keep track of how many times they have been reported to ebay and how long it takes ebay to finally do something (if they do anything at all).

“eBay’s stance then (and probably now) was that they merely offer a platform for selling goods and that they cannot be held accountable for the authenticity of individual items on sale. ”

Right, that’s the attitude to improve the buyer experience and trust in the venue.

It’s time ebay stopped with the smoke screens and actually really addressed the real problems.

Patricia 1On April 25, 2008 at 2:43 pm Said:

If I may - the arts categories are also riddled with fraud. Especially Chinese sellers (sorry but they are the biggest offenders) will steal an image from a successful artist’s listings and then reprint it crudely - maybe even slap a little paint on it and are selling these fakes as originals. Many times they don’t even bother to change the artist’s name on the painting!!! They are reported to no avail. Even the artists themselves who try to report it under Vero get the runaround or get ignored. They are getting away with this and buyers are getting duped instead of the “exciting experience” ebay wants us to give our buyers! Something needs to be done - not to just line ebay’s pockets but to really bring up the reputation of that site. Ebay is forcing this on ALL sellers but refuses to do their share to clean up the place because then that costs them money. Its kind of like having the wolf guard the henhouse - sorry to be so blatant but its true.

I’ve given two examples on this blog of art fraud - still would like an answer as to what ebay is doing about it. I have no idea if they still have Arts Community watch but most of us quit it because it simply had no teeth and we got tired of reporting the same offenders over and over again.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn April 25, 2008 at 2:48 pm Said:

“The sellers have done an excellent job raising their DSRs. I think that sample that you took locally is definitely different from the metrics we’re seeing.”

Seems to strengthen the argument that the data eBay chooses to recognize is subjective to suit their purposes, so therefore unreliable. The sellers on eBay Pulse represent the ones offering items which bring in the most traffic and attention to the site. what happens to eBay’s traffic and site attention when those sellers decide to take their items elsewhere?

“Lorrie: I was referring to the fact that sellers were 8 times more likely to leave a retaliatory negative remark and that is why we changed the Feedback system.”

eBay definition of “retaliatory” is incorrect. It assumes that just because the feedback was left last must mean that its sole purpose was retaliation, rather than waiting to leave accurate feedback on the entire transaction upon its conclusion.

“What has happened over time is that sellers have increasingly held off on leaving feedback until the buyer leaves feedback to make sure they don’t get a negative rating without being able to counter that.”

Wrong. Sellers were waiting so they could leave an accurate feedback which consisted of the entire transaction. Should a buyer not receive a neg if they perform a charge back, after receiving the item and not sending it back? Should a buyer like that have a 100% positive rating, simply because they initially paid, but ultimately reneged on the payment? Should a buyer not receive a neg if they receive a new item, use it, and then try to return it for a full refund? Basically, seller’s used negs to keep the marketplace informed about such scamming buyers that eBay allowed into the site. If eBay actively booted such buyers, then sellers wouldn’t have need to keep the community informed on such situations. If eBay reacted quickly when such reports were made by sellers, instead of ignoring or waiting for a “pattern”, sellers wouldn’t need to leave negs, because the buyer would be NARU.

Ebay created this atmosphere, and the need for sellers to leave negs, because eBay failed to make the enviroment safe for sellers. Ebay needs to fix their end of the problem, before taking away a seller’s only protection and voice in the transaction.

“Sellers used to do this twice as much as buyers; now it is eight times as much.”

That is most likely because eBay is attracting scamming buyers at least eight times more than they once were. How does the higher rate of so called “retaliatory feedback” compare to the increase in buyer traffic? If the traffic has increased, and thereby the percentage of scamming buyers have increased, then it stands to reason that the use of neg feedback against these scamming buyers would have increased as well.

It is ridiculous to think that sellers just started leaving negs against good buyers. They were leaving it against buyers would abused or tried to circumvent the system.

“So basically buyers were no longer willing to hold sellers accountable for their performance; which is why 90% of sellers have positive feedback scores of 99% and above.”

Buyers can create a new id on a whim, and eBay prevents a seller from automatically blocking a 0 feedback bidder, so such a scenario is ridiculous. On the flip side, I once had a non-paying bidder, who did respond to the UPID, but did not pay. I would have loved to leave that buyer a neg, as a warning to other sellers, but I didn’t. Why? Because I was afraid that this non-paying bidder would leave a retaliatory neg for me. I was not going to allow my selling reputation to be damaged by a non-paying bidder, which eBay allowed to continue using the site. It is much harder to establish a new selling id, that buyers will trust, than it is for a buyer to establish a new buying id.

<i”It is up to us to help your economics by making sure that buyers are more confident when they bid.”

How about helping the seller’s economics by providing a safer enviroment to sell in, by getting rid of these scamming buyers quickly and not allowing them to create new ids on the site?

“Which is why we changed the system and with this more honest of a system we’ll be able to do things like elevate items in search and reward sellers for top performance with bigger discounts.”

It is not an “honest system” when only one party can leave accurate feedback. It is not an “honest system” when all buyers will have inflated 100% scores. It is not an “honest system” when scamming buyers can target smaller sellers, more now than ever before, because they know that smaller sellers do not have the volume to absorb a negative compared to a higher volume seller.

“All of which will create more of a race to the top than we’ve had before.”

All they did is make things harder for sellers, and rolled out an even bigger and brighter red carpet for scamming buyers.

“Frankly, I think that means the DSRs are working because we all know that S&H charges on eBay are higher than the Internet on the whole. ”

Really. I’d love to know where. I charge more for shipping on my other site, than eBay sellers do. When I buy online for big retailers I pay more for shipping (that eBay) and usually have to wait a week or more for the item to be shipped out.

“The fact of the matter is that free shipping is the standard for eCommerce now. Sellers who want to meet buyer expectations need to aspire to that.”

Wrong, and even more important, it is an impractical expectation for the type of seller eBay was created for. Unless, of course, they want to get rid of the casual sellers all together, and have only professional sellers who may be able to accomplish this. Either way, it won’t attract this professional seller, as I know I can charge for shipping and still sell my items for higher elsewhere. Losing money on shipping is not an incentive for any seller to participate in such a venue.

“to Matt’s point, there are a lot of people out there getting 5s for S&H.”

Yet, even more that are not? Since when did a few represent and overwhelming pattern that these sellers are doing what others are not? More of eBay’s fuzzy data.

“The answer is that we have seen sellers who send emails after receiving a negative, (for example, they have received a 3 or 4 from a buyer) and the seller begins to harass the buyer.”

First, was it simply an inquiry to find out what was wrong (what I’ve read mostly) or true harassment? Second, was the buyer’s rating fair, based on the auctions representation, or was it unfair? If it is unfair (mostly what I’ve read), why is eBay allowing buyers to ruin seller standings based on these unfair and unrealistic expectations? Third, if eBay had accurately informed buyers of the true effects the 3 or 4 ratings had (not good), would the buyer have still left such a low rating? These are the questions that eBay needs to ask, in order to determine the validity of the buyer’s claim.

“new initiatives or experiments that we’ll want your input on.”

Experiments? With my business and livelihood? I think not! Sorry, but that has got to be one of the worst things I have ever read from an eBay representative.

“With the new system I think everyone in this room will get more specific information on a transaction that has not gone perfectly well. Buyers will now have 80 characters to provide feedback and detail all without the fear of a negative retaliatory feedback.”

If eBay wants the information for their purposes, fine. Have the buyer’s feedback response show up only to eBay. Why does eBay need possibly inaccurate, unverified, unable to be contested, buyer feedback publicly displayed, which will only hurt and ultimately ruin a seller’s business.

Where is the buyer’s accountability in all of this?

MistyOn April 25, 2008 at 2:56 pm Said:

I use exact shipping in all my listings and have never had a problem with shipping or retaliatory feedback in my over 10 years with eBay. There is no such thing as free shipping no matter how you want to spin it.

Sellers are buyers also and some are even our best buyers, they are here every day.

I have had 2 NPS and 1 NPB in all my years I guess I am fortunate but yet I still wear those negatives because of the loopholes in the system… It did not stop me from trusting other sellers or buyers however I feel and strongly believe that NPS and NPB have no right to leave any kind of feedback due to their failure in the transactions.

I think eBay could have better resolved this issue by taking a more of a hands on in disputes by creating a panel of our peers to oversee these disputes rather than automating them as they have done.

I totally agree with what everyone else here is saying and no kind of candy coating will make me feel any differently.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn April 25, 2008 at 3:04 pm Said:

@ Misty

From what I read on the eBay forums, eBay was either in the process of or at least considering creating a court of sorts, which would look into these types of disputes. However, for some reason, eBay decided to scrap the idea.

I, for one, thought such a court was an excellent idea. Perhaps Richard can find out why eBay decided to abandon it?

Although, if eBay is looking to be more of a “retail” experience, rather than a community, then such a court would probably drive away the type of buyers they are looking to attract.

MistyOn April 25, 2008 at 3:42 pm Said:

@Crunchy
I was not aware of that thank you, I have been inactive for about a year due to deaths in my family and such so to come back to all of this was overwhelming to me.

If eBay would just remove the bad buyers and sellers like they originally promised to do years ago we would not be having these problems now, eBay could have just as easily educated buyers and told them this was their policy and ENFORCE it buyers would have understood and agreed that it was not to insult them but to protect the community from fraud and scams and in the long run protecting and making it a better place for everyone but nooooo eBay thought it made more sense to make it easier for these frauds and scams and verbally insult and accuse sellers making buyers feel we are all thief’s and allow them to run buckshot at will over all of us it just so amazes me their lack of reasoning and common sense. When Richard first posted this I just sat and stared at it reading it over and over not even knowing where to begin.

I do hope Richard finds that answer for us because I feel it would make much more sense to do that and make it a revolving panel so it is not the same say 6 people overseeing these disputes.

implogOn April 25, 2008 at 3:52 pm Said:

@ Crunchy

I enjoyed your thoughtful and reasoned post. It made me take another look at the Q&A answers .

“Matt: Shipping and handling is the lowest DSR of the four but I do want to point out that 72% of all DSRs left for S&H are 5s. Frankly, I think that means the DSRs are working because we all know that S&H charges on eBay are higher than the Internet on the whole.”

Parse this sentence.

Is he saying that “72% of all DSRs left for shipping and handling are 5s” in spite of or because “we all know that S&H charges on eBay are higher than the Internet as a whole.”?

Is he saying buyers gave 5s to sellers with the highest S&H charges on the Internet?

Frankly, I think he might be talking about the S&H charges at the eBay Store ; )

implogOn April 25, 2008 at 4:16 pm Said:

Our blog pal Usher Lieberman was in the news.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/25/ebay.boycott

“For its part, eBay is holding firm on the changes. Its (eBay’s) spokesperson, Usher Lieberman, told guardian.co.uk there is no place on eBay for sellers who do not give buyers exceptional customer service and the “vocal minority’ who are unhappy “will be routed off” the site. “We have set the bar high,” he admitted.”

According to Mr. Lieberman, soon not only a low DSR/feedback rating will get someone removed from the site. He says the “vocal minority” will be “routed off” too.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn April 25, 2008 at 4:25 pm Said:

@ Implog

I think he means “in spite of”. However, the 72% of all DSRs left for S&H are 5s makes no sense. If that was the case, then the majority of sellers would have 4.6 and above.

How can the majority to stars left for S&H be 5s, yet the S&H is the rating the majority of sellers are lowest on?

Not to mention, according to eBay’s own evaluation chart, they are making low stars against S&H count less than the other categories, because they thought buyers would rate that too harshly.

Something doesn’t make sense here. Either it is their numbers, their application of the numbers, or their logic.

How can S&H be the lowest star rating, in spite of 72% of those ratings being 5s, and the fact that eBay affords less weight to that category when determining Top 10%, 50%, etc.?

As to my long post above, I truly hope that someone from eBay will take the time to address the questions and points I made in it. If not, perhaps Richard can find out the answers and let us know.

MistyOn April 25, 2008 at 4:35 pm Said:

Interesting IMPLOG Thank you.

As I stated above I have been inactive for a year so at this point I have no DSR rating what so ever, where does this leave me? Is eBay going to boot me out before even finding out what rating I could have?

Vocal Minority??? I think they will be greatly surprised that the minority is in fact the majority.

implogOn April 25, 2008 at 4:37 pm Said:

I envision Richard eating crab at a Lake Pontchartrain restaurant this evening, frantically searching monster.com

TheBrewsNewsOn April 25, 2008 at 4:44 pm Said:

Perhaps, what he means (when he says that “72% of all DSRs left for shipping and handling are 5s) is:

Out of 100 DSRs left, 72 are 5s and the remaining 28 are some number less than 5.

So, for example, if the remaining 28 (out of the 100) are all DSRs of 1, then the average DSR rating would be 3.9 calculated as ((72 x 5) + (28 x 1))/100

What I take that to mean then is that buyers typically leave a 5 for Shipping Cost (probably if they happy with the overall way the transaction went) or they leave a VERY low rating, which is probably why eBay started asking buyers to provide an explanation as to why they were giving a “1″ or a “2″.

SandiOn April 25, 2008 at 6:04 pm Said:

ebay, as usual is a little late:

Ecommerce Study: Free Shipping Is Out, Social Networking Is In
April 09, 2008

Shop.org’s annual study of online retailing conducted by Forrester Research for 125 retailers predicts that online retail will rise 17 percent this year to $204 billion. The State of Retailing Online 2008 study forecasts apparel ($26.6 billion), computers ($23.9 billion), and autos ($19.3 billion) to be the largest three sales categories.

The report states that while free shipping offers have been effective in the past, retailers are less interested in promoting free shipping options this year. Instead, retailers are eager to experiment with “social computing” initiatives to attract customers: 65 percent and 55 percent of retailers, respectively, said that social network advertisements and widgets would be categories of increased focus this year.

TheBrewsNewsOn April 25, 2008 at 8:51 pm Said:

I continue to be so very impressed by the ideas, questions, comments, and information being posted on this blog by eBay sellers and buyers.

I only wish more eBay employees, like Colin, would take the time to respond. Sellers may not agree with everything that Colin has said but at least I get the feeling that he is listening and giving consideration to what is being said. Kudos.

implogOn April 26, 2008 at 4:25 am Said:

In an earlier post above, I copied a quote from eBay spokesman Usher Lieberman from a Guardian U.K. article titld “Auction Site eBay Defies Boycott Threats.” in which he said:

“For its part, eBay is holding firm on the changes. Its (eBay’s) spokesperson, Usher Lieberman, told guardian.co.uk there is no place on eBay for sellers who do not give buyers exceptional customer service and the “vocal minority’ who are unhappy “will be routed off” the site. “We have set the bar high,” he admitted.”

Lieberman’s quote seems to directly contradict the quote from John Donahoe in his eBayINK blog interview. It seems Mr. Donahoe is encouraging the “vocal minority” to speak out and says eBay will “embrace” what people have to say “constructive criticism or praise”.

Richard - Can you explain this contradiction between the CEO’s message and what the company spokesperson said? Is there an internal disconnect in the organization’s goals?

See Donahoe’s quote copied below.

“Listen and have passion. Our goal is not to be a finely tuned, smooth, perfect machine. The minute our community stops talking is the minute I worry. Because their opinions, constructive criticism or praise, stem from passion. People are basically good – that is our belief. And we will not shut our ears to what people have to say – we will embrace it.”

Patricia 1On April 26, 2008 at 10:05 am Said:

I’m afraid those speaking out are in the minority in “noise” only - watch the quiet ones who silently pack up and leave when they have better options and when they’ve had enough. Obviously, ebay is not considering this yet any seller you ask tells you they have that breaking point….and many tell you they’ve just about had enough of ebay superiority complex. Right now, they can’t even keep their listings up without some reduced fee gimmick.

Patricia 1On April 26, 2008 at 10:08 am Said:

“Listen and have passion. Our goal is not to be a finely tuned, smooth, perfect machine. The minute our community stops talking is the minute I worry. Because their opinions, constructive criticism or praise, stem from passion. People are basically good – that is our belief. And we will not shut our ears to what people have to say – we will embrace it.”

Sadly, they prove over and over that this is simply “ebay-speak” for the media and nothing more. What troubles me so much is that they expect people to believe it. To me that shows a lack of grasp of the problem and a callousness towards their customers as well. :-(

MistyOn April 26, 2008 at 7:26 pm Said:

@ Richard

I ran across and article or comment along the lines of eBay was implementing fees on cross border trade access. I don’t know if this is something they are all ready doing or plan to do. Would you please find out for us because these will be additional fees to my understanding.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn April 26, 2008 at 7:49 pm Said:

Very good question, Implog:
“Richard - Can you explain this contradiction between the CEO’s message and what the company spokesperson said? Is there an internal disconnect in the organization’s goals?”

I realize that eBay is a very large corporation, but you would think that at least all of upper management would be on the same page. Even Norrington seemed to indicate, in the transcripts from the recent meeting, that eBay was eager to hear from the users and would take such comments into consideration.

This is only one example of the conflicting messages that eBay users are constantly receiving. Does eBay just send these people out to interviews without even bothering to brief them on what the latest “spin” is?

Which version of eBay’s attitude towards sellers are we supposed to believe?

TheBrewsNewsOn April 26, 2008 at 9:02 pm Said:

Misty, I think you are inquiring about a comment that I made on the Lorrie Norrington topic. To further explain the information, below is the official eBay announcement made on March 31, 2008:

***A Message from Stephanie Tilenius — The International Site Visibility listing upgrade for US, Canada, UK and Ireland sites***

March 31, 2008 | 08:01AM PST/PT

Stephanie Tilenius
Hello everyone…This is Stephanie Tilenius, General Manager for eBay North America. The ability to sell internationally is a key benefit of doing business on the eBay marketplace. I’m pleased to announce an exciting new listing feature upgrade that will give sellers in North America the option to get full visibility for their items on other eBay sites, initially eBay.co.uk, enabling them to reach many millions more buyers.

How International Selling Works Today
eBay’s global marketplace opens the door to international business for many sellers. Traditionally, US sellers who want to attract buyers in the UK and elsewhere have had two options:

1) They can list on eBay.com and choose World Wide Shipping or other international shipping options. In this scenario, their items only show up on another international site in the few cases when buyers specifically look for international items using Advanced Search features.

Or –

2) They can create a separate listing on another international eBay site (and pay all the same fees that other sellers pay to list there).

Coming Soon: International Site Visibility Listing Upgrade

In May, we’re giving sellers who list on US and Canada sites a better option for international exposure by introducing the International Site Visibility listing upgrade. With this listing upgrade, sellers will be able to list on their local site and pay a small upgrade fee so that their listing also shows up in the main default search results to buyers across the Atlantic on eBay.co.uk – two sites for a great price.

In the US, the fees to use this optional upgrade are as follows:

Start Price
$0.01 -9.99
International Site Visibility Listing Upgrade Fee
10 cents

Start Price
$10 - 49.99
International Site Visibility Listing Upgrade Fee
20 cents

Start Price
$50+
International Site Visibility Listing Upgrade Fee
40 cents

The International Site Visibility listing upgrade offers sellers who want to expand their international business a great value – items with this upgrade show up by default for international buyers in the market selected in addition to the buyers in the seller’s own market. This makes international listing economical and easier to manage than listing separately for international sites.

Data shows that depending on the category and start-price, it only takes one or two extra bids from international buyers to make up the cost of the International Site Visibility fee.

For PowerSellers, using this feature also ensures that these UK sales are counted towards their Final Value Fee discounts.

UK, Ireland, US and Canada International Support Only
At launch, the International Site Visibility listing upgrade will only be available for eBay UK, eBay Ireland, eBay Canada and eBay.com. US and Canada sellers have the upgrade option to list on eBay UK, and UK and Ireland sellers have the upgrade option to list on the North America sites. We’ll be adding support for more international markets in the near future, so stay tuned.

A word about testing – US-UK Collectibles
Over the past six months, we’ve been running tests in the collectibles-related categories on eBay.com and eBay.co.uk, looking for optimal ways to display international listings. These tests will be concluding as we introduce International Site Visibility as an upgrade available for almost all categories to US and UK sellers.

We’re excited about the new opportunities for the members in our communities to do even more trade together. International Site Visibility helps sellers reach international buyers – and helps increase the value and selection available to buyers! We’ll update you again once International Site Visibility is launched.

Sincerely,

Stephanie Tilenius
General Manager, eBay North America

TheBrewsNewsOn April 26, 2008 at 9:09 pm Said:

Approximately 1/3 of my eBay sales are international and I will NOT be paying for this extra insertion fee. Fortunately I have lots of repeat buyers, many of whom go straight to my eBay store. Of course, those international sales will no longer be eligible for FVF discounts even though I have the DSRs to be eligible for a 5% discount (would be 15% except for my Shipping Cost DSR). So, once again, I’ll be raising my international shipping rates just slightly in May in order to compensate for the loss of the 5% FVF that I should have earned but will not receive.

MistyOn April 26, 2008 at 9:55 pm Said:

@ TheBrewsNews
Yes that sounds like what I seen, I also seen the fee scale shown with it, I tried to re track my steps to find the fee scale I seen but I was in so many places Au, UK I am not sure where it was I came across it at but yes that is the same thing I was referring to Thank you.