John Donahoe Interviews Pierre Omidyar

Formerly Known As MarikaBooksOn 04.29.2008 at 4:56 pm Said:

CrunchyPostingGoodness, you said it all. Very inciteful and accurate post!

Patricia 1On 04.29.2008 at 5:00 pm Said:

Richard - first I want to thank you for posting that video - it speaks volumes in what is said between the lines. Please remember that some of us may get a bit hot under the collar but its not directed at you - just at the frustrating situation we are in. This blog is one of the best ideas ebay has had in a long long time. I do hope they weill read it and weigh what we’re saying here.

@ Crunchy:

Hmmmm….I see it more simplistically….

Ebay works for ebay….period. They may wrap it up in ebay-speak but nothing gets done that does not ultimately benefit ebay. That’s only good business…except where their treatment of their customers (the sellers) comes into play. They may try to make you feel they’re listening and doing what’s best for you….but they are not listening and doing just what’s best for their immediate needs.

The 21 day hold on Paypal funds - translates to me as a way of holding and collecting interest on a huge amount of money. Lowering listing fees while putting a huge raise on FVF’s - is another “benefit” they tried to make you believe…was due to them “listening.” Stopping sellers from leaving negative feedback is just another way of saying….deal with it and don’t bother me. Nobody, but nobody believes they will protect a seller from a scammer in any way, shape or form. If they wanted to enhance a buyer’s experience then long ago they should have rolled up their sleeves and dumped the bad sellers that stick out like sore thumbs. Anyone who has bothered to report fraudulent sellers knows just what I’m saying here. I’m speaking honestly and with no malice…just laying it out coldly in black and white as I see it. I see no community - that’s just more ebay-speak…I see no level playing field…and absolutely no respect for sellers. In fact, ebay stands ready to kick us off the site if we dare treat buyers the way ebay has been treating us! Sometimes the truth is hard to hear…it falls on deaf ears because they are focused on their needs alone….still, it has to be said for one reason only - to prove to ebay we aren’t as dumb as they think we are!

nancybusinraleighOn 04.29.2008 at 5:03 pm Said:

The time was taken to edit an interview that was originally intended for employees only and I then shared it with you

Mr. Hays, obviously we’re “employees” of ebay in every sense of the word as sellers but I guess letting us in on any and all information and plans is counterproductive to ebay’s plans. Ebay feels they know better than their customers, so that must make us employees.

We have come to realize that as sellers, we’re only good for revenue, not to be considered worthy of real communication as to the vision of ebay.

We’re piecing it together bit by bit, quote by quote and what we’re seeing is no longer even close to the original ebay nor is it beneficial to most.

We got the message, even that portion which was not included.

thirdworld1968On 04.29.2008 at 6:01 pm Said:

Who is Ebay’s customers? The buyers or the SELLERS? Once we figure that out then and only THEN can we figure out what is needed in 2008

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.29.2008 at 6:03 pm Said:

@ Patricia

I see the situation rather simply too. Very simply eBay is making several mistakes, all of which have been pointed out time and time again on this blog, eBay forums, and other media outlets.

I was mainly trying to point out the inconsistencies and in fact, blatant destruction of the eBay core principles which is the direct result of all these changes.

The clip seems to indicate that Pierre and Donahoe believe that these new changes are perfectly inline with the core principles of eBay. I think when one takes the time to compare and evaluate the effects of the changes, nothing could be further from the truth.

Every change and resulting effects are direct violations of the eBay core principles.

The ColonelOn 04.29.2008 at 6:13 pm Said:

Wow…I haven’t heard so much double speak since I read 1984 years ago.

The interview was staged very nicely. Did the players in this charade memorize their parts or was there someone off camera with cue cards?

This whole thing is nothing more than a well massaged message designed to placate a legion of angry small sellers, many of whom are bolting.

But the part I loved the best was the mention that sellers will often ask for things “which are against their long term interest”.

You are so right Pierre and JonDon, I want to be subjected to a system where I can be abused by feedback without recourse, I want to be rated on shipping charges by a public that has no clue over the costs actually involved, I want to have my listings given inferior placement by design should I choose to stick to my guns and ship at cost (true cost), I want a carrot dangled infront of me in the form of discounts, which the average small seller will never qualify for without subsidizing shipping costs, I want to have my money held for 21 days interest free, and I WANT TO PAY FOR THIS PRIVILEGE!!!

Pierre and JonDon missed something here.

Sellers know darn well what is good for them. That is why they are leaving.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.29.2008 at 7:04 pm Said:

Comments on the second clip:

Donahoe states, “We hear more from those who don’t like them [changes].”

Now here’s the question, is it possible that the reason they hear more from those who don’t like the changes is because there are more people that dislike the changes? Honestly, if the majority of the feedback eBay receives on a change is negative, then how can it say that the changes are good? If the majority liked the changes then eBay would hear tons of praise. It is for the exact reason that these changes are bad that they are receiving negative responses.

Is he implying that they only time they hear from the community is when something is wrong, or something that the community doesn’t like? No, it can’t be that because he said, “the great thing about our community is that they aren’t quite about anything.” So, that seems to support the fact that if the vast majority of users liked the changes, then eBay would have heard about it, right?

Pierre states, “The important thing is, um, as eBay, as the managers of this marketplace, the payment platform, all of our services, you know we have to be able to take all that input, respectfully, and empathize with the people providing that input, but then put that in the context of the whole thing, and understand that not every voice is speaking up… you don’t want to design it by consensus.. if you do that then you end up with a thousand features that no one really understands how they all fit together, and so forth. You don’t end up with a nice clean experience, so the magic, expertise, is required as a manager, is to be able to take all that input empathize with it, understand where it is coming from and then design a product, a solution, a strategy that actually makes sense for the whole ecosystem. “

I think the vast majority of users can agree that they do not feel that their input has been obtained at all, nor that what small amount of input has been collected, has been treated respectfully or with empathy.

1. Surveys are not sent to the vast majority of users.

2. Users receive canned email responses and uneducated, uninformed, and often time, erroneous information from eBay Live Help.

3. There are a ton of loopholes which exist in eBay and PayPal, which have exsisted for quite some time, and no effort has been made to eliminate them.

4. There is no empathy when the sellers are the only ones who risk anything on eBay. Even when a seller follows all of the rules for PayPal Seller Protection, they are at the mercy of charge backs, while eBay and PayPal stand by and collect their fees.

As to a “nice, clean experience”, perhaps eBay should look at its own short comings before putting the blame on sellers. For instance, did sellers ask for eBay Express, or was that simply eBay’s failed experiment to try out a “more retail like experience”. Was it the sellers who wanted scamming buyers on the site, or was it eBay’s desire to attract as much traffic as possible, that it didn’t care about the quality of the buyers it attracted?

Lastly, “design a product, a solution, a strategy that actually makes sense for the whole ecosystem”. Well, I think eBay has failed at that too. It doesn’t make sense to open up a site even wider for scammers, when you don’t even have the ability to monitor the site correctly in the first place. You can’t promise to be able to take a more active role, when you don’t have the experience, technology, man-power, or desire to do so.

Pierre states, “Buyers vs Sellers. You know its really easy to pay too much attention to the sellers, but quite often, and I learned this right in the beginning, sellers were asking me for features which were clearly disadvantageous to buyers. Okay? Um, and absolutely and clearly reduce the price transparency, reduce the levels of discounts buyers would get, would be a really bad idea for buyers, in the very beginning. And I said, okay I understand why you are asking for this but this doesn’t make any sense because if the buyers stop coming, then you’re going to go away. So you have to understand that your community will sometimes, some segments of the community, will sometimes ask for things which are against their own interest, and that is what’s really kind of funky about this, people will often ask for things which are against their long -term interest and you have to really put the designer hat on, the manager hat on, and take all that input, treat it respectfully, but then just do the right thing, from the whole ecosystem perspective.”

1. When the largest, most reputable sellers are leaving eBay for other venues which are safer, less maintenance, less risk, and more profitable, then I think sellers are already going away from eBay. They are leaving, not due to their mistakes, but due to eBay’s mismanagement.

2. Is is just some segments, or the vast majority of the sellers, that are asking for things which go against their own interest? I think the people posting here are rather intelligent, and obviously successful business owners. They are relating the exact same beliefs, that other smaller sellers are, mainly, these changes are bad. These changes will hurt their long-term interest.

3. In order to be a successful designer and manager, you have to understand the product. One can not understand the product simply by reading about what you “think” it should be, but actually using it, and see it for what it is. Donahoe, does not have the practical experience as a seller on eBay in order to understand his product from that point of view.

4. When designing a product, you must test it in some form of BETA, before sending it live and allowing it to reek havoc on the entire site. Ebay has not done this. It is using the actual site, and actual users’ businesses as its BETA test.

5. Need I reiterate the whole, “treat it respectfully [input]“, or lack there of, again?

6. I would love to see a list of all of these “features which were clearly disadvantageous to buyers”, that Pierre received from sellers.

7. It would seem to mean that if sellers are capable of asking for features which will hurt the entire ecosystem, then it is entirely plausible that eBay is capable of it too. So what makes eBay infallible? The main difference is that when a business owner makes a bad decision - it only affects that owner’s business, but when eBay makes its mistakes, every business on the site suffers.

KathyOn 04.29.2008 at 7:36 pm Said:

I definately feel this was a Public Relations presentation by ebay. Of course, Odimar was prepped, and he was very careful with his choice of words and interpretations.

The whole interview looked staged and I feel that Odimar is between a rock and a hard place.

CPJOn 04.29.2008 at 7:45 pm Said:

In Pierre’s little world of billionaires, everything is black and white.

DSR’s keep people honest he believes somehow, but the manipulation of those ratings is simple and have and will be devastating to many sellers.

Focusing on the “buyer’s experience” is all well and good. But if there are cancers in the community, excise them, don’t “level the playing field.” Stop pandering to Power Sellers who rip off buyers. Start rewarding sellers who are actually a credit to the eBay community. Use real identification so that bad buyers can’t re-register once they’ve been NARU’d.

The ivory tower concept may be hackneyed, but Pierre and John shot a video from there, complete with zombies in the audience.

MechelleOn 04.29.2008 at 7:55 pm Said:

” Are you kidding? What story? It’s an interview between two leaders of the company. No more, no less.

No- it is SEGMENTS of an interview between two leaders of the company- and there is more, but you gave us less.

My use of the term story wasn’t to suggest the interview was a staged play- but rather a record of an event. The complete interview being the event- the segmented portions - not telling the whole story- record- account or whatever you want to call it of the interview.

When you read periodicals for research- or I guess for fun depending on the publication- the citations actually serve 2 functions- most obvious and considered being- giving credit to the originator of the information - second to have the ability for the reader to seek out the cited work for evaluation of the credibility of the information being cited. Also, to ensure that the author is not biasing or manipulating other’s work that is being used to support the argument.

I know it’s not a professional journal- never the less the credibility (the question of information excluded that might have a significant impact on the viewers perception) is undermined by the reality that you have chopped out - who knows what other than you- and there is not a trail that will lead the viewers to the original source to verify the credibility of the information you have presented.

Naturally, I question what I did not hear- you state that it is because you picked out parts that have been brought up within this blog. Fine, but I am curious what other topics that have been brought up on the blog that you chose to leave out of your chosen segments. Maybe none, but that’s the problem I don’t know and given the culture of eBay execs and their approach to policy changes- well, with their customers at all I can’t help but feel as though I am missing vital information.

Paranoid? Maybe, but justifiably.

HaroldOn 04.29.2008 at 9:08 pm Said:

I will make this simple. Others have said it before. Ebays customer are the sellers……..Why? Because if the sellers leave there will be no marketplace for buyers to buy from. Is that so difficult to understand? I have been in retail for over 25 years. Pierre’s vision of controlling the buyer’s experience through tough love tactics on its sellers is flawed and doomed to fail.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.29.2008 at 9:11 pm Said:

Comments on third clip:

Pierre stated, “For instance the recent thing with increasing standards and increasing visibility of sellers with higher, you know, customer service ratings, basically DSRs, um, it annoyed people, but, and so you can say here is an example of sellers advocating against their best interest, because they’re saying ‘we should not be discounted for having lower customer service’, you know, lower rated service to buyers, which will ultimately lead to buyers having a bad experience, and going away, and ultimately lead them to losing business. Right? So they are advocating somehow, they were advocating somehow against their best interest. So you have to be really careful that you don’t take that and say, ‘oh my God, they’re right, it’s hurting their business because they’re disadvantaged, and all that, you have to, you really have to focus on the buyers, uh, and in terms of mechanisms, you know, how it get ingrained in the company, you know, the culture”

Personally, I think “annoyed people” in an understatement, but lets go on with the rest…

1. Sellers are upset at being “discounted for having lower customer service” because the vast majority of sellers on eBay do not sell full-time. This is not their job or their livelihood. eBay created that environment by advertising eBay as a place where normal people could sell their collectibles and extras. In fact, Pierre created eBay so that his girlfriend could sell her Pez dispenser collection. Smaller sellers should NOT have to or be expected to operate at the same level as professional sellers. By eBay expecting this, it is only setting up more sellers for failure, frustration, and poor experiences for buyers who have been encouraged, by eBay, to have unrealistic expectations.

2. Data proving that buyers have left eBay due solely to the fault of sellers has yet to be provided and verified. Making decisions on such unreliable data is irresponsible.

3. No, sellers who want to be rated according to their abilities are not “advocating, somehow, against their best interest”. Expecting all sellers, small and large, to operate the same way and at the same level is against the seller’s best interest and eBay’s. That is why eBay needs to cater to all types of sellers by creating different tiers based on customer service ability. Smaller sellers should NOT be punished, because they are not able to offer the same shipping, or immediate communication and shipping time that professional sellers can.

4. The seller’s are right, the DSRs are hurting their businesses and they are disadvantaged, because eBay is setting up all buyers for a poor experience, by allowing them to have unrealistic expectations of all sellers. What eBay needs to do is set realistic expectations, for different levels of sellers, so that buyers can have more choices and be more realistic about their buying experience on eBay.

What eBay is doing is focusing on the buyers, at the expense of sellers. That will never work because sellers will only become, and have already become, unfriendly, hostile, and concerned with regards to selling to zero feedback buyers and unconfirmed addresses. It will not work, because instead of focusing on customer service, sellers will need to focus more on protecting their business.

If eBay makes the sellers happy, then sellers will make sure that the buyers are happy. It is a chain reaction, which starts with eBay. If eBay makes it unpleasant for sellers, then it will become unpleasant for the buyers too. The buyers already have, and will continue to lose the selection and special items which once made eBay so popular.

bidder3On 04.29.2008 at 10:10 pm Said:

Donahoe has stated that he only intends to stay for about a year or so to use EBay as a spring to get a better job — and build himself the reputation as the problem solver guy who changes the company.

He’s getting that reputation, but unfortunately in a bad way. I hope other companies will pay notice and make sure his next turn around happens in the unemployment line.

There is NO leadership at Ebay. None invested in the users of the site, and there was none when Meg was there cashing out and ignoring the business. Now because of the overwhelming bad press and bad reputation the site has rightfully earned, Donahoe is going to make all sellers, even the good ones who have built the site, pay the price for managements reckless disregard to the serious problems.

Ebay will one day be a parked advertisement site, nothing more. Sellers and buyers have left in droves, and it’s only the beginning of the exodus.

It will be a textbook example (in the future) of corporate greed, reckless management and personal profit of the management over the needs of the customer of the site, and destroying something truly innovative and successful.

TheBrewsNewsOn 04.29.2008 at 10:21 pm Said:

I’ve had some time to sit and reflect on the clips. When I watched the clips the first time through I admit that I was extremely annoyed to hear Pierre say eBay sellers don’t know what is good for their own business. But in watching the clips again, I realized that Pierre is a scientist and an engineer and he speaks with the terminology and mannerisms one would expect a scientist and an engineer to use when talking about business.

Pierre is the founding father, the inventor, of eBay and if my only experience as an online seller were through the eBay system I would be very confused right now because I would really want to believe that Pierre knows best about the ecosystem he created. But, unfortunately for Pierre, my experience is not limited to eBay. As a business owner who has experience selling face-to-face retail, through my own ecommerce websites, through eBay, and through Amazon and other online venues, I have many other experiences to which I can compare my eBay selling experience.

And having sourced my product through liquidators, through distributors, from manufacturers, and even directly from Chinese factories (after having secured multiple U.S. licensing agreements for the product), I have also battled and won against the eBay VERO system.

So when I hear Pierre tell me that he knows more about what is right for my business than I do, I must respectfully disagree.

Make no mistake — I absolutely positively love the majority of my buyers. I have some of the best buyers in the world, including those who buy from me on eBay, that I could ever hope for. There is the nice lady from Lubbock, Texas who called at 10:30 pm at night just to tell me that her breakable item arrived in one piece and she wanted to thank me for the care that we took to package it well. And then there is the gentleman from New Jersey who called on his lunch break to say that he had never received an online purchase so quickly. One of my favorites is a Canadian buyer who emails each and every time he buys from us (about 2 to 3 times a month) to tell us that his package arrived safe and sound and that he so looks forward to our shipments.

Pierre, I know how to treat my buyers. Can you say the same about your treatment of eBay sellers? Can you honestly say that you provide excellent customer service to those who represent you on your site as sellers? What do think your feedback percentage and your DSR ratings would be from those of us who use your services?

Pierre, your ecosystem is polluted. It is polluted with bad sellers AND bad buyers. Action is being taken by you to cleanse the ecosystem of the bad sellers but absolutely nothing is being done to rid the eBay system of bad buyers.

And just like there are some sellers that eBay doesn’t want to do business with, there are some buyers I don’t want to do business with. If you are not going to turn away the bad buyers and you are not going to allow me to do so either then you are leaving me with no choice but to continue to take the good buyers from eBay with me to the other venues where I sell. Contrary to what you believe, I DO know what is good for MY business.

Lisa sparkklejarOn 04.29.2008 at 10:32 pm Said:

unfortunately, donahoe has placed the buyer in charge of a level playing field. The buyer does not always understand the proper use of feedback & often misuses the DSR system whether it be intentional or uninteniol. The buyer is now in total control of the transaction. The buyer now dictates your eBay future as a seller, including how you are listed as a powerseller, best match search and those stars that may cause a big red blotch on the listing page (YOU pay for as a seller) pointing out your weakest DSR attribute, which is shipping/handling for most of us as somehow buyers think that star goes directly to the usps complaint department.

The focus of this interview was on buyer satisfaction. eBay somehoe has forgotton, sellers ARE THEIR buyers.

I have left ebay as a seller due to inflated fees for ridiculous new terms and no new services. The new policies for buyers are stifling and create an unfair hostile environment between buyers and sellers.

I had a 95% sell through rate

over 60% regular repeat customers

never once late paying my fees

almost perfect feedback with an excellent DSR ratings

Obviously not good enough for ebay’s criteria, and I have successfully moved my selling ventures elsewhere and will not return to eBay if these new policies continue.