John Donahoe Interviews Pierre Omidyar

permacrisisOn 04.30.2008 at 3:03 pm Said:

Like most hostages, Pierre must speak in code when interviewed: “That would have been - is - a disaster.”

I’m sure inside he is really very sad about all this. He may even want to start a new, pure ebay but cannot (due to noncompete agreements- just look what ebay is doing to Craigslist).

I’m willing to believe that ebay can’t give ALL the reasons for changing things, because they don’t want to give crooks new ideas. But it bugs me that each change makes them more money.

At least in the short term.

MistyOn 04.30.2008 at 4:17 pm Said:

Well it seems your spins have caused quite the uproar in the community discussion boards with BOTH sellers and buyers.

JJHOn 04.30.2008 at 4:52 pm Said:

@Perma,

I’m sure inside he is really very sad about all this.

As cynical as this sounds, I’m sure he couldn’t give two hoots. When you’re that rich, who cares? That money is never going to run out.

As someone mentioned earlier Oh….I have one more thing to say about Pierre and this youtube interview. 10 years ago he didn’t know what to do with Ebay and couldn’t handle its success - which is why he took Whitman on board. What makes everyone think he knows what’s best now? Everyone respects Pierre for starting ebay - but that really should be as far as it goes.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.30.2008 at 7:29 pm Said:

@ Martin

“We are involved in pretty much everything eBay does and my goal is keeping people ON the site as opposed ot migrating off the site.”

I think it is the goal of all those posting here to point out the flaws in Ebay’s system and recent changes so that they can return to the site as successful sellers.

I used to own an eBay store, but when eBay stopped having store listings show up in the search results and raised store fees, I closed my eBay store. Luckily I was invited to sell on a different site, where I have had nothing but success. In fact, more success than I ever did on eBay. I also have a website supported by this other venue.

I still attempted to sell sporadically on eBay, only those items which I knew would fetch a good price on that venue, but when the new feedback and fee changes were announced I stopped selling there all together. eBay has simply become too unstable and volatile. It simply isn’t worth the effort necessary to constantly adjust. Not to mention the fact that I can sell my items for more money and with great ease on my other venue than eBay. So why would any seller, with my options, stick around to sell on eBay?

Perhaps, if eBay finally realizes these changes are for the worst and rescind them, then I may return to sell there. I figure that eBay will come to this realization, but it will not be until many other sellers are destroyed along the way. Those of us that choose to protect our reputations, by not selling on eBay right now, will be in better shape to return to eBay when these changes are rescinded. For now, anyone who continues to sell on eBay is simply a participate in eBay’s BETA testing on a Live site. Those sellers are guinea pigs in eBay’s experiments. It doesn’t matter if the guinea pigs are destroyed in the process. All that matters to eBay is the results of these experiments.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.30.2008 at 7:38 pm Said:

@ Ebay Refugee

Although many are upset about the changes, Richard is the only person I’ve seen at eBay who is actually trying to get information for us. He is asking the questions we want, although the people answering these questions like to tap dance around the issue. He is trying to provide us with information that we would not have had access to or known anything about.

I think it is wonderful that he is doing this and he does not deserve the venom that your post has directed at him.

Even with the clips being edited, there are plenty of statements made by Pierre in them, which clearly shows that the recent changes are a direct violation of eBay’s core principles. It also gives us an insight into the type of propaganda the eBay executives are providing to their employees. These clips only serve to give us more insight into why eBay is so out of touch with its users.

I, for one, am grateful for any information that Richard can bring to light, and I sincerely hope that he continues to do so.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.30.2008 at 7:56 pm Said:

@ Patricia

“Oh….I have one more thing to say about Pierre and this youtube interview. 10 years ago he didn’t know what to do with Ebay and couldn’t handle its success - which is why he took Whitman on board. What makes everyone think he knows what’s best now? Everyone respects Pierre for starting ebay - but that really should be as far as it goes.”

Just a little more information about that…

While it is true that Pierre had no professional management experiences, and therefor could not take eBay to the next level, that is not the only reason why someone like Whitman was brought on board.

During the dot com bubble, the biggest online selling competitor to eBay was Amazon. Amazon’s founder had business experience, and was selling a product held in decent regard, and being shipped by the company, so he was able to attract the interest of the stock market. If a business was to be successful back then, it needed to be able to attract investors from the stock market.

Most of the items sold on eBay during this time were by individuals with little to no experience selling anything. The items being sold, such as Beanie Babies, Pez, used items, weird collectibles, also held little respect in the eyes of stock holders. Since Pierre has no previous business experience, he did not help to instill any confidence from the stock market either. The only way for a company advertising the items that eBay was, and from inexperienced private individuals, was to bring in an executive was a lot of business experience. Enter Meg Whitman.

So while I’ll agree Pierre may not have been able to handle the quick growth of eBay on his own, it was not the primary reason from bringing someone like Meg on board. Once Meg Whitman was a part of eBay, the company was finally in a position to successfully market the company on the open stock market.

Patricia1On 04.30.2008 at 9:03 pm Said:

Richard - can you please pass this on - I feel its kind of urgent?

I have a feature plus listing running right now. It is on the fourth day and only has 34 views! This is appalling for a $20.00 listing! If this is the best they can do with Best Match or with their new policies designed to have buyers coming in droves, its pretty darn sad. Every artist I know is complaining about the lack of views on these expensive listings. If they want to keep feature plus listings in the arts categories - then I think they best look into the situation because only an idiot would keep paying stiff fees for this kind of return

Patricia1On 04.30.2008 at 9:07 pm Said:

@ crunchy - doesn’t that kind of prove my point. Pierre knew when to stand back because it was not in his realm to handle ebay - so why would I believe he knows what’s best for the company now? To be frank, I found the video embarressing. JD was almost putting the words in his mouth and Pierre seemed little more than a puppet I found that sad and I felt embarressed for him.

KDOn 04.30.2008 at 10:39 pm Said:

The wool is pulled over Pierre’s eyes. John Donohoe must be telling him half truths or outright lies. Pierre doesn’t know what’s happening. I can’t believe a caring person, as Pierre is, would ever allow the pain, anguish and suffering being experienced by thousands of eBay sellers right now.

What is happening is like and extermination. eBay called it cleaning house. That does not describe it. Real human beings are being destroyed, body, mind and spirit.

I can’t believe he, Pierre, would believe what is happening to live human beings to be right and moral. Some of the sellers being wiped out are poor and disadvantaged, just like the poor and disadvantaged people he helps with his philanthropy.

CrunchyPostingGoodnessOn 04.30.2008 at 10:53 pm Said:

@ Patricia
“crunchy - doesn’t that kind of prove my point. Pierre knew when to stand back because it was not in his realm to handle ebay - so why would I believe he knows what’s best for the company now?”

In part, yes. However, his inability to handle the growing eBay effectively, was not the primary reason for bringing Meg on board. There was much more to it. That was all I was trying to relate.

Pierre probably could have continued eBay on his own, but most likely it would not have grown to be as large and popular as it is now. The primary reason for introducing Meg was that eBay needed the money from stock holders to take eBay to the next level - technology and advertisement wise.

I’m not so quick to dismiss Pierre’s continued importance to eBay, because it is his core principles which made eBay so appealing to the average joe in the first place. Without those guiding principles, eBay would have grown into a large corporation, without a care for the community, much sooner than now. eBay is now primarily dominated by corporate managers, who are out of touch with the original intended users, average joes, and that is causing several problems and negative experiences for sellers and buyers.

If one dismisses Pierre’s abilities and knowledge, then one must also dismiss the core principles which he created as the foundation for eBay as outdated and irrelevant in the business world today. That is precisely what Donahoe believes and is using as justification for the recent changes. He believes that the core principles are not realistic in today’s e-commerce enviroment, so therefor it doesn’t matter that the recent changes violate them.

I can not dismiss Pierre because it is his founding principles that I am trying to defend and use as the reason why eBay shouldn’t make these changes. It is the very foundation and reason why eBay was so well liked by people in the past, and the violation of them now, is exactly what is creating the unpleasant selling and buying enviroment on eBay. So I must believe that he has an understanding and knowledge of what eBay is and what is should become. I simply disagree with the methods being used to achieve this.

I also agree with Pierre when he says that eBay needs to refer back to the core principles when initiating any change to the eBay ecosystem. That is why I’m so confused by eBay’s course of action - every policy change that eBay is initiating right now goes directly against the core principles created by Pierre. Not to mention the fact that he clearly states that the level playing field was never meant to hold everyone to the same standard, yet that is exactly what eBay is doing with sellers.

In short, I still believe Pierre has the right idea for eBay. I think he still believes in the core principles, however he just may not be seeing how these current changes go directly against those principles he holds dear.

What I’m more interested in learning about are all the requests Pierre says that he has received from sellers which would not be in their best interest. I visit the eBay forums from time to time, so I know that some of the things sellers want and do are definitely against their best interests. Therefor it is entirely probable that some of the requests Pierre has received are unreasonable and harmful.

However, I do not think any of the changes proposed here (tiered seller levels, PayPal not required, seller ability to leave neg feedback, correct buyer education of the true effects of DSR ratings, confirmed addresses for all sellers, etc.) would be against the best interest of any seller.

If Pierre believes that any of those requested changes would be harmful, then I would love for him to post those reasons here, so that we can intelligently discuss them with him.

SandiOn 04.30.2008 at 11:32 pm Said:

@crunchy said:

“The primary reason for introducing Meg was that eBay needed the money from stock holders to take eBay to the next level - technology and advertisement wise.”

No, it was THE THING to do, it was the dot com craze, people like Pierre capitalized on the trend. There as a mass of them, buying boats, planes, houses, etc.

My company had a steady stream of wanna bees who needed the programming skills we possessed to make their dream a reality - they all had the goal of getting venture money, then going punlic and retiring with their millions.

We were offered “stock” instead of cash on a daily basis, not one had a goal of keeping the company, only making the bucks then moving on.

The venture capital investors put money in companies like ebay in the beginning for part ownership - and with the goal of the business going public - they expected a profit, and going public is how that happened back then. They would have been driving where the company was going long before Meg, and in almost every case, when they invested, the contract clearly outlined the goals expected - going public.

I bet Pierre couldn’t even look at the programming code driving ebay now and know how to alter or fix something. It’s been a long time since he did any programming I suspect and it’s leaped in the last 10 years.

ebay/Pierre just happened at the right moment. 95% luck is what made most millionaires/billionaires from that era - who came up with the means to do it first.

SandiOn 04.30.2008 at 11:56 pm Said:

@patricia “I have a feature plus listing running right now. It is on the fourth day and only has 34 views!”

I stopped selling my artwork on ebay a year ago because I found a much better site. I have sold every single painting I have listed, everyone for 4 times what I would get on ebay. ebay is NOT the place to sell the quality of work you produce.

I may only have One bidder Over at the Other site, but I can list Over there for 299-599 and up as starting bid, where here I would start at 49-99 and might get 10 bidders but only get 200.00 when the bidding was Over.

Over at the Other place, they have phone support, do not restrict payment methods, no ads on my listing to boot.

Do not let Other artist feedback make you think they are not selling, I have 0 feedback, but I have sold 129 paintings Over there, I have an LL, indicating I have loyal repeat buyers - the buyers Over there simply are not into leaving feedback - it’s not the focus Over there, the site is more secure for the buyers as they actually verify users, specifically sellers - what a concept.

The first month I was Over there, my credit card was not getting billed, I sent an email to support - I got 3 replies, it was clear they were written just for me, One from the head of the whole company, One from the head of the Auctions, and one from Billing.

They all apologized, told me it was their fault, told me they would credit the auctions I listed (I was trying to pay my regular bill - and for some reason the automated payment was not working) - and listed me as featured artist for the week - for all the trouble I had - I kid you not - now that’s customer service.

I was impressed with an email response within 2 hours - then shocked realizing they were emails written personally - then blow away when they gave me basically free listings/FVF for the time period - and then featured my works on the front page for a week.

They have had me ever since.

MistyOn 05.01.2008 at 2:04 am Said:

I am curious… When I first joined eBay in 1998 you had to either sign up using a credit card or go through ID verify if you were going to sell and was then ID verified with that logo by your seller ID linking back to your verification. What ever happened to this? Where did my ID verify logo and verification go?

Patricia1On 05.01.2008 at 8:56 am Said:

@ Sandi - I know the site well. Sold well there before but then it all stopped and I came back to ebay. Thanks, maybe I’ll give them another try. Their prices sure are reasonable so that even if a painting doesn’t sell I’m not out that much.

@ Misty - far as I know you still need a credit card in order to sell. I have two seller ID’s and both needed cc information and verification.

JewelrySellerOn 05.01.2008 at 9:52 am Said:

RBH,
Thanks for posting the video clips. I appreciate the opportunity to see them.

I’ve had the opportunity to work with a company full of geniuses. Their software could help eBay as it does for nuclear power plants, the International Space Station, Intel, HP, the Paris Metro, every U.S. Nuclear Submarine, etc.

For all their collective genius in creating artificial intelligence software, they could not profitably run a business - they did not have a ‘business sense’.

It unfortunately appears that Pierre has a similar disconnect.

The business equation cannot be -

eBay = good, buyers = good, sellers = bad

or

eBay = honest, buyers = honest, sellers = dishonest

or

eBay, buyers = essential, sellers = disposable

Pierre, please.

The only long term business equation that works is

WIN - WIN - WIN

Everyone must win to make eBay work. Somehow this basic precept of live, ecology, love and commerce - BALANCE is completely lacking in what eBay has been doing.