Wednesday, May 7th, 2008
Accountability: The Evolution of the eBay Feedback System
Yesterday I sat down with Brian Burke, Director of Global Feedback Policy, to get a full run-down of all the changes being applied to eBay’s Feedback system. During our discussion, I was able to get the rationale and reasoning behind the changes as well as ask some of the questions that had been provided by Ink readers over the past few days.
Before I jump into the overview, interview and presentation, I wanted to give my two cents. The overarching theme coming out of these changes seems to be a trade of transparency for accountability (hence the title of my post). I’ve received a few emails stating that this is very “un-eBay”. However, I get the impression that eBay’s public feedback system was always intended to provide transparency and accountability but that over time, the transparency of the feedback system has taken us away from the accountability goal. So, with these changes, eBay should return to a more healthy balance of the two.
NOTE: I’ve just checked out the AB post about the changes and in retrospect, I am definitely toeing the company line on this one.
Here is a breakdown of what is being introduced this month:
1. In order to encourage repeat transactions and reward good service, eBay will provide credit for similar repeat transactions going back to when the system was introduced in 1996.
2. In May, sellers will no longer be able to leave negative or neutral Feedback for buyers.
3. eBay will remove negative and neutral Feedback left by members who are suspended or who fail to respond to the Unpaid Item (UPI) Process.
4. Positive Feedback percentage will be based on the past 12 months of Feedback, rather than lifetime on the site.
5. Restrictions on when Feedback can be left:
- Buyers must wait seven days before leaving negative or neutral Feedback for active PowerSellers who have been registered for at least 12 months.
- Members must leave Feedback within 60 days of the transaction closing (today members have up to 90 days).
6. eBay is removing Mutual Feedback Withdrawal.
This is a global eBay site-wide initiative which will start to roll-out in May, 2008.
5/12 Australia
5/15 UK, Ireland
5/19 US, Canada, Canada.FR
5/20 France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Belgium.FR, Belgium.NL
5/21 HongKong, Singapore, India, Malaysia, Phillipines
5/22 Germany, Austria, Switzerland
Additionally, he provided me with the presentation that summarizes the evolution of the feedback system:
Q&A with Brian
Can you please explain how the 2004 and 2007 ratio of retaliatory feedback numbers (shown on slide 5) was determined?
We used a really simple definition when determining exactly what constituted retaliatory negative feedback. It was strictly a user who received a negative feedback and subsequently left a negative feedback. That second negative feedback was counted as being retaliatory. There wasn’t anything that we did to go back and look to see if that negative was justified rather we observed how behavior changed in the marketplace over time. We saw that 4 years ago sellers would do that two times as more frequently than a buyer and today it is eight times more likely.
It’s basically how our members interpret retaliatory negative feedback so we wanted to keep it simple; getting a negative after receiving a negative constitutes retaliatory feedback.
A week or two ago the eBay developer blog announced “We will base the Positive Feedback Percentage on the past 12 months of activity (and will include neutral feedback in the calculation.” Is the above quote still accurate? If so, why are neutrals now going to count as negatives?
The above quote is accurate. As for neutrals, they’re not counted as negatives but they’re going to not count as positives either. When we first introduced the feedback percentage we had, within our feedback system, something that was called NARU neutrals. Basically, what had happened up through 1999, whenever a member got suspended we took any feedback that they had left (whether it was negative, positive or neutral) and we converted it to Neutral. The majority of feedback that was left for users was predominantly positive so we didn’t think it was fair back then to include NARU neutrals in the overall feedback percentage so we chose to count only positives and negatives in calculating the feedback percentage (although ideally we would have liked to track all). Now we’re going to a 12-month window, we no longer have to worry about NARU neutrals unfairly affecting an overall feedback score. So what we can do is make the Positive Feedback Percentage be exactly that. What’s the percentage of positives that a seller has received over all of the feedback they have received? Which is really what sellers should be measured against.
How is eBay going to protect the sellers? How is eBay protecting the sellers from bad buyers? How can I truly block an eBay bidder given that anyone can create a new disposable eBay ID at any time to circumvent my blocked bidder list?
First, what is good for the buyers is ultimately going to be good for the sellers in our Marketplace and we’ve already seen a lot of sellers changing behavior and focusing on what’s most important to the buyers just by the announced changes we’ve made.
When we made this change we understood clearly that we were taking away both a real and a perceived protection. For the seller who had never left a negative – it was just a perceived protection that they had. We needed to make sure there was a balance to the system. The goal behind the changes was not to enable buyers to just leave negatives. Rather it was to go back to the original intent of the feedback system - to make sure that both buyers AND sellers are held accountable for their actions in the marketplace. We’re going to hold sellers accountable through a public reputation system, leveraging our buyers. The way we’re going to hold buyers accountable is through private reporting from sellers; through enhancing the tools that we’ve given sellers to help protect them from buyers. We’re going to rely on sellers to let us know when a buyer has violated policy.
Why is my blocked bidder list no longer alphabetized and why are some seller’s blocked bidder lists disappearing all together? How can I truly block an eBay bidder given that anyone can create a new disposable eBay ID?
We haven’t made any changes to the blocked bidder list system so I’m not sure why someone would be experiencing that. I’ll have to look into that further. I haven’t heard about blocked bidder lists disappearing all together so if you could get me an example I will get that to the product team to find out why that is happening. In the case of a bidder circumventing a seller’s blocked bidder list with a new ID, that is against the rules and there has been no change in policy here at all. If that buyer is identified, he/she is suspended from the site.
I rechecked Feedback criteria today and it seems that the reason eBay couldn’t censor feedback was due to potential legal liability to eBay if they did. How do the shifts in feedback procedures pan out legally? Does the shift in policy constitute censorship?
In the United States only, eBay is given protections as a hosting service for the comments and content that another person puts on our site. As we don’t actually edit the comments or make changes to the comments – there is no difference in how we’re protected. All we’ve changed is how a user is rated in the marketplace. We’ve always had rules in place that allow us to remove negative feedback or positive feedback and the comments – but we won’t go in and edit the comments. Under the US law we can’t do that. To be clear though, we don’t get those same protections outside of the US but we still have a very similar set of rules so even if that law was to go away in the US we probably wouldn’t make changes to the system because we’re trying to design a system that instills trust within the marketplace, not one that is in place because of a US law.
What steps did eBay take to educate the users, both buyers and sellers, during the 3-year period that showed a trend in retaliatory feedback?
Well, the focus on retaliatory negatives didn’t just happen overnight. We examined a number of other alternatives before coming to the conclusion that the feedback system needed to change. The one thing we learned was that when a buyer gets a negative feedback in the eBay marketplace, they discontinue participating in the marketplace and it’s not healthy for anyone. All of the alternatives we examined still didn’t address one of the leading reasons why buyers were not comfortable continuing to participate in our marketplace.
There’s been a lot of focus on buyers but what are the changes we’re making to protect sellers?
One is basing the feedback system on a 12-month window rather than a lifetime window. For example, in the past, a seller’s feedback score has been negatively impacted by a negative left 7 years ago even though it doesn’t necessarily accurately reflect the seller’s participation in the marketplace today. So they’ll no longer be dragged down by old feedback and it’s more relative information for the buyer.
Second, if the buyer receives an Unpaid Item Strike and fails to respond (and that occurs more than 70% of the time today) we’re now going to remove the rating and the comment (in the past we just removed the rating). In the future, if a buyer responds in a manner that doesn’t fault the seller, we’re going to take a look at what buyers are saying in the UPI console and remove it if it is arbitrary.
We’re going to remove all negative and neutral feedback when a member gets suspended.
We’re going to prevent negatives and neutrals being left for PowerSellers that have been on the site for more than 12 months (within 7 days of the transaction end). This is a big deal for us because we’ve always felt that we shouldn’t be able to prevent a buyer from leaving a negative feedback but we feel that PowerSellers who have been on the site for 12-months are pretty safe. We’re going to start with that group of sellers so that if a buyer tries to leave a negative or neutral within 7 days of the transaction end, we’re going to provide a link that encourages communication between the buyer and the seller to see if the buyer has given the seller enough time to deliver on the transaction.
In order to cut down on potential extortion situations we’re reducing the number of days someone can leave feedback from 90 to 60 days.
For Cross Border Trade we’re going to include messaging in the leave feedback flow to remind the buyer that it was a CBT transaction.
When a buyer goes to leave a negative or a neutral – and very single buyer will see this, every single time they leave a negative or neutral – we’re going to ask them three key questions:
1. Have you communicated with the seller?
2. Have you allowed enough time?
3. Have you kept the feedback factual?
The big difference between then and now is that before, buyers saw the above questions but moving forward, they will have to check each question before proceeding. So it is creating a speed bump for buyers in leaving a negative or neutral and we hope that it will educate buyers, the first time they go to leave a negative or a neutral, that it is important to communicate, it is important to allow time for shipping, and that it is important to be factual.
When satisfied buyers attempt to leave DSR ratings of all 5’s they are prompted with the following message: “Are you sure? Remember, the ratings left by you are anonymous and can’t be seen by the seller.”
Why does eBay feel they need to doubt the satisfied buyer’s desire to leave 5-star DSR ratings?
The short answer is we don’t do it just for those with 5. We do it for anyone who is leaving detailed seller ratings. Whether someone intends to leave a 1 or intends to leave a 5, they’re going to get that message. This isn’t about us doubting someone whose desire is to leave a 5. Rather, it was an effort by us last Summer to address an issue we saw arise when we first introduced detailed seller ratings. Our conventional feedback system is a public system that is transparent to the marketplace and we wanted to communicate to the buyers that DSRs were designed to be more anonymous with the ultimate goal to obtain more accurate, honest feedback from buyers.
Since eBay has made such a point that DSRs are anonymous, what faith do we as sellers have that eBay is accurately reporting the ratings that our buyers are actually leaving for us? While still protecting individual’s anonymity, why not provide to me some DSR information of value? For example, what is my DSR rating from international customers versus domestic buyers for each DSR?
To answer the first part of the question… it really is in eBay’s best interest to accurately represent how buyers are reporting on sellers because that will favor those sellers that are performing best which is exactly what we want.
With regard to seller reports and information, I absolutely believe this is an area in which we can dramatically improve. We’re introducing the Seller Dashboard that provides basic information to the seller about their DSRs but we’ve heard from a lot of sellers that they would like to slice and dice that information so we’re working on a separate project right now that will enable them to either create their own reports or for us to provide a much more robust reporting structure that our sellers can take advantage of. All I can say on that is to stay tuned; it’s not something folks are going to see in the next couple of months but it is something we’re working on.
Brian, thanks very much for taking the time to provide answers to Ink readers. It is greatly appreciated and we look forward to having you back on the blog soon.
My pleasure. Anytime.
Tagged: brian+burke, buyers, detailed+seller+rationgs, dsr, ebay, ebay.com, ecommerce, feedback, Marketplace, online+marketplace, sellers
Patricia1On 05.08.2008 at 4:57 pm Said:
Hi Richard….I have an awful lot of trouble finding my previous posts - let along seeing that they are answered. Is there any easy way besides diligently keeping track of where we posted what? I wander sometimes and I know sometimes I post the wrong thing on the wrong thread 
Forgive please
MechelleOn 05.08.2008 at 5:01 pm Said:
are you asking me to be nice?
Ok- I’ll reiterate my acknowledgment of what an awful job you have, and I am certainly impressed with your control in your communication- I know this may be really hard to believe coming from me LOL, but I would be very nasty in my responses to some of the comments made toward you (I know I’m guilty of some of those comments)you are very professional in your presentation of yourself and the blog.
I mean that sincerely - I know you have a tough job and I would not want it
SandiOn 05.08.2008 at 5:17 pm Said:
@RBH
I’m getting a bit tired of the same group of people including personal attacks with what would otherwise be seen as great, honest feedback.
Given you called me out yesterday, I think you are mistaken. I know I never knowingly made a personal attack, it quoting someone’s statement and asking additional questions is considered an attack, then I have, but I personally do not. Perhaps those who hired you failed to accurately describe the current atmosphere they had created?
If I have hurt your feelings, I apologize, it was not my intent. You must realize it is frustrating to be asking the same questions for months, and never getting a response, not even “Your question is not important enough” “it’s none of your business” “we really don’t care what you think”.
Some of us have been banging our heads against the wall for a couple of years trying to get simple answers to basic questions.
I actually have sympathy for you; you have been placed in an intolerable position at a time when you are probably still having the honeymoon with your new employer. Not sure who to believe, you have the advantage (I would hope anyway) or actually looking these people in the eyes when you talk to them, while they may avoid the hard questions even from you, you probably simply just like these folks - but remember, nice people do not always have the best business sense.
Whereas we are simply faceless names on a blogs who keep asking the same thing over and over again.
There is a reality though; thousands of sellers depend on ebay to put food on their tables, to pay medical bills, to keep heat running in the winter.
Now if these were really all bad people as ebay would have us all believe, ok. But I doubt seriously that the person who has been selling for 10 years, has 100% feedback, has DSRs 4.8 and higher isn’t as important as the power seller with 12 months of selling.
Ebay says that small seller doesn’t have a proven track record. I personally think that is totally a flawed believe. I completely believe ebay has its own agenda that they are not sharing, and you were put squarely in the cross-fire - but not by any of us.
We are in a time of economic uncertainty (real or perceived), ebay gloats about their community service, yet they are causing real damage to the very people who helped them become as large as they are. Why isn’t ebay as concerned about their own members as the people in Burma?
Charity begins at home, even if the charity is only simple honesty.
At least tell us why they are no longer important. At least explain what the measurable goals are for ebay, is it to have 100 superpower sellers a year from now? Is it to increase the sell through rate xx% in the next 12 months; is it to increase Fifes 10%? Is it to merely add xx number of new members, whether they buy or not?
The Fords of the world at least tell the employees they are laying off why they are being laid off. It would seem ebay would do the same.
Again, if you have felt any of my posts were a personal attack, I apologize. That was not my intent. Am I frustrated we are not getting answers to basic questions, yes - but I do understand you are at the mercy of your employers and co-workers to get those answers.
Ebay should have forewarned you thick skin was a prerequisite for this job:-)
Richard Brewer-Hay On 05.08.2008 at 5:24 pm Said:
@ Sandi - sorry - to clarify, I wasn’t referring to personal attacks against me. I was talking more about accusations toward my colleagues and folks behind the scenes.
Sorry for not making that clear. We’ve got a dialogue going here and it’s only going to continue to get more two-sided.
As for me, I don’t take anything personally. How could I? We’ve never met.
Cheers,
RBH
MechelleOn 05.08.2008 at 5:32 pm Said:
Also- although some of the information is really shining the black light on eBay- it is good to actually hear eBay employees say these things publicly. Really I’m sure some people think we are entirely insane, but their exposing themselves really enlightens the perception others have of the current conflict.
So - bravo!- you know I am changing my perspective were you’re concerned- my initial perception was that you were simply eBay’s public BSer, but I am from now on going to view you as an undercover seller supporter who is very smoothly let the world see the real eBay. Very sly
Just be positive- the fact that we are all spending our time freaking out on this blog is a sign your doing a good job
SandiOn 05.08.2008 at 5:43 pm Said:
Richard, maybe it would help if you could clarify how you get to work (not how you get to the office, but how you are able to obtain information.
Take the question from someone yesterday wanting clarification on the 3 day 7 day “track record” change. That was a fairly easy one, all the poster wanted was clarification.
I don’t understand why you couldn’t simply pop an email off to Brian and ask if only power sellers were now being offered 7 day protection from feedback. Are small sellers no matter what their history was now excluded.
I would think the turn around would be quick and easy. You could then post the answer you got.
I guess I am just not getting why so many questions go unanswered. How has it been set up for you to actually do what ebay claims was the objective of the blog?
Do you have to request a face-to-face meeting, do questions have to be provided ahead of time? ebay loves email so much, it just seems like that would be a readily available tool for you to get quick answers as they arise.
It would help all of us if we knew “how this blog worked”. It would also make us more patient. I know I personally sent you an email quite a while ago with questions, still waiting which is fine, but if we knew the process it would make things easier.
I was talking more about accusations toward my colleagues and folks behind the scenes.
I think most of us know a group of people probably come up with this stuff, not one person. They may even have valid reasons for some of the actions, but sorry, some of the tools used are hard not to be critical of.
But remember, so it is hard for us to really be “personal in our attacks” - we’ve never met any of them:-)
TheBrewsNewsOn 05.08.2008 at 5:47 pm Said:
I remember being a very dependable teenager and one Friday night I was 2 hours late because my watch had stopped (cell phones were not common when I was a teenager so my parents couldn’t call me). My mother was frantic, of course, that her reliable child was not home on time. But the minute I pulled into the driveway her fear turned into anger. In my life, I have found that a lot of times anger is a direct result of being afraid.
I think that many eBay sellers (including myself) are angry in large part because we are fearful. eBay doesn’t communicate with us and doesn’t protect us or even allow us to protect ourselves. Because of our dependence on eBay we are very frustrated and angry about the roller-coaster environment we are asked to operate in. eBay won’t acknowledge our concerns and they seem to completely misunderstand our anger and frustrations. And as eBay continues to make changes that are in direct opposition to what we feel we need then we become even more anxious which leads to even more anger.
We simply cannot believe that eBay knows “what is best” for us because we can plainly see how, under the current eBay watch, the eBay community has become overrun with counterfeiters, scammers, and fraudulent members.
My experiences as an eBay seller in the last ten weeks have been more fearful than in the last 10 years combined. And as strange as it sounds, I would rather eBay have continued in the same “hands-off” manner (which allowed the counterfeiters, scammers, and fraudulent members to take hold) than to take the actions they have in the last few months. At least with the “hands-off” approach I knew what to expect. I have no earthly idea what eBay’s “plan for the future” is because the plan changes on a daily basis. One month eBay is offering a workshop on “How to Sell Your Digital Items on eBay” and then the next month they are removing all digital items from eBay with no notice.
eBay’s “disruptive” instability is causing good sellers, large and small, to leave and many of them simply won’t return either as sellers or buyers. I know that eBay must think there is a never-ending supply of residents who want to learn to sell on eBay but I could tell them that there are MANY residents who want to learn to sell online anywhere BUT on eBay. I really don’t want eBay to fail because I have so much sweat equity invested in it but as I slowly divest myelf of the eBay “investment” I have, you will see my anger disappear along with me.
Patricia1On 05.08.2008 at 5:48 pm Said:
I haven’t seen any personal attacks on you Richard. If you’re getting tired of us perhaps its because we kind of know we are being duped by ebay. That, however, has little to do with personally attacking you. I’m sorry you feel that way.
MechelleOn 05.08.2008 at 6:02 pm Said:
Oh well- if you are expecting us to play nice with our abusers you have lost your mind- what are you thinking? When you read the comments from us doesn’t it seem a bit much to expect us to treat them with civility? These people are affecting our income negatively- our reputation- our pride don’t sweep that under the rug the same as eBay does. Please acknowledge that we are people who do not view our participation in the eBay marketplace as entertaining activity.
This is our lives we are talking about- not fun and games- this “play time” on eBay feeds our children and pays the mortgage- this is a very serious and traumatic situation. Maybe our reactions seem dramatic to you, but that is because you don’t know what it is like to be part of the marketplace in a meaningful position. Buying things and selling things from the garage is not the reality for the large majority of those that sell on eBay- it is either the sole income or a necessary contribution to the household. It is also very hard and demanding work that consumes your life, and deserves a little bit of acknowledgment by eBay rather than telling us and the world we are crap.
My kids - my life- are already feeling the effects of the decrease in sells right now- I’m not talking a hundred dollars - I’m talking almost 6000 (not a lot to everyone, but that is a blow to my home) less in gross sells over the past 3 months and it is due to eBay’s nightmare. So when/if my reputation is thrashed by some nut and my income completely gone are you going to come and tell me I should still be nice to these people who have wrecked my life based on their “simple formula”.
Be reasonable- empathetic try to understand what is happening here. Don’t mock our concerns and treat us like we are a bunch of drama queens who should just be sweet as pie to these people who are playing games with the quality of life my children and I will live. This is not a freaking joke damn it!
AmberOn 05.08.2008 at 10:52 pm Said:
“I was talking more about accusations toward my colleagues and folks behind the scenes. ”
Richard, we all understand that the constant negativity is draining and demoralizing. Perhaps because we’ve been receiving the same negativity from ebay itself for years.
As for accusations, I am sorry, but there are so many documented examples of dishonest communication from the executives here that, quite frankly, I no longer trust anything ebay says. Notice that is ‘ebay’ not a specific person.
And there is a fine line between spin and dishonesty. Many of the execs’ comments can be viewed either way depending on your point of view. At the very least, they are disingenuous.
AmberOn 05.08.2008 at 11:01 pm Said:
Mechelle, I completely understand your frustration. I’m a SAHM who uses (used) my ebay income to help make up for the lean times. I paid for preschool, diapers, clothes…
Traffic is down 50% from last year and down 15% since Best Match was introduced. My sales are half what they were a few months ago. My selling practices, inventory etc are unchanged, so it’s clearly not something I’m doing (or not doing).
To top all of that off, the “rumors” about the future of the stores format makes it impossible for me to even plan a month or two ahead. The deal with Buy.com was just the final nail in the coffin that used to be my business.
I’m angry because 5 years of hard work have been thrown out as worthless by eBay. I have no “track record” because I don’t make enough money for them. I can take a hint…it’s quite clear that the small sellers have no value for eBay. I think I’m entitled to be a little bit bitter.
AmanOOn 05.08.2008 at 11:13 pm Said:
Just because no transaction takes place does not mean feedback is not in order. Actually sometimes the absents of a transaction IS the reason for feedback.
I agree that the system is FUBAR right now, but that needed to be said.
You got to a car wash and ask the employee to get the tar off your car. The employee tells you to go out back and play hide and go screw yourself. No transaction but there sure as hell could be feedback from that. You are saying that even though the customer was mistreated, let it go since he/she did not purchase anything?
HenriettaOn 05.09.2008 at 2:07 am Said:
As is happening increasingly often I get so infuriated by the sheer mindless stupidity of the powers that be. My comment is a blog post. An open letter to RBH.
Mark ClassicOn 05.09.2008 at 2:40 am Said:
Hello Richard 
Keep up the good work.
Now, just to re-iterate a question that was posed earlier:
Quote:
Whilst on the subject of feedback, can you ask Brian Burke to answer one simple question for me please?
If I am to deal with any seller that has a lot of negatives, I like to know what sort of problems they have.
So I check the negatives by clicking on the link in the feedback rating box.
Why is it that I cannot click on the negative feedback on the BUY seller account?
Is this a special arrangement they have so that their negatives cannot be accessed via the normal means?
Or is this a dishonest manufacturing of high feedback on a high rated politically sensitive account?
I do not submit this as an accusation, but as a question.
Because if that is the case, then the whole validity of the Ebay feedback system is all a puff of smoke in the wind.
If Ebay are engaging in this type of dishonesty, it will ultimately come back on them in a very embarrasing way.
Or is this merely an oversight on Ebay’s part?
Mark
KPAOn 05.09.2008 at 5:00 am Said:
@The Colonel…I would like to address Ebay’s biggest concern, loosing buyers because of a bad buying experience. If a buyer holds up his or her end of the transaction by READING seller guidelines, then that buyer has NOTHING to be upset or worried about. Any buyer that tries to undermine the seller’s T & C is a buyer that the Ebay community doesn’t want or need!
You hit the nail dead on the head here Colonel. When eBay has the verbiage stating, ” You are agreeing to a contract — You will enter into a legally binding contract to purchase the item from the seller. You are responsible for reading the full item listing, including the seller’s instructions and accepted payment methods” then buyers should be held accountable for THEIR responsibility in a transaction too.
There have been MANY times we’ve all had a horrible buyer who was so unreasonable they remind you of a brat in public that screams and shows his butt so he can get his way. He knows before he acts out he’ll get his way because he’s done it before and it worked. This is the same with bad buyers. We all know that less than 15% of them read the TOS. It’s an emotional buy for most. They want to “SHOP VICTORIOUSLY” so they simply click and bid hoping they win the item. eBay and Paypal have proven hundreds of thousands of times that they have no intention of holding buyers to the TOS…it would hinder the financial growth of the company and its shareholders if they did.
It is obvious that eBay’s ONLY concern is the buyer experience and the ONLY person who stands to lose even more now is the seller.
It has been my experience that buyers don’t read the TOS and are quick to neg when they didn’t get what they “thought” they should or some other obscure reason for not being a responsible buyer. DUH!!!! try and pull this stunt at an real auction. Try and pull this stunt in a genuine legal transaction.
We all want to make money on eBay and eBay wants to do so as well. Buyers want to find a bargain or that one item they’ve been searching for to add to their stuff but with eBay telling sellers your hands are tied now and Paypal giving buyers the open door they need to rip us off I don’t see ANY benefit in all these changes to the seller. We.re simply lab rats.
What is even more puzzling to me is the fact that other online sites don’t have this constantly changing business model that keeps screwing its partners over… WHY CAN’T EBAY FIGURE THIS FORMULA OUT AS WELL??? Sellers are getting tired of being the lab rats for experimentation.
As The Colonel said, if the buyers were held to the T&C they agreed to by their bid a lot of the problems would go away IMHO
BrendaOn 05.09.2008 at 7:06 am Said:
Make the rules the same for everybody. The Power Sellers, by virtue of their greater experiance should have less problems maintaining standards than new users.
This gap in Ebay policy is doing nothing towards making me think positively about the company.
We close the comments for posts after 30 days. If you would still like to comment on this post, please use our contact form.
177 Responses on this post. Click to add yours.