All Existing Payment Methods to be Allowed on eBay.com.au

dimesOn 07.02.2008 at 7:37 pm Said:

The initial reaction on the Australian eBay boards appears to be anger that they will still be compelled to offer paypal as a payment service, since it’s apparently not a popular option in a territory that has such a strong bank-bank payment system.

It will be interesting to see how this continues to play out.

TWOn 07.02.2008 at 7:47 pm Said:

“All Existing Payment Methods to be Allowed on eBay.com.au”

Interesting choice of words … “all”. Google check out is good to go then. Cool!

implogOn 07.02.2008 at 8:11 pm Said:

“citing a desire to avoid further confusion and disruption among the eBay community”

I thought “disruption” was what it all was about.

MechelleOn 07.02.2008 at 8:30 pm Said:

Well, eBay made a smart move with this decision.

Clearly, the cost of continuing this push for paypal only would only undermine their credibility in their position in the LV case in France and all the other sure to follow.

Basically, eBay final value fees for the item bring in more money than paypal fees- not to mention the damages they’ll pay if they lose the appeal in France.

Good thinking eBay- I’m impressed

HenriettaOn 07.02.2008 at 8:57 pm Said:

This is good news. Regardless of eBay’s statement, the ACCC will make a ruling on eBays current business model and it is possible that the ruling will prevent the requirement of offering PayPal or even to have a PayPal account at all. Those are also tying practices.

I think eBay realized that the aggressive talk and attitude was not going over well and perhaps hopes to forestall the ruling by capitulation. Maybe Mr Smith decided to accept the advice of his lawyers, the case was very thin.

It will be interesting to check the Aussie boards.

Thanks RBH for bringing us the news so speedily.
Enjoy the holiday weekend.

Patricia1On 07.02.2008 at 9:05 pm Said:

“I get the impression that this process went on much longer than originally anticipated.”

Seems a LOT of things are going on much longer than originally anticipated. Too bad, Ebay, you don’t know everything after all… I’m sorry you seem to be having a bad week - but I’m afraid its only the beginning..

bonniOn 07.02.2008 at 9:06 pm Said:

EBay is expressing regret? Uhm, only regret that they have to back down.

EBay can express all the regrets they want, but they’re still pulling listings where the seller states that they prefer bank deposit or they prefer cash on pickup or anything other than “We prefer PayPal RAH RAH!”

I think the damage has been done. Time will tell on this one, but it’s going to take some pretty spectacular magic being pulled out of Simon Smith’s… hat… to bring people back around to eBay.

Kevin_TOn 07.02.2008 at 9:12 pm Said:

QUOTE: Obviously eBay is standing by its contention that PayPal is the safer payment choice for users on eBay.com.au (and for eBay overall for that matter)

Hello Richard,
Can you please confirm how forcing PayPal to be offered on Pick-up-only items protects Ebay users? Employees have confirmed that there are risks in this aspect, but have never addressed them satisfactorily. Since this was about protection of users and not profits, and since Australian and UK members are required to still offer PayPal as a payment option on Pick-up-only items, can you please explain how this increases protection to Ebay users?

Kevin

ejholdenOn 07.02.2008 at 9:22 pm Said:

I get the impression that by withdrawing the application, eBay hopes to head off an ACCC ruling that will prevent the enforcing of mandatory paypal ….
Bigger & more damaging problems still exist with the seller feedback policy however ….

DaveyOn 07.02.2008 at 9:52 pm Said:

@Richard,

Regarding the Paypal Buyer Protection touted at the end of the eBay announcement above, I’m sure you’re aware that the fine print in the UA specifically removes obligation on Paypal to make good on a valid claim. Instead of the word “shall” in regards to fulfillment of a claim, they use the words “may” and “at our sole discretion.” You can verify this independently if you wish. In other words, the protection plan, even if promising $10 million, is without teeth as a claim can be denied without appeal arbitrarily, in Paypal’s sole discretion. Doesn’t sound very reassuring to me…

I’m also very interested in two questions related to Paypal and “Safe Payments:” What makes Google Checkout “unsafe?” How could it be made “safe?” I know these are rhetorical questions unlikely to get answers even though we all know what the answers really are, but they are still valid all the same.

dimesOn 07.03.2008 at 12:59 am Said:

Paypal should be ashamed of itself for the weasel wording in its Australian “protection” policy, and the way it was touted as something to be relied upon:

(bolding by paypal):

IMPORTANT: If you are eligible under PayPal’s Buyer Protection Policy, and you claim that the item purchased is “significantly not as described” or you did not receive the item PayPal may attempt to recover your payment from the seller, but recovery of your payment, whether in whole or in part, is not guaranteed. However, where PayPal is unable to recover the whole or any part of your payment from the seller for a claim, PayPal may at its absolute and sole discretion, decide to make an ex gratia payment, not exceeding the financial limits set out in paragraph 3 below.

Interesting that paypal is covering SNAD claims in AU only if funds can be recouped from the seller. No such restriction exists in the US user agreement. Yet.

And this isn’t exactly reassuring (again, bolding by paypal):

IMPORTANT: Payment by PayPal under PayPal’s Buyer Protection Policy is at PayPal’s absolute and sole discretion. You have no automatic entitlement to receive any payments. PayPal’s Buyer Protection Policy does not indemnify you for the loss which you, as a buyer, may incur and it is not a contract of insurance.

No buyer protection guarantee at all, even if every requirement in the long list is met. What’s the point then?

SandiOn 07.03.2008 at 3:57 am Said:

I’m also very interested in two questions related to Paypal and “Safe Payments:” What makes Google Checkout “unsafe?” How could it be made “safe?” I know these are rhetorical questions unlikely to get answers even though we all know what the answers really are, but they are still valid all the same.

Given Google Checkout is my preferred choice as BOTH a buyer and seller I thought I would offer my insight.

As a seller, Google gives me the verification information - how they verified the actual card holder made the payment - 3 digit (or 4) CVS, zip code match, how long the buyer has had the google account. They give me credit of having enough intelligence to determine if any risks are worth it to me.

As a seller, the fee is less.

I personally know Paypal’s method of confirming addresses based on address is flawed - I transposed numbers in my address when registering my paypal account - for 3 years it was listed as my confirmed (my credit card bills go to my accountant, not my home). I manually via phone had my residence confirmed. The fact my primary address was incorrect really bothered me when I finally caught the error myself using my Paypal Virtual Card online and it kept rejecting my billing address. Paypal wanted the wrong one.

That is not very confidence building.

As a buyer, I always ask a seller if they take Google, why? Because Google does not make me jump through hoops to pay with my credit card. They don’t ram that 3 screens down my throat everytime I want to pay for something with “You know your ban account is just as safe as your credit card” crapola. Google is simply 100% more user friendly, it is quicker and easier than Paypal.

Patricia1On 07.03.2008 at 7:37 am Said:

@Davey - I, too, would love to know specifically what makes Google “unsafe” except for the fact that they are a competitor.

@Dimes - I don’t think you will find many long-time sellers who believe Paypal will refund them anything. All of them probably expect the “weaseling” and have the attitude that they’ll believe it when they see it. Paypal’s reputation - like Ebay’s is kind of “lengendary”. LOL

SandiOn 07.03.2008 at 7:46 am Said:

Well Dimes I responded regarding google but it never got posted, alas…

Maybe I should have been less pro google?

TonyOn 07.03.2008 at 9:59 am Said:

Well people are going to put two and two together and come up with five as this reversal in policy does remove ebay’s hypocrtitical stance on consumer choice.

However, it doesn’t matter, it’s a good move. Market forces will dictate whether people use paypal anyway and that’s how it should be. I’d go further and suggest they remove the forced acceptance of paypal on sellers, many sellers already claim they offer paypal as it improves sales anyway, so let paypal sell itself.

Nice to see ebay will change their minds on policies, now if they’d just remove a few more of their recent ridiculous policies then it might become a happier place again.