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

dimesOn July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 2, 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 July 3, 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 July 3, 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 July 3, 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 July 3, 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 July 3, 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.

bonniOn July 3, 2008 at 11:25 am Said:

I don’t think eBay actually changed their minds. I think they just realised and understood that they weren’t going to be able to win with the ACCC. I don’t know if they even ever understood just how furious Australian sellers (and buyers!) were about the move, though.

Someone at eBay should do some research on the Eureka Stockade to see what happens when you try, with high fees, and ridiculous regulations, to wring the life out of Australians trying to make a living.

Patricia1On July 3, 2008 at 12:47 pm Said:

Bonni - I think you hit the nail on the head. In all their dealings with sellers they have shown a callousness and a complete lack of sensitivity toward the sellers as fellow human beings. We’re all just numbers to be crunched along with everything else. When face to face with it they fall back on putting the “fun” into buying and selling…what? Fun hasn’t entered the picture in years now - ever since they began controlling things! Where is there room for “fun” when sellers are tied up like cattle ready to be branded?

GenieOn July 3, 2008 at 2:57 pm Said:

As a blogger, I read a good number of blogs. Freedom of choice is a critical component in our modern society. While we are on this freedom of choice topic, I noticed this blog will only let you ’stumble’, social bookmark site owned by eBay, but it does not let you conveniently Digg, Reddit, Delicious, Furl, Technorati, Slashdot, Spurl, etc… like on other independent blogs. Are those other bookmarking sites not as safe as Stumble Upon?

TheBrewsNewsOn July 3, 2008 at 3:50 pm Said:

Although eBay lost the battle in Australia (they couldn’t force the Paypal-only issue), they did actually win the war. Notice how easy it was for eBay to require ALL Australian sellers to offer PayPal as a choice and yet Australians feel that they have won a victory because they kept eBay from requiring Paypal Only.

Now, eBay will just throw a ton of coupons at Australian buyers and those coupons will only be valid for use with Paypal. Although Australian sellers can now offer other payment methods, eBay will certainly make those methods unattractive to Australian buyers.

Of course eBay / Paypal would loved to have made the eBay Australian site Paypal-only but they have still come pretty darn close to getting everything they were wanting. And with enough coupons and rewards program, eBay will be able to effectively make the Australian site PayPal only. Just give eBay a little more time to regroup and approach it from a different angle.

TonyOn July 3, 2008 at 3:55 pm Said:

Thebrewsnews you do realise that Ebay UK has forced all sellers to accept paypal too don’t you?

NicholaOn July 3, 2008 at 4:46 pm Said:

@ Kevin_T

Full disclosure here, hello all, I’m Nichola a member of the eBay.com PR team. I’m just jumping in quickly as Richard is taking a well-deserved day off today before the long weekend, so please be gentle with me ;-)

Just to hopefully answer your question - The Australian Safe payments initiative would have given buyers the option of PayPal or pay on pick-up (using cash or bank cheque). We are no longer moving to that phase – so people will be able to use a variety of methods for Pay on pick-up, including PayPal.
Using PayPal for pay on pick-up, gives buyers the same increased protections that are normally associated with PayPal – such as no need to share financial information, buyer protection etc…

Nichola

Patricia1On July 3, 2008 at 4:50 pm Said:

I think ebay go exactly what it wanted…simply to force every seller to offer Paypal. I don’t feel they believed they would win a paypal only decree. Miracles happen…but not often.

TheBrewsNewsOn July 3, 2008 at 5:18 pm Said:

Yes, I do Tony. My point is that eBay encountered a battle in the U.K. and sellers in the U.K. are still extremely angry and frustrated over the PayPal policy. Seems to me that Australian sellers are focused on their “victory” and are overlooking the fact that eBay clearly got what they wanted — everyone in Australia must offer Paypal (just like the U.K.).

In the U.S., eBay has to be more subtle… if you are a new seller you must offer Paypal. If you want to sell internationally, you must offer Paypal. If you sell in a “high risk” category, you must offer Paypal.

PhilipCohenOn July 4, 2008 at 4:57 am Said:

eBay introduces absolute anonymity for (shill) bidders

In Australia and the UK (at the least) eBay has now obscured auction bidding to the point that genuine bidders have got absolutely no chance of detecting and thereby protecting themselves from “shill” bidding (a criminal offence in most civilised countries) by unethical vendors. Notwithstanding eBay’s statements to the contrary, this application of absolute anonymity by eBay serves no purpose other than to deceive consumers; and the same criticism has always applied to eBay’s other facility, “User ID kept private” (aka “the shill bidders’ stairway to paradise”). Again, notwithstanding eBay’s various pronouncements about shill bidding being banned on eBay, eBay is now knowingly “aiding and abetting” such shill bidders, at the expense of consumers …

The full detailed version of the above comment (on AuctionBytes.com) at:
http://www.auctionbytes.com/forum/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=6498345#6498345

Patricia1On July 4, 2008 at 10:32 am Said:

I read that australian sellers are still angry because ebay is pulling any listings that say the seller “prefers” a different method of payment. Apparently, they can offer them but not say anything about preferring them…and the beat goes on…

TonyOn July 4, 2008 at 1:39 pm Said:

Same in the UK Patricia, you can’t say you prefer a different payment method to paypal. It is annoying people.

Patricia1On July 4, 2008 at 3:22 pm Said:

Well, the big mistake is that once people understand the reason behind pulling listings for the mere mention of another form of payment - they tend to dislike Ebay very very much and that, in the end may hurt them more than losing the fees from Paypal.

dimesOn July 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm Said:

Using PayPal for pay on pick-up, gives buyers the same increased protections that are normally associated with PayPal – such as no need to share financial information, buyer protection etc…

Unfortunately, sellers are totally unprotected when paypal is used to pay for items that are picked up because they have no proof of shipping or delivery.

Sellers don’t offer it on those items to avoid becoming ‘dolphins caught in the net’.

noneOn July 4, 2008 at 10:58 pm Said:

Nichola, you ever sell anything and have it picked up? How would one provide online proof of delivery to paypal when the scamming buyer files an INR after he picked up the item?

Does ebay even have the foggiest idea that there are two parties in any transaction and the one that pays their fees is not the one they’re busy protecting?

Patricia1On July 4, 2008 at 11:41 pm Said:

As far as pick up is concerned, whatever happened to “I give you cash and you give me a receipt”? You can’t get any safer than that. Too simple? Or is it just plain a matter of wanting that Paypal fee so badly?

Kevin_TOn July 5, 2008 at 2:21 am Said:

QUOTE: “Using PayPal for pay on pick-up, gives buyers the same increased protections that are normally associated with PayPal – such as no need to share financial information, buyer protection etc…”

Hello Nichola,
Thank you for selectively answering half of my question. My reference to Ebay users above also included SELLERS (you know, the Ebay users who actually pay your wages). It is all very well to tout the protection of buyers when they pay for a pick up only item that is paid for with PayPal, but sellers are (a)left entirely vulnerable to a reversal on pick-up-only items as there is no suitable “proof of delivery” for PayPal’s system (ie: seller protection is voided), and (b) in Australia and the UK MUST accept this form of payment due to the combination of PayPal being required on all listings and the Misleading and Discouraging Payment policy ( http://www2.ebay.com/aw/au/200710021700582.html ), meaning they can not refuse a PayPal payment on a pick-up-only item.

IF a scammer decides to “buy” a high value pick-up-only item and reverse the payment through PayPal, the seller has absolutely NO rights, and will lose both the item and their money. HOW is this deemed to be a “safer payment choice for users on eBay.com.au ” for those selling pick-up-only items, or does Ebay not consider sellers to be ebay users?

Kevin

Peter LOn July 5, 2008 at 9:12 am Said:

‘Paypal Only’ withdrawn? Not so.

Just try buying something on Ebay and look at the newest checkout version.

The buyer is confronted with a checkout where only the Paypal payment option is prominently visible and is selected by default, while alternate payment options (although theoretically available) are hidden for buyers under a non-intuitive button.

Patricia1On July 5, 2008 at 11:34 am Said:

Sold an a/c thru craigslist just recently. Buyer paid cash - I gave him a dated receipt and we were both happy! Had there been a problem he could have used that receipt in small claims court to recoup whatever he lost. KISS

wavdjazOn July 5, 2008 at 11:50 am Said:

Re. Nichola: hear hear, Dimes, None & Kevin-T. How nice that the buyer is protected, too bad eBay seems to think the seller needs no protection.
Read the ‘advanced FAQs’ at http://pages.ebay.com.au/useprotection/advanced-faq.html#a7 :
—————————-
“7. If I offer PayPal for local pick up am I covered by PayPal Seller Protection?
No. The Seller Protection policy requires proof of shipment which is not available for face to face transactions.”
“8. Can I offer pay on pick up and not offer PayPal?
PayPal must be offered on all listings including those with pay on pick up.”
—————————-

Very nice, thanks eBay, I’m sure the sellers are cheering of joy.

TonyOn July 5, 2008 at 1:12 pm Said:

Would the USB Paypal swiper count as proof of delivery for collections?

Nichola, here’s a PR tip for you, don’t force people to accept paypal, you’re getting bad PR over it, there are of course a number of other issues where you’re getting bad PR but this is an easy fix because it’s not a worldwide ruling.

implogOn July 5, 2008 at 10:51 pm Said:

@ Nichola

You wrote:

“I’m just jumping in quickly as Richard is taking a well-deserved day off today before the long weekend, so please be gentle with me.”

Hi Nichola:

While eBay employees are “disrupting” and “enhancing” and “excited” and “jumping in quickly” and attempting to conjure up an “excellent buying experience” from a site on life support, eBay sellers are less than “delighted”.

Ebay is destroying our livlihood and you ask us to “be gentle”.

Tsk tsk.

Got a proposition for you. You guys start being gentle with us and we’ll consider being gentle with you.

Every day, every angered eBay seller is telling the truth about the nuthouse we once knew as eBay. Sellers are talking with family members, friends, buyers, sellers, strangers, strangers at the Post Office, strangers at the swap meets, strangers at the antique malls, tech web sites, financial web sites, bloggers, reporters, governmental regulators and elected officials.

We tried communicating with eBay too but were dismissed as “noise”.

Your post covering for Richard on INK seems to be based on May 19th thinking.

All the PR you may do “jumping in quickly” here and “jumping in quickly” there may have been effective before that date. Unfortunately, eBay PR now could very well be too little and very well too late.

MechelleOn July 6, 2008 at 3:22 am Said:

@Implog

that is so true the word is spreading- to non-ebay users. I was at my sisters yesterday and one of her husbands employees had come and when I was asked how eBay was going he jumped right in asking me about the new search and what does it have to do with shipping. I asked if he was an eBay user and he said no!

Why would or how would a non-ebayer know or care about any of the abuses that eBay sellers are afflicted with by the hands of eBay management these days??

NetsellersOn July 6, 2008 at 11:18 am Said:

@ Kevin_T: yes, I agree with you, the scenario you describe is all too possible. Perhaps sellers in such instances should mail a receipt to the buyer for their payment/purchase by trackable means? Would that work? It gives the seller a tracking number for the sale…

Patricia1On July 6, 2008 at 11:46 am Said:

@implog - you hit the nail right on the head.

Hi Nichola - we know you’re just doing your job but when you say “be gentle” it tells me that Ebay and their employees are well aware of what is happening to their so-called “community”. I hardly know one seller who speaks of Ebay in kind terms and we ARE all spreading it around to be sure. I blog and I comment on every single financial blog and article that allows comments. I want wall street to know what their darling is doing to its sellers (the real customers)! As a 10 year seller with a perfect record who can no longer seem to make a sale on your site - I feel its my duty to warn every potential seller I can find! I tell every potential buyer I meet just exactly what Ebay is doing. None of us have to lie or embellish - we only have to speak truthfully!!!!

MsFish213On July 6, 2008 at 12:51 pm Said:

Its kind of scary when you read ALL the bad and nasty press Ebay has received since the “changes”….I dont see how a company can survive that kind of press. Its to the point now, that even if Ebay were to “roll back” to its earlier format,I think they lost a very large number of buyers and sellers who wont return to their site. End of an era.

dimesOn July 6, 2008 at 5:38 pm Said:

I was visiting an elderly relative yesterday at a nursing home. We were sitting in the dayroom, along with several other residents and their families.

Someone’s granddaughter was complimented on the blouse she was wearing and mentioned she’d gotten it on eBay.

It was like a switch had been turned on. Complete strangers started talking with each other about what a ripoff eBay has become. Although a few people mentioned ‘the good old days’, I must point out that none of the residents participated in the discussion (I don’t think many of them would even know how to turn on a computer).

When nursing home visitors start a spontaneous group rant about the evils of eBay, you know you have a real brand image problem.

JayOn July 8, 2008 at 7:06 am Said:

As a seller, I think the biggest problem with eBay’s brand comes from the sellers themselves.

Sellers are publically complaining to the world of their woes with eBay, meanwhile wondering why buyers (who also read/watch the news) aren’t shopping on eBay anymore.

If I went to the grocery store, and all the clerks told me that grocery store was ‘evil,’ I’d be shopping elsewhere too.

Some sellers are smart enough to know that when it comes to a buyer, eBay and the seller are the same thing. When you cry and bicker about the name brand you represent, the only person you hurt is your bottom line.

JerryOn July 8, 2008 at 9:01 am Said:

Well put Jay, when sellers go out of their way to badmouth ebay then complain when their sales are down they are shooting themselves in the foot.

TheBrewsNewsOn July 8, 2008 at 11:06 am Said:

Jay, maybe you could explain your comment where you think the biggest problem with eBay’s brand comes from the sellers themselves (maybe with some examples or something). I think perhaps I just don’t understand your comment / opinion.

Regarding your comment about grocery store clerks in a grocery store, I think your analogy is not congruent. A clerk in the grocery store is an EMPLOYEE paid a wage. His / her salary is known and it doesn’t vary depending on how many customers come in the store or how much they spend or if they decide to do chargebacks later, after taking their groceries home and eating them.

A better analogy might be that if I went in a mall and noticed there was graffiti everywhere and every other lightbulb was out in the hallway then when I went into a particular store and the owner was bemoaning how the owner was not taking care of maintenance issues then I would understand the store owner’s frustration.

And then when he/she complained that the mall owner was raising rates and not kicking out the store owners next door who were selling drugs and also that the mall owner promised a burglar alarm system to prevent theft (that was increasing because of the drug activity next door) but didn’t pay to have the alarm turned on, then I would have a much better appreciation of why the store owner was telling me that he / she was making plans to move his store to a better retail location. I wouldn’t stop visiting that store in that particular mall location because the owner was complaining about his / her conditions but rather I would stop visiting the mall altogether because of the actions (inactions) of the mall owners.

I consider myself to be a “smart” seller and I guarantee you that my buyers realize and recognize they are buying from ME and not from eBay. I am not the same thing as eBay, nobody (including buyers) thinks that I am, and I certainly don’t want my business to be synonymous to eBay and their business practices. Now, the buyers on Amazon and their perceptions… that is a different story.

Patricia1On July 8, 2008 at 12:16 pm Said:

You can’t beat sellers over the head and then expect them to give you a glowing review. Many of the damaged sellers have reduced listings or do not even list (or buy) on ebay anymore. Unfortunately, word of mouth is a really effective way of spreading something to the widest possible audience and also unfortunately, most of what they spread is true.

Kevin_TOn July 8, 2008 at 7:07 pm Said:

Quote: “If I went to the grocery store, and all the clerks told me that grocery store was ‘evil,’ I’d be shopping elsewhere too.”

You, like Ebay, seem to assume that those selling on Ebay are employees and not Ebay’s actual customers. I view Ebay and PayPal as business tools, and fail to see how having to constantly fight with my business tools for the right to run my own business properly, on my own established fair and reasonable terms, is productive for any of the parties involved.

If I went to the grocery store, and was told by the management that I must pay with their fee bearing credit card, and specifically how I must consume my purchases, I’d be shopping elsewhere too. The difference for Ebay, is that there are less choices to access the wider international market, and established customers have to take a substantial hit to their income if they choose to shop elsewhere immediately.

Kevin

Patricia1On July 8, 2008 at 11:04 pm Said:

Well said Brews.

permacrisisOn July 9, 2008 at 3:46 am Said:

implog said:

We tried communicating with eBay too but were dismissed as “noise”.

More importantly. We tried communicating with eBay first but were dismissed as noise!

bonniOn July 9, 2008 at 4:35 am Said:

“Seems to me that Australian sellers are focused on their “victory” and are overlooking the fact that eBay clearly got what they wanted”

I don’t see why you’d think that. Sellers that I talk to every day are still just as angry and irritated. Why do you think everyone has suddenly thought, “Oh, well, it’s all okay!” ?

Yeah, people are pleased that the ACCC smacked eBay in the chops, but I don’t think anyone believes it’s a “victory”. EBay is still a foreign corporate body that doesn’t contribute to the Australian tax system at all, and PayPal still isn’t a signatory of the Australian EFT code of conduct.