Business by "trick"? Specifically Ebay policies

[DTEJD1997]

Hey all:

 

Has anyone noticed lately that more and more business seems to be conducted by "trick"?

 

Here is a good example:

 

Ebay has policies for being a "top rated seller".  This is very important for various reasons, lower fees, better item placement, etc.  Sellers strive to attain this rating level.  It is meant to show which sellers provide good service and do the right thing.

 

So here is where Ebay is pulling two "tricks".

 

A). You are supposed to ship an item and provide tracking information to the buyer.  If the buyer does not receive the item in a timely fashion, it is counted as a defect, and counts AGAINST the seller.  Sounds good!  Here is a problem...Seller ships item via Fed-Ex, UPS, USPS in the allotted time frame and uploads tracking information.  Carrier mis-routes, loses, destroys the item.  Buyer gets refunded their money and seller has to work it out with carrier.  HERE IS THE TRICK!  It now counts as a strike against the seller that the carrier LOST, destroyed, stole the item.  Seller has no control once they turn over the package to the carrier.  This is manifestly unfair, seller is being punished for carrier's misdeed.  Seller should only be punished for items under their control.

 

or consider:

 

B). A buyer on Ebay decides they don't want the item, OR they don't have money to pay for the item.  They request to cancel the transaction.  Seller has to send "Cancel transaction" request.  Buyer then has to say "I agree, I don't want the item".  If the buyer does not do this in 7 days, it is automatically closed and COUNTS AGAINST THE SELLER, even though buyer didn't/won't pay and requested the item cancellation.

 

This is serious business.  Some sellers can not compete without the "Top Rated Seller" because of fees and placement issues.

 

Ebay should not be "punishing" sellers for items that are obviously out of their control.

 

If I were cynical, I would say Ebay is doing this to increase revenue.  Their revenue is increased because as time passes, more & more sellers lose "Top Rated Seller" status and have to pay higher fees.

 

There are other businesses like this out there, but Ebay seems to do this on purpose.

 

Anybody have any experience or thoughts about this?

 

 

[jouni1]

i absolutely believe the seller should be responsible for the courier he uses. if i get what you're saying, the seller gets a negative mark even when he straight up refunds or sends a new item successfully. this seems a bit nasty, but i understand the thinking. when comparing sellers, i want to choose the one who gets his packages to where they should be. as a consumer i just want to pay for the item and get it, not worry about couriers etc. so in a way i understand the successful sales kind of scoring of sellers.

 

the seller is providing a service and i hold him fully responsible to compensate me if the courier f's up. i also understand it being a part of the scoring system, as it's a service(shipping) i pay him for.

 

that being said, i'm noticing how ebay is turning for the worse. it's getting impossible to search for stuff, and smaller sellers are gone. haven't shopped there for over a year now. the last two orders were "lost" by couriers. idiot sellers told me to wait for a few months as it's coming with regular mail(so i wouldn't be able to start a dispute anymore), after initially telling the shipping time was 3-10days. i disputed and gave negative 1-star review to both of them and got my money back. they were both "top-rated" BTW.

[DTEJD1997]

In the USA, there are essentially 3 courier services.  Those are the US Post Office, Fed-Ex & UPS.

 

The seller should be held accountable for which of those 3 they chose?  How does a seller have any influence or sway over those companies?  All of these companies are good, reputable companies.

 

It isn't like sellers are choosing "Larry & Jimbo's fly by night deliveries".

 

The many changes in Ebay policies are designed to increase revenue.  If Ebay wants to increase their revenue, that is fine.  They need to do it in a forward, evenhanded way.  They don't need to resort to tricks and unfair policies. 

 

They should just set the bar high enough that nobody (or virtually nobody) qualifies for discounts.  They don't need to be sneaky, or retroactively changing terms of service.

 

Come August 20th when the new rules come into effect, Ebay is going to find that a lot of sellers leave the system.

[matts]

I agree with Jouni1. The buyer pays for an item to be delivered, so that becomes part of the seller's responsibility. Does it suck that the US only has 3 carriers? Sure, but what is your solution? If the seller was not responsible, how many sellers would claim that they shipped an item when they really didn't?

 

And I don't think that many big sellers will leave under the new rules, at least not the global ones. Ebay is very profitable for sellers that can get items wholesale. The Chinese and HK sellers make a fortune in aggregate. Will Jane from Wisconsin stop selling her homemade jewelry on ebay? Maybe, but the market will survive and even thrive. Ebay takes out a whole whack of middlemen, and that business model is working in many sectors of the economy.

 

[Ham Hockers]

i'm a top rated seller on ebay. in my experience, you can achieve top status despite having packages lost by the shippers on occasion. i'm guessing what ebay primarily cares about is whether the rate at which you lose packages is above the norm.

 

[matjone]

I think some businesses have a more ethical culture than others.  The ones that require a contract or a monthly payment seem to be more prone to shenanigans.  I've had bad experiences with cell phone carriers and I know a lot of people who have had bad experiences with charter communications here in st. louis.

 

I quit using ebay several years ago after a bad experience with the dispute resolution process with paypal.  I came away with the impression that ebay in effect had a no return policy, even if the seller sent the wrong item. That's not going to work for me for an internet transaction.  I can see maybe buying some small dollar items but for any major purchase I'd be scared to use them.  My sister had a seller's account and she seemed to have the same impression as you, DTE.  Apparently it sucks from the seller's perspective too.  I will just stick to amazon.

 

[bookie71]

I used to sell and buy tons of stuff on Ebay, but haven't done either in the past two years.  It just got to be too big a hassle.

[DTEJD1997]

I agree with Jouni1. The buyer pays for an item to be delivered, so that becomes part of the seller's responsibility. Does it suck that the US only has 3 carriers? Sure, but what is your solution? If the seller was not responsible, how many sellers would claim that they shipped an item when they really didn't?

 

Matts:

 

I think you misunderstand what I am complaining about...

 

It is not about the seller dodging responsibility to the seller for their purchase...

 

IF a seller ships an item ON TIME, via approved carrier AND UPLOADS tracking information showing and confirming ALL of that, and the shipper loses the package, they are still "marked down" by Ebay.  The seller did everything correctly.  The buyer is still getting a replacement item OR their money back.  It is not about the loss of the package, it is about the seller's markdown by Ebay.

 

 

The controversy is that the seller gets punished even when they do everything correct, and have confirmation to prove it.

 

Sellers are getting punished simply for a carrier losing a package.

 

That is going to generate a tremendous amount of ill will amongst their sellers.

 

As to Chinese sellers, there is all sorts of rumors floating around that they don't pay any fees OR pay vastly reduced fees.  The Chinese fee structure is totally different than the American fee structure, but that is another topic...

[bizaro86]

As to Chinese sellers, there is all sorts of rumors floating around that they don't pay any fees OR pay vastly reduced fees.  The Chinese fee structure is totally different than the American fee structure, but that is another topic...

 

That makes no sense. If I was running eBay I would charge those sellers more. The prototypical original American ebay seller can and will go back to the swap meet/used book store/craigslist etc if ebay raises fees high enough using it is no longer economic.

 

Those selling goods from Hong Kong/China will have a very hard time accessing North American markets otherwise. EBay provides those sellers real value by reducing the inventory costs/middleman.

 

Example: I bought my baby a tuxedo on Ebay from a chinese seller for a very low price. We needed it for a wedding, he'll wear it once, even if its cheaply made he looks cute. That seller can afford to pay ebay high fees, because ebay is the only other way for them to reach me as a consumer. I wouldn't have searched elsewhere on the web, and I probably wouldn't buy from an independent website selling imported baby tuxedos. The other choice would be importing it and selling it through a store in my local mall, which has costs dramatically in excess of using ebay, and the market for baby tuxedos in any one geography is very small.

 

It makes sense for ebay to maximize its profits by charging those sellers more, because they could get away with the price discrimination.