Options
Great Source Of EBAY Card Buyers To Block From Bidding
storm888
Posts: 11,701 ✭✭✭
On the EBAY "Professional Buying" board, you will find hundreds of
BAD buyers that should be added to ALL blocked-bidder lists.
The pending-new BB lists will hold 5,000 names.
MANY of the dirtbags are salivating at the prospect of being able
to RUIN sellers by destroying their feedback w/o risk of retaliation.
BAD buyers that should be added to ALL blocked-bidder lists.
The pending-new BB lists will hold 5,000 names.
MANY of the dirtbags are salivating at the prospect of being able
to RUIN sellers by destroying their feedback w/o risk of retaliation.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
0
Comments
<< <i>On the EBAY "Professional Buying" board, you will find hundreds of
BAD buyers that should be added to ALL blocked-bidder lists.
The pending-new BB lists will hold 5,000 names.
MANY of the dirtbags are salivating at the prospect of being able
to RUIN sellers by destroying their feedback w/o risk of retaliation. >>
This is silly, and I think you should stop it. The fact neither you nor anyone else have any idea how these changes will affect sellers.
If you're interested I could write up a strong argument, based on economic theory, explaining why these changes will benefit all scrupulous ebayers. I won't bother if nobody is going to read it, but if you (or anyone else) is curious then I'll put something together tonight or tomorrow.
For Me, I'm curious, so please write it up. I am concerned, having been held Feedback Hostage on numerous occasions with Blatant Fraud and Theft both involved.
Neil
"If you're interested I could write up a strong argument, based on economic theory, explaining why these changes will benefit all scrupulous ebayers."
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Since neither I nor "anyone else have any idea how these changes will affect sellers,"
it seems YOU are the sole psychic, IF you can "explain why the changes will benefit all
scrupulous ebayers."
When TENS-OF-THOUSANDS of sellers' PayPal accounts are seized because CRIMINALS
pretending to be buyers refuse to leave ANY feedback, all scrupulous EBAYers will best
understand how "these changes" have benefitted them.
The BEST way to understand what is about to happen here - and why - is to read the
thousands of comments by buyers/sellers on the EBAY boards. I have done that.
<< <i>"The fact neither you nor anyone else have any idea how these changes will affect sellers."
"If you're interested I could write up a strong argument, based on economic theory, explaining why these changes will benefit all scrupulous ebayers."
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Since neither I nor "anyone else have any idea how these changes will affect sellers,"
it seems YOU are the sole psychic, IF you can "explain why the changes will benefit all
scrupulous ebayers."
When TENS-OF-THOUSANDS of sellers' PayPal accounts are seized because CRIMINALS
pretending to be buyers refuse to leave ANY feedback, all scrupulous EBAYers will best
understand how "these changes" have benefitted them.
The BEST way to understand what is about to happen here - and why - is to read the
thousands of comments by buyers/sellers on the EBAY boards. I have done that. >>
That's exactly your problem-- you think I'm doing what you're doing, which is divining a conclusion based on half-assed conjecture and semi-educated guessing. So it will certainly surprise you to learn that I'm simply applying the rules of incentives and asymmetrical information, and applying these to the more general problem of market failure, to explain why these changes MAY be beneficial.
WILL they be beneficial? I don't know. If theory holds then they will be; if not, then they won't. But-- again, unlike you-- I'm willing to admit I don't have a crystal ball. I'm not presumpuous enough to pass off speculation as certainty; it would be nice if you were capable of a similar restraint.
//////////////////////////////////////////////
I do not need a didactic weatherman to tell me when it is about to rain.
I just look at the sky.
I'm sitting on the sidelines for this one.
Steve
Now can we please get back to arguing about the merits of the .5 grading scale, ugly looking PSA 10s, and how big of a douche my mailman is? Thanks.
Lee
<< <i>"I'm not presumpuous enough to pass off speculation as certainty; it would be nice if you were capable of a similar restraint. "
//////////////////////////////////////////////
I do not need a didactic weatherman to tell me when it is about to rain.
I just look at the sky. >>
It must be great to never be wrong.
I'm assuming you've now liquidated all of your assets and shorted Ebay stock, since it's a 'hammer lock' these changes are going to destroy the Ebay marketplace. Criminals running rampant, cats and dogs living together.... Sound the bell, boys! The end is nigh!
<< <i>If you guys would like, I could write up a 40-page dissertation on how these changes won't effect my life in any way, and probably none of yours either.
Now can we please get back to arguing about the merits of the .5 grading scale, ugly looking PSA 10s, and how big of a douche my mailman is? Thanks.
Lee >>
No. Although I would like to initiate a discussion surrounding when, exactly, it became vogue to toss around insults that I remember thinking were puerile by the time I was in fifth grade ( 'douche', 'douchebag', 'retard', and so on).
Retaliatory feedback made the current feedback system useless. Everyone knows this. The seller FB rating is going to actually be closer to reality now. Yes, there are going to be some crackpots and abuse, but every seller is going to face this problem equally so presumably, they will all be affected similarly. Also keep in mind that you just can't neg a seller without going through a process and if you're abusing the system as a buyer, or targeting a seller unfairly, this is going to be problematic for the buyer.
Right now, even the scum sellers have 99%+ ratings. How is that a good thing? It's a freaking joke, completely meaningless. And, as much as ebay needs sellers, they need buyers even more. And so do the sellers. A new buyer who leaves a negative rating is screwed automatically if he is neg'd. That had to stop.
Even world class retailers have customer satisfaction ratings in the 70-80% range. Why? Because there is no such thing as retaliatory feedback when you criticize Nordstrom or WalMart.
I think we need to get used to feedback ratings in the low to mid-90s. That is where the good sellers should be, in a real world. I mean, how many of you have given + feedback reluctantly because of fear of retaliation?
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
i give non paying bidder fiends negatives all the time, i could care less if they give me one or not, not having the balls enuff to negative somebody for a retaliation feedback is pretty lame
Guy gets the Wm. F Buckley award for the day. Please carry on while I go look up what it means.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
//////////////////////////////////////////////
I have NEVER NEGd anybody; buyer/seller.
I have had ONE seller who likely deserved a NEG.
I have NEVER been extorted by a seller.
I have been repeatedly extorted by buyers.
I have had MANY buyers who should have been NEGd.
BUT, there is not a penny in leaving a NEG. I just block
them and move on.
My primary businesses on EBAY have nothing to do with
collectibles. Buyers of collectibles are, in general, the
best-quality buyers on EBAY.
Now can we please get back to arguing about the merits of the .5 grading scale, ugly looking PSA 10s, and how big of a douche my mailman is? Thanks.>>
lee-i will listen to your 40 page dissertation on the lime of the cat head, or a .5 grade,or anything else ya got up your sleeve-as long as you put it to music like arlo guthries' -alices resteraunt
<< <i>I just think it should be noted that this might well be the first time the word "puerile" was in a baseball card forum. >>
It's definitely not the first time it has applied, though.
<< <i> puerile
adj 1: of or characteristic of a child; "puerile breathing"
2: displaying or suggesting a lack of maturity; "adolescent
insecurity"; "jejune responses to our problems"; "their
behavior was juvenile"; "puerile jokes" [syn: adolescent,
jejune, juvenile]
>>
Thanks for the vocabulary lesson, Boo!
Vintage Football Card Gallery
Steve
The issue of incentives:
One of the fundamental tenants of economic theory is that people respond to incentives; as such, if you want to change a behavior then the most efficient way to do so is to provide the proper incentives for people to change how they behave. (This, by the way, is why many economists are in favor of paying students for getting good marks in school, or for rewarding ‘green friendly’ firms with tax credits).
On to the subject of feedback. Ask yourself this: What is the incentive for leaving negative feedback if you’re a buyer? Perhaps you feel like you gain something by warning future bidders about the seller’s business practices, or perhaps you’re vindictive… or perhaps you just feel like it’s ‘the right thing to do’. Whatever the case, it’s clear that for most Ebay bidders the reward (in whatever form it may assume) for leaving a negative feedback does not compensate for the cost of leaving same (which, generally, is the risk of receiving a retaliatory neg). The feedback system was designed to give bidders (and sellers) information about people with whom they might engage in a market transaction. But, for whatever reason, that system as it now stands has failed. For evidence, you need look no further than the feedback rating for that mouth breather Gary Daggett. Does anyone believe that 49 out of every 50 people who buy something from him is satisfied with the transaction?
This issue is perhaps best illustrated through a quantitative example. I ask you: What is a negative feedback ‘worth’ you to you? Say someone sold something to you, the item you bought was misrepresented, and the seller then emailed you and asked you if you would be willing to exchange negative feedback with them. Would you do it? And if not, how much would that person have to pay you in order for you to agree to this exchange? $5? $10? $20? Let’s say it’s $10, for arguments sake. Now then, let’s say you bid on something—a lot of cards, say—and you pay $50 for the lot. When you get them you’re disappointed, since in your opinion the lot was somewhat overrepresented in the auction description. It isn’t a total loss, but if you’d known exactly what was in the lot you would have only bid $41 dollars. Since you’re only out $9 (the price you did pay minus the price you would have paid), and a negative feedback is worth $10 to you, you will not leave a neg. What’s the point? The reward you get for leaving a neg does not exceed the cost of receiving one.
This is the problem Ebay currently faces. The would like people to leave negs when they’re disappointed with how a deal went down, but people don’t do it—and the reason why they don’t do it is because Ebay doesn’t provide the proper incentives. There’s no percentage in leaving a netg; it screws up your rating, and it doesn’t offer you anything in return (or what it does offer you, namely ‘the chance to inform future buyers about a shady seller’, don’t outweigh the cost).
Asymmetrical Information:
Have you ever wondered why you can’t find a decent used car? Let me explain the reason. Take a car like a 1997 Honda Accord. Let’s say that if the car is a ‘peach’ it’s worth $4000 to you, but if it’s a lemon it’s only worth $2000. Assume further that the ratio between lemons and peaches is 50/50 (you can use any percentage here you want and it won’t corrupt the theory; I’m just using 50/50 because it’s easier). If you’re a buyer, and you know that the car has a 50% chance of being either a peach or a lemon, then you would be willing to pay $3000 for that car. But look what happens when $3000 becomes the market clearing price. Anyone with a peach won’t sell for that price, because they know the car should be worth more than that. And anyone with a lemon would jump at the chance to sell their card for three grand, since they know the card is only worth $2000. The net result? Only the lemons make it to market. The value for the peach exceeds the market value for 1997 Accords in general, which means the peaches don’t wind up on the markt.
This is what’s known as a market failure. The price a producer would require for a commodity exceeds the price that a consumer would be willing to pay; as a result, there’s no market for that good (which, in this case, is a ‘peachy’ 1997 Accords). And the reason for this market failure is what’s known as asymmetrical information (this concept was first brought to light by Joseph Stiglitz, who he was subsequently awarded the Nobel Prize Nobel Prize in Economics for it in 2001). In simple terms, the problem of asymmetrical information arises whenever the seller knows more about the good than the buyer. For the buyer the outcome of the transaction is random; it can either go well or go sour. But for the seller the outcome is predetermined, since he knows exactly what it is he’s getting rid of.
From an economic perspective asymmetrical information is bad, since it leads to market inefficiency. Goods that should come to market do not. And if anyone is curious to see how the problem of asymmetrical information plays out in the Ebay marketplace I would encourage you to look at almost any post involving Ebay that has ever been posted on these boards. You want to put in an aggressive bid on that ‘NM’ 1965 set, but is it ‘really’ NM? That lot of 270 Pujols cards looks like it would be sweet pick up, but is it all going to be 2002 Fleer Platinum base cards? Everyone one of us here has undoubtedly passed up on Ebay deals that we would have taken if we could have seen the goods face to face simply because we weren’t sure what we were getting. It happens all the time.
But what if you could ‘know’ what you were getting? Suddenly Ron Burgandy can put in a serious bid on that ‘NM-MT’ 1959 set from a seller in Pittsburgh, since he knows exactly what he’s going to get. I can go out and bid with impunity on all matters of random insert lots from the late 1990’s, since I know I won’t get stuck with a bunch of Brady Anderson inserts. And the good sellers—the honest guys with good stuff—can bring their stuff to market, since they now know they’ll get the fair market value for their goods.
Having an even distribution in the information about a commodity between buyers and sellers is a very, very good thing. And that’s precisely what the new feedback system is hoping to achieve. We will all see our feedback ratings plummet at first, but all that means is that the ceiling for good sellers—Steve Hart types—will go from 99% down to 85%. And the losers like Gary will see their ratings go down to 50%, since there will no longer be any reason not to hit a guy with a neg when he so richly deserves it. And the consequence of all this will mean that feedback rating will start giving buyers real information about sellers (something they do not provide now), and the market for quality goods will at last begin to clear.
Gary will go under. New England Sports Cards will go under. JoJowhateverhisnameis will go under. All these losers who keep screwing guys for a dollar amount that’s just low enough to dissuade someone from giving them their deserved feedback will lose their market share. Buyers will now have real information about sellers, which will reduce the asymmetry of information. This will allow seller so get maximum value for their goods, and allow buyers to put in maximum bids. And that, really, is what a free market economy is all about.
All a buyer can really do is pay in full and make the payment quick. Once a buyer has fulfilled those obligations, there is really few other reasons to be any more demanding from a seller's POV. A seller is responsible for a whole lot more like delivery, time of delivery, description of item, etc. I can understand if a buyer did not read all of the description and then gets disappointed when receiving the item when all along the seller made full disclosure. I don't feel a buyer should neg just because of not reading everything. However, perhaps sellers need to be very clear and concise and not use fine print or disingenuous language.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
The buyer on eBay ALWAYS takes the higher risk because it's his money he's putting out there for an unknown item and also because of the asymmetrical information principle.
With paypal combined with credit card protection, I've never felt much risk as a buyer. The only real risk was having to waste time getting a refund through one of those two channels. As a seller, there's all kinds of risk; any intelligent buyer can get an item for free if they know how to play the system. Plus, even a paypal payment can turn out to be 'bad' (ie. stolen credit card). Whether you run into one of these buyers depends a lot on what you sell. If you're predominantly selling registry cards in the $5-$50 range and you use DC, you might never deal with a buyer like that.
The biggest problem now won't be scammers, though. It will be the buyers who are already buying expensive, $200+ items and waiting 10-14 days before even responding to an invoice. There's no telling how long they'll wait once the threat of negative feedback is removed. Sellers will also have a hard time deciding their cutoff point since filing against a NPB will virtually ensure a neg now. (All a buyer has to do is respond to the claim and they can still leave feedback). That might seem like an easy call to make today, but if your feedback has already started taking a large nosedive, then it may not be so easy. Actually, I think ebay is hoping the new feedback system will prevent sellers from filing for fees since 6% of all transactions result in NPB's. That would be a lot of added revenue.
Regarding consumer confidence, I'm trying to picture myself as a newbie being faced with sellers whose feedback tops out in the 85% positive range. It definately would have saved me from a few purchases that were a waste of time, but being risk averse I'm pretty sure I would have bought substantially less overall, especially in the ungraded category. There would have just been too much negative information to process, and I wouldn't have wanted to deal with it. Legitimate grading companies pretty much eliminate the lemon factor, especially if you get decent scans and don't worry too much about alterations that almost no one can detect. It remains to be seen how much feedback will really drop, though. It isn't that low on amazon where buyers don't receive feedback, but amazon does a much better job of policing its buyers. I don't think you can have one without the other.
For buyers who are also sellers (which are many in our category), there will still be retaliatory feedback, only now it will take the form of a seller creating a new account and winning items without paying and then leaving negative feedback. If you think you no longer need a separate buyer account, you're sorely mistaken.
I watched about 15 minutes of the online conference where they announced all the changes, and regardless of how ebay is effected I can honestly say I wouldn't hire any of ebay's braintrust to pass out fliers at the mall. It was actually kinda comical. They started off saying they weren't perfect and would work with sellers to smooth out wrinkles in their policies, but every time a seller raised a valid point ebay's management only explained why they were wrong, lol.
Basing powersellers' fees on their DSR rating is stupid. I'm betting most buyers are like me - they buy a lot of crap at a time and only in very extreme cases do they even remember details such as delivery time and shipping rates when they leave feedback, which is why sellers with free shipping often get less than perfect ratings for shipping charges. They should forget about the stupid stars and reward sellers for meeting certain standards for return customers.
With the new fee system, I really think ebay is overestimating sellers' margins with moderately priced items and underestimating the degree of frustration they already felt with ebay. Even if there weren't another alternative, it's not like there aren't other ways to earn a living or a side income besides selling crap on ebay. I'm assuming that, unlike cards, most sellers in other categories are actually trying to make a profit. If they lose a substantial amount of business over the next few months, I bet they delay or cancel the upcoming feedback changes in May.
The 21 day wait guidelines for paypal payments (if it's really enforced) will substantially prevent the growth of new sellers.
I have seen countless numbers of posts about how broken and irrelevant the current ebay FB system has become. I don't think anyone would disagree with this. There was simply no way to distinguish good sellers from the scum. While I see the new system being open to abuse, I feel the fb ratings will be more reflective of the seller's actual performance. And, yes, there will be abuse, but every seller is open to the same amount of abuse theoretically so one has to assume all ratings would be impacted equally.
But, I still think ebay has to be very aggressive in protecting sellers from the deadbeats who will have no fear of retaliation. Tweaks are going to be necessary but it remains to be seen just how many tweaks will be required.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set