Does anyone remember what it was like BEFORE Ebay. It was not uncommon to pay 4.95 for one card to be shipped and 3 or 4 dollars on each additional card. I am looking at an old magazine from 1992 right now and the shipping costs then are in some cases 2 or 3 times what we pay. In addition it was not uncommon for an item to take 3 to 4 weeks to even be shipped.
Funny thing is that some of you are trying to tell me how I done something wrong, but the seller told me I was right, and he apologized. I was refunded the difference.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have.
<< <i>This really isn't a tough question. If the seller states up front what shipping charges will be, you pay it. Period. Otherwise, don't bid. I know you wouldn't reimburse a seller who charged too little for shipping now would you? I have underpriced shipping several times and never once expected the buyer to cover my misjudgment. If the card gets to you as advertised, you have zero gripe IMHO. Plus, we are talking about chump change here...are you serious? It is amazing to me how little pride some people have. Come on boys. It is NOT worth it. Not at all. >>
<< <i>Funny thing is that some of you are trying to tell me how I done something wrong, but the seller told me I was right, and he apologized. I was refunded the difference.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have. >>
Nice.. I guess you are a seller who thieves off your customers too?
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
Only a foolish person can suggest this is the way to conduct business as a seller. When a seller does this act, they are intentionally ripping the buyer off. Don't charge for Priority Mail rates, and ship First Class. If you charge a customer for "X" amount of insurance, then make sure and insure it for that amount, instead of being cheap and hoping the buyer will not catch it. If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
Ebay's negative feedback is a great tool for master negotiators like stanman to squeeze a few bucks out of sellers after a deal is done. Punishing sellers that have the good business sense to charge somebody more than 18.10 for a package that has 18.10 of postage on it. He thinks that the seller should not be compensated for his time, or the expense of having people, equipment, or supplies on hand in order to ship out packages. Only when stan becomes a seller will he realize that he's been wrong in his belief that the seller's time is worthless.
This situation is quite simple. One rates the transaction based upon the facts and the level of satisfaction that has been met.
1. Was the item as described? 2. Was it delivered in a timely fashion? 3. Is the buyer satisfied that the item is as described?
It sounds as if the only issue the buyer has is with regard to the shipping service versus what he expected or assumed he would be getting based upon the price. If there was no stated method or process relative to how the item would be shipped, then no assumption can be made other than that it would arrive in a timely and in the described condition.
I think that they buyer is upset that the seller has made some additional profit through scrimping on the shipping, but the buyer really has no gripe as the terms of the contract have apparently been satisfied.
The solution, leave positive feedback, make note of the shipping method versus cost if the buyer so desires and make notation in the DSR.
I had a situation recently where I paid $5.00 and the shipping was advertised as Priority Mail with Insurance. I received the package via 1st Class Mail with Delivery Confirmation. I left a positive, left a 1 for shipping costs and noted it in the feedback. The item arrived safely and was as described and I was satisifed with the price that I paid (including delivery). How he managed to get it to me wasn't the significant concern as long as it arrived safely and timely. Certainly not worth extorting or threatening the seller over!
<< <i>Ebay's negative feedback is a great tool for master negotiators like stanman to squeeze a few bucks out of sellers after a deal is done. Punishing sellers that have the good business sense to charge somebody more than 18.10 for a package that has 18.10 of postage on it. He thinks that the seller should not be compensated for his time, or the expense of having people, equipment, or supplies on hand in order to ship out packages. Only when stan becomes a seller will he realize that he's been wrong in his belief that the seller's time is worthless. >>
You know what kb, I have been a buyer/seller on Ebay for more than 6 years. Almost 7 years at this point. I have done more selling than buying, by far.
More false assumptions, but I am not surprised. As I said, $1-$2 overcharged, I can let it go. But, when you pay for something, and they buyer pulls the switcheroo on you, just to pocket the money, the seller is the crook. It has nothing to do with master negotiations, it has to do with sellers not doing the right thing.
When you sell an item, you should figure your time, fees, and all the conditions that are involved in the lowest price you are willing to let your card go for. It's not a buyer's place to help cover costs for the seller who does not use good judgement.
<< <i> Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it. >>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference?
This is why many sellers prefer UPS over the Post Office because the nitpicking buyers don't know what you paid to ship it. It comes with no price tag on the outside and they have nothing to complian about. Some still do though. They'll weigh the package and go on line and figure what the seller paid. But they'll forget things like surcharges for fuel, residential delivery, or taking it to a UPS store and paying a premium over the listed prices to ship. It's a lot easier to complain with the Post Office. You pay $1.00 for shipping and there's only $.97 on the label and you've got yourself a clear case of fraud.
<< <i> Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it. >>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times than not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this.
<< <i> Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it. >>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times that not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this. >>
I didn't see an answer to my question anywhere in there.
<< <i> Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it. >>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times that not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this. >>
I didn't see an answer to my question anywhere in there. >>
It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid.
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend?
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because most of us aren't buying what you are selling. There is no way I believe you would send additional money to a seller who undercharged you initially...especially given the fact that you are going nuts over a couple of dollars, here. Give us a break.
<< <i>Funny thing is that some of you are trying to tell me how I done something wrong, but the seller told me I was right, and he apologized. I was refunded the difference.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have. >>
Same here. Amazes me how many experience ebay buyers.....just don't seem to get it. The seller stated charges, you pay or you move on, just like anything outside of ebay. No need to start a thread complaining a dealer in town wanted $3.00 for a card you only wanted to pay $1.50 for either.
Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards. Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because you insist on Clintonesque answers. It's a yes or no question. Yes or no will suffice.
I'll try one last time.
If the package arrived with more postage/insurance costs than the $25 you paid, would you have sent the seller the difference?
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because you insist on Clintonesque answers. It's a yes or no question. Yes or no will suffice.
I'll try one last time.
If the package arrived with more postage/insurance costs than the $25 you paid, would you have sent the seller the difference? >>
I have answered the question, if you can't comprehend exactly what I said, not sure what else to tell you.
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It's a one way street. The seller collects his fees up front. If they cost more, then it sux to be the seller, they should have done their homework before they stated the fees.
In this OP's case, nothing was promised with the shipping ammount, just "shipping". If the buyer thinks a seller is being totally unreasonable with their shipping fees, feedback can be used to discourage this behavior.
Now, if the seller offers insurance, and doesn't pay for it (and just pockets the cash or "self-insures"), then for all intents and purposes, the item has been delivered NOT AS DESCRIBED, as a particular service that was supposed to be included with the item was not.
Yes or no . . . If you purchased an item from me and I charged you $5.00 to ship via USPS Priority and it actually cost more, would you send me the difference?
Better yet, if I bought an item from you and paid you $5.00 to ship and it only cost you $3.00, would you send me the extra $2.00?
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It's a one way street. The seller collects his fees up front. If they cost more, then it sux to be the seller, they should have done their homework before they stated the fees.
In this OP's case, nothing was promised with the shipping ammount, just "shipping". If the buyer thinks a seller is being totally unreasonable with their shipping fees, feedback can be used to discourage this behavior.
Now, if the seller offers insurance, and doesn't pay for it (and just pockets the cash or "self-insures"), then for all intents and purposes, the item has been delivered NOT AS DESCRIBED, as a particular service that was supposed to be included with the item was not. >>
If it's portrayed as a moral issue, it's a two way street.
If you know the shipping up front and bid anyay, I don't think using feedback to "discourage behavior" is ethical.
Many companies self insure. As long as it's made right if there's a problem, you got the "insurance" you paid for.
I'm not wasting anymore of my Saturday on a message board. It's too nice outside to sit here all day and go back and forth. At this point, I have better things to do than try and win over some folks that think it's ok for a seller to charge for services that are not rendered. If you guys have no problem getting ripped by sellers who like to skim off the shipping fees, fine. My money is something I work hard for. I have what I have in life because I watch where my money goes.
In closing, if you guys have no problem getting taken here and there, then I have no probem with it either.
<< <i>I'm not wasting anymore of my Saturday on a message board. It's too nice outside to sit here all day and go back and forth. At this point, I have better things to do than try and win over some folks that think it's ok for a seller to charge for services that are not rendered. If you guys have no problem getting ripped by sellers who like to skim off the shipping fees, fine. My money is something I work hard for. I have what I have in life because I watch where my money goes.
In closing, if you guys have no problem getting taken here and there, then I have no probem with it either. >>
And to finish, so I can go and enjoy my Saturday....
1. If I sell a card, and by some chance I overcharge on shipping, I will refund if it's for more than $1 over the exact postage rates.
2. If I buy a card and am undercharged for shipping, I would pay the seller or post office. As a matter of fact, I have had a few items come with postage due. I paid it.
At this point, no matter what I say, some will just want to argue anyway. It's the way message boards always are.
<< <i>1. If I sell a card, and by some chance I overcharge on shipping, I will refund if it's for more than $1 over the exact postage rates.
2. If I buy a card and am undercharged for shipping, I would pay the seller or post office. As a matter of fact, I have had a few items come with postage due. I paid it. >>
If you would do both of these things, then that is very commendable!
<< <i>If it's portrayed as a moral issue, it's a two way street.[/a] No. I disagree.
<< <i>If you know the shipping up front and bid anyay, I don't think using feedback to "discourage behavior" is ethical. >>
So be it. I think it is. What else is feedback for? Customer feedback.
>>
Many companies self insure. As long as it's made right if there's a problem, you got the "insurance" you paid for. >>
Self-insuring is against Ebay policy, and thus forbidden.
From Ebay: "Sellers offering insurance may only charge the actual fee for insurance. No additional amount may be added, such as “self-insurance”. Sellers who do not use a licensed 3rd party insurance company may not require buyers to purchase insurance. This is a violation of state law."
Many companies self insure. As long as it's made right if there's a problem, you got the "insurance" you paid for. >>
Self-insuring is against Ebay policy, and thus forbidden.
From Ebay: "Sellers offering insurance may only charge the actual fee for insurance. No additional amount may be added, such as “self-insurance”. Sellers who do not use a licensed 3rd party insurance company may not require buyers to purchase insurance. This is a violation of state law."
The violation ONLY occurs when the seller charges an ala carte fee for the insurance.
The costs of self-insurance - or of CIA or an equivalent - can be recouped by charging a flat-rate S+H fee. Sellers CANNOT ala carte - or list individually - an insurance charge that is NOT paid to a third-party insurer AT THE TIME that drayage is contracted.
Insurers and their agents are licensed in all 50-states. Charging an ala carte fee for:
1. Self-Insurance
2. Pro-Rata Recovery of Premiums Previously Paid To Third-Party Carriers (CIA),
is a violation of law and regs in all 50-dtates. And, it violates EBAY policies.
The 4SC model is the correct method to use.
Also, "Free S+H" that includes insurance is not a problem.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>At this point, no matter what I say, some will just want to argue anyway. It's the way message boards always are. >>
That's funny...you're the one who seems to like to argue. Substitute "I" for "message boards" and "am" for "are" and your second sentence will be very true.
Actually, with your podunk English, you can skip the second substitution and it'll sound just fine to you, too.
I can't remember what I was going to say, except kill anybody that tries to make money or run a business selling cards and all shipping SHOULD be FREE.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis .
<< <i>I can't remember what I was going to say, except kill anybody that tries to make money or run a business selling cards and all shipping SHOULD be FREE.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis . >>
I can't tell if you are completely nuts or terrifically funny....either way, more power to ya!
<< <i>I can't remember what I was going to say, except kill anybody that tries to make money or run a business selling cards and all shipping SHOULD be FREE.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis . >>
I can't tell if you are completely nuts or terrifically funny....either way, more power to ya! >>
Sellers are trying to recoup ebay and paypal fees.
To avoid all of these s/h threads, i think ebay should make provisions that the buyer pay a "buyers fee" which can be added at the end of auction the way auction houses do. The bottom line, IMO, is when you bid, expect to pay the s/h fees (by the way the h stands for handling), and expect to recieve the card in good shape.
Buyers know how much shipping is before they bid, so they SHOULD bid accordingly, and just have the expectation of recieving the card timely and in good shape, PERIOD.
Ebay would be better off, simply calling it a BUYERS fee instead of a shipping & HANDLING fee.
I buy more than i sell, so it's not as though I am pro-seller.
"Ebay would be better off, simply calling it a BUYERS fee instead of a shipping & HANDLING fee."
////////////////////////////////////
I doubt that even 1% of EBAY buyers would buy into paying a fee to shop.
EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base. They cannot afford to chase anymore buyers away.
Sellers are supposed to collect ALL of their expenses inside of the price of their item and the S+H fee. Sellers who cannot do that need to raise their prices.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>"Ebay would be better off, simply calling it a BUYERS fee instead of a shipping & HANDLING fee."
////////////////////////////////////
I doubt that even 1% of EBAY buyers would buy into paying a fee to shop.
EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base. They cannot afford to chase anymore buyers away.
Sellers are supposed to collect ALL of their expenses inside of the price of their item and the S+H fee. Sellers who cannot do that need to raise their prices. >>
Depending on what "MUCH" means, I don't really believe that ebay lost MUCH of its original buyer base. Most people realize that the "shipping and HANDLING" fee, is rarely the actual shipping fee...so whatever buyers want to call the "HANDLING" fee, doesn't really matter. THe buyers should SIMPLY calculate that handling fee into their bid and not complain AFTER the fact.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that graph does not suggest anything to prove your point that "EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base."
That graph demonstrates that eBay is slowing in growth, but still shows that there is still a quarterly increase in the number of new and unique users. The increase in the last quarter of 2007 was about 10% of that of the first quarter of 2006, but this can also be attributed to the sheer volume of users and that the "new unique user" pool is continuing to shrink as more and more people use eBay.
It only makes sense that the older any business gets the less and less new customers its going to have. How many new customers does Wal-Mart have in a year?
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but that graph does not suggest anything to prove your point that "EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base."
That graph demonstrates that eBay is slowing in growth, but still shows that there is still a quarterly increase in the number of new and unique users. The increase in the last quarter of 2007 was about 10% of that of the first quarter of 2006, but this can also be attributed to the sheer volume of users and that the "new unique user"[/GS] pool is continuing to shrink as more and more people use eBay. "
GS busted the gang on that fiction, in a CC last year.
The chart - without the footnotes and explanations - is yet another fraud designed to support the VERY question/argument that OTWCARDS raises. When questioned by GS and others, EBAY confirmed the "true" meaning of the chart.
The chart does not distinguish what you call "new members" from the established user base.
The CHART is "disguised" to look like a "growth chart using raw numbers of new users." It is actually nothing of the sort.
EBAY defines in tiny-footnotes, and oral explanations, "active users" as "those registrants who have bought/sold during the past 12-months.".................. IT IS NOT A TRACK OR CENSUS OF "new registrants or new users."
The chart wants folks to believe that it details "new" users. When in fact it ONLY details "use of the site by registrants."
Thus, any decline in "user growth" must reveal that "previous users" have bailed and continue bailing.
The EXACT unique "new user" numbers AND the "base numbers" are proprietary and are never included in the filings.
Analysts do know that about 80% of registered users have more than one-ID. The EBAY fantasy of 230,000,000+ members is believed to be much closer to 80M-unique worldwide.
Griff did not issue his Chicago classic, "We need all buyers, whether they pay or not," because everything is OK on the buyer front. Another year at this "growth" rate and EBAY will be on the scrap heap.
So I take it that many of you have no problem with paying 6.00 for 50 cents worth of services?
If the item comes in ok I have no problem, it is when the item comes crushed because the silly seller needed to make 5.50 extra on me is when I would be pixxed.
In that light I have no problem if someone gets negged for sending a card in a PWE when the buyer clearly paid for more.
In this business, shipments should be sent in a bubble mailer or better.
If I get the card in the condition I ordered it in I don't really care how it is shipped. There have been many times I have made money by intentionally buying an item with highly inflated shipping charges.
Comments
<< <i>Carry on then. >>
There we have it.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have.
<< <i>This really isn't a tough question. If the seller states up front what shipping charges will be, you pay it. Period. Otherwise, don't bid. I know you wouldn't reimburse a seller who charged too little for shipping now would you? I have underpriced shipping several times and never once expected the buyer to cover my misjudgment. If the card gets to you as advertised, you have zero gripe IMHO. Plus, we are talking about chump change here...are you serious? It is amazing to me how little pride some people have. Come on boys. It is NOT worth it. Not at all. >>
Amen!
<< <i>Funny thing is that some of you are trying to tell me how I done something wrong, but the seller told me I was right, and he apologized. I was refunded the difference.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have. >>
Nice.. I guess you are a seller who thieves off your customers too?
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
Only a foolish person can suggest this is the way to conduct business as a seller. When a seller does this act, they are intentionally ripping the buyer off. Don't charge for Priority Mail rates, and ship First Class. If you charge a customer for "X" amount of insurance, then make sure and insure it for that amount, instead of being cheap and hoping the buyer will not catch it. If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
1. Was the item as described?
2. Was it delivered in a timely fashion?
3. Is the buyer satisfied that the item is as described?
It sounds as if the only issue the buyer has is with regard to the shipping service versus what he expected or assumed he would be getting based upon the price. If there was no stated method or process relative to how the item would be shipped, then no assumption can be made other than that it would arrive in a timely and in the described condition.
I think that they buyer is upset that the seller has made some additional profit through scrimping on the shipping, but the buyer really has no gripe as the terms of the contract have apparently been satisfied.
The solution, leave positive feedback, make note of the shipping method versus cost if the buyer so desires and make notation in the DSR.
I had a situation recently where I paid $5.00 and the shipping was advertised as Priority Mail with Insurance. I received the package via 1st Class Mail with Delivery Confirmation. I left a positive, left a 1 for shipping costs and noted it in the feedback. The item arrived safely and was as described and I was satisifed with the price that I paid (including delivery). How he managed to get it to me wasn't the significant concern as long as it arrived safely and timely. Certainly not worth extorting or threatening the seller over!
Just my 2 cents on the issue...
<< <i>Ebay's negative feedback is a great tool for master negotiators like stanman to squeeze a few bucks out of sellers after a deal is done. Punishing sellers that have the good business sense to charge somebody more than 18.10 for a package that has 18.10 of postage on it. He thinks that the seller should not be compensated for his time, or the expense of having people, equipment, or supplies on hand in order to ship out packages. Only when stan becomes a seller will he realize that he's been wrong in his belief that the seller's time is worthless. >>
You know what kb, I have been a buyer/seller on Ebay for more than 6 years. Almost 7 years at this point. I have done more selling than buying, by far.
More false assumptions, but I am not surprised. As I said, $1-$2 overcharged, I can let it go. But, when you pay for something, and they buyer pulls the switcheroo on you, just to pocket the money, the seller is the crook. It has nothing to do with master negotiations, it has to do with sellers not doing the right thing.
When you sell an item, you should figure your time, fees, and all the conditions that are involved in the lowest price you are willing to let your card go for. It's not a buyer's place to help cover costs for the seller who does not use good judgement.
<< <i>
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
>>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference?
<< <i>
<< <i>
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
>>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times than not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
>>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times that not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this. >>
I didn't see an answer to my question anywhere in there.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Customer pays for a specific service, it's not rendered. Now, the buyer is at fault because the seller was looking to pocket the extra money he skimmed off that should have been used for shipping/insurance costs, that the buyer fully paid for?
If I pay for $5000 insurance, the seller better make darn sure the package arrives with $5000 worth of insurance coverage, or I will call them on it. It's never right to pay for a service that is not received. That's fraud, no matter how you want to look at it.
>>
Using that line of reasonng, if the priority postage/insurance cost more than the $25 you paid, would you have given the seller the difference? >>
I have always been, and always will be a person who insists on fully insured shipping. No matter what the final auction price, I want to be fully covered if any slight problem should occur in shipping(such as lost or damaged). I have no problem paying exact rates to cover shipping and insurance. I am ok with even a little bit overcharge, as I mention in a previous post($1-$2).
I am not ok with sellers who are paid for a service that they intentionally don't put on your package, that you paid for. That's fraud, because most just hope the buyer will not say anything, and they gamble that your card will arrrive with no problems. More times that not, it does arrive safely, and they can pocket that money that they skimmed off the buyers. If they pocket $6 per, on higher end items, and sell at least 50 items a week, they can pocket a profit of $300 or more on just shipping costs alone. You are suppose to figure how to make a profit on your item you are selling, not on the shipping costs. Too many sellers are becoming greedy and losing site of this. >>
I didn't see an answer to my question anywhere in there. >>
I guess you did not read it very well.
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend?
<< <i>
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because most of us aren't buying what you are selling. There is no way I believe you would send additional money to a seller who undercharged you initially...especially given the fact that you are going nuts over a couple of dollars, here. Give us a break.
<< <i>Funny thing is that some of you are trying to tell me how I done something wrong, but the seller told me I was right, and he apologized. I was refunded the difference.
No most likely he paid you off to shut you up and then added you to his BBL. I would have. >>
Same here. Amazes me how many experience ebay buyers.....just don't seem to get it. The seller stated charges, you pay or you move on, just like anything outside of ebay. No need to start a thread complaining a dealer in town wanted $3.00 for a card you only wanted to pay $1.50 for either.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because you insist on Clintonesque answers. It's a yes or no question. Yes or no will suffice.
I'll try one last time.
If the package arrived with more postage/insurance costs than the $25 you paid, would you have sent the seller the difference?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It was a direct answer. I have no probem paying exact rates means just that. Why does this have to be so hard to comprehend? >>
Because you insist on Clintonesque answers. It's a yes or no question. Yes or no will suffice.
I'll try one last time.
If the package arrived with more postage/insurance costs than the $25 you paid, would you have sent the seller the difference? >>
I have answered the question, if you can't comprehend exactly what I said, not sure what else to tell you.
<< <i>
I have answered the question, if you can't comprehend exactly what I said, not sure what else to tell you. >>
No, you really didn't.
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It's a one way street. The seller collects his fees up front. If they cost more, then it sux to be the seller, they should have done their homework before they stated the fees.
In this OP's case, nothing was promised with the shipping ammount, just "shipping". If the buyer thinks a seller is being totally unreasonable with their shipping fees, feedback can be used to discourage this behavior.
Now, if the seller offers insurance, and doesn't pay for it (and just pockets the cash or "self-insures"), then for all intents and purposes, the item has been delivered NOT AS DESCRIBED, as a particular service that was supposed to be included with the item was not.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Yes or no . . . If you purchased an item from me and I charged you $5.00 to ship via USPS Priority and it actually cost more, would you send me the difference?
Better yet, if I bought an item from you and paid you $5.00 to ship and it only cost you $3.00, would you send me the extra $2.00?
<< <i>
<< <i>It wasn't a direct answer. "I have no problem paying exact rates.", didn't answer whether or not you would send the dealer extra money if the package arrived with more postage costs than the $25 you initially paid. >>
It's a one way street. The seller collects his fees up front. If they cost more, then it sux to be the seller, they should have done their homework before they stated the fees.
In this OP's case, nothing was promised with the shipping ammount, just "shipping". If the buyer thinks a seller is being totally unreasonable with their shipping fees, feedback can be used to discourage this behavior.
Now, if the seller offers insurance, and doesn't pay for it (and just pockets the cash or "self-insures"), then for all intents and purposes, the item has been delivered NOT AS DESCRIBED, as a particular service that was supposed to be included with the item was not. >>
If it's portrayed as a moral issue, it's a two way street.
If you know the shipping up front and bid anyay, I don't think using feedback to "discourage behavior" is ethical.
Many companies self insure. As long as it's made right if there's a problem, you got the "insurance" you paid for.
In closing, if you guys have no problem getting taken here and there, then I have no probem with it either.
in most cases, the monetary value of your time is probably worth more than the amount you are quibbling over!
<< <i>I'm not wasting anymore of my Saturday on a message board. It's too nice outside to sit here all day and go back and forth. At this point, I have better things to do than try and win over some folks that think it's ok for a seller to charge for services that are not rendered. If you guys have no problem getting ripped by sellers who like to skim off the shipping fees, fine. My money is something I work hard for. I have what I have in life because I watch where my money goes.
In closing, if you guys have no problem getting taken here and there, then I have no probem with it either. >>
Your answers are as clear as mud!
You may wish to take up politics!
1. If I sell a card, and by some chance I overcharge on shipping, I will refund if it's for more than $1 over the exact postage rates.
2. If I buy a card and am undercharged for shipping, I would pay the seller or post office. As a matter of fact, I have had a few items come with postage due. I paid it.
At this point, no matter what I say, some will just want to argue anyway. It's the way message boards always are.
<< <i>1. If I sell a card, and by some chance I overcharge on shipping, I will refund if it's for more than $1 over the exact postage rates.
2. If I buy a card and am undercharged for shipping, I would pay the seller or post office. As a matter of fact, I have had a few items come with postage due. I paid it.
>>
If you would do both of these things, then that is very commendable!
<< <i>If it's portrayed as a moral issue, it's a two way street.[/a]
No. I disagree.
<< <i>If you know the shipping up front and bid anyay, I don't think using feedback to "discourage behavior" is ethical. >>
So be it. I think it is. What else is feedback for? Customer feedback.
>>
Many companies self insure. As long as it's made right if there's a problem, you got the "insurance" you paid for. >>
Self-insuring is against Ebay policy, and thus forbidden.
From Ebay: "Sellers offering insurance may only charge the actual fee for insurance. No additional amount may be added, such as “self-insurance”. Sellers who do not use a licensed 3rd party insurance company may not require buyers to purchase insurance. This is a violation of state law."
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Self-insuring is against Ebay policy, and thus forbidden.
From Ebay: "Sellers offering insurance may only charge the actual fee for insurance. No additional amount may be added, such as “self-insurance”. Sellers who do not use a licensed 3rd party insurance company may not require buyers to purchase insurance. This is a violation of state law."
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
The violation ONLY occurs when the seller charges an ala carte fee for the insurance.
The costs of self-insurance - or of CIA or an equivalent - can be recouped by charging
a flat-rate S+H fee. Sellers CANNOT ala carte - or list individually - an insurance charge
that is NOT paid to a third-party insurer AT THE TIME that drayage is contracted.
Insurers and their agents are licensed in all 50-states. Charging an ala carte fee for:
1. Self-Insurance
2. Pro-Rata Recovery of Premiums Previously Paid To Third-Party Carriers (CIA),
is a violation of law and regs in all 50-dtates. And, it violates EBAY policies.
The 4SC model is the correct method to use.
Also, "Free S+H" that includes insurance is not a problem.
<< <i>At this point, no matter what I say, some will just want to argue anyway. It's the way message boards always are. >>
That's funny...you're the one who seems to like to argue. Substitute "I" for "message boards" and "am" for "are" and your second sentence will be very true.
Actually, with your podunk English, you can skip the second substitution and it'll sound just fine to you, too.
How did it go off course?
Steve
<< <i>I was under the impression that this thread was about a seller sending a card in PWE.
How did it go off course?
Steve >>
My post that began with "Let me try and offer some constructive criticism....." has brought us to this sorry state.
I believe that makes my lifetime score:
Constructive criticism offered: 2765
Constructive criticism rejected: 2765
<< <i>I believe that makes my lifetime score:
Constructive criticism offered: 2765
Constructive criticism rejected: 2765 >>
Please don't quit the hobby over this. I don't know who you are, but you are a valuable member of these boards.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis .
<< <i>I can't remember what I was going to say, except kill anybody that tries to make money or run a business selling cards and all shipping SHOULD be FREE.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis . >>
I can't tell if you are completely nuts or terrifically funny....either way, more power to ya!
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
THAT was the original "point" of the buyer's complaint.
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't remember what I was going to say, except kill anybody that tries to make money or run a business selling cards and all shipping SHOULD be FREE.
PS: my 13 kids are hungry can someone offer free shipping on peanut butter and bread because I think the store closest to me is adding on shipping and handling fees on the price of bread and peanut butter. (I hate people who charge for food and include S/H In their prices).
PS: "touch me and I'll kill you" my name is Francis . >>
I can't tell if you are completely nuts or terrifically funny....either way, more power to ya!
just completely NUTS.
To avoid all of these s/h threads, i think ebay should make provisions that the buyer pay a "buyers fee" which can be added at the end of auction
the way auction houses do. The bottom line, IMO, is when you bid, expect to pay the s/h fees (by the way the h stands for handling), and expect
to recieve the card in good shape.
Buyers know how much shipping is before they bid, so they SHOULD bid accordingly, and just have the expectation of recieving the card timely
and in good shape, PERIOD.
Ebay would be better off, simply calling it a BUYERS fee instead of a shipping & HANDLING fee.
I buy more than i sell, so it's not as though I am pro-seller.
////////////////////////////////////
I doubt that even 1% of EBAY buyers would buy into paying a fee to shop.
EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base. They cannot afford to chase anymore buyers away.
Sellers are supposed to collect ALL of their expenses inside of the price of their item and the S+H fee.
Sellers who cannot do that need to raise their prices.
<< <i>"Ebay would be better off, simply calling it a BUYERS fee instead of a shipping & HANDLING fee."
////////////////////////////////////
I doubt that even 1% of EBAY buyers would buy into paying a fee to shop.
EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base. They cannot afford to chase anymore buyers away.
Sellers are supposed to collect ALL of their expenses inside of the price of their item and the S+H fee.
Sellers who cannot do that need to raise their prices. >>
Depending on what "MUCH" means, I don't really believe that ebay lost MUCH of its original buyer base.
Most people realize that the "shipping and HANDLING" fee, is rarely the actual shipping fee...so whatever buyers
want to call the "HANDLING" fee, doesn't really matter. THe buyers should SIMPLY calculate that handling fee
into their bid and not complain AFTER the fact.
"Depending on what "MUCH" means, I don't really believe that ebay lost MUCH of its original buyer base. "
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
..............
<< <i>"Depending on what "MUCH" means, I don't really believe that ebay lost MUCH of its original buyer base. "
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
.............. >>
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that graph does not suggest anything to prove your point that "EBAY has already lost MUCH of its original buyer base."
That graph demonstrates that eBay is slowing in growth, but still shows that there is still a quarterly increase in the number of new and unique users. The increase in the last quarter of 2007 was about 10% of that of the first quarter of 2006, but this can also be attributed to the sheer volume of users and that the "new unique user" pool is continuing to shrink as more and more people use eBay.
That graph demonstrates that eBay is slowing in growth, but still shows that there is still a quarterly increase in the number of new and unique users. The increase in the last quarter of 2007 was about 10% of that of the first quarter of 2006, but this can also be attributed to the sheer volume of users and that the "new unique user"[/GS] pool is continuing to shrink as more and more people use eBay. "
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
GS busted the gang on that fiction, in a CC last year.
The chart - without the footnotes and explanations - is yet another fraud designed to support
the VERY question/argument that OTWCARDS raises. When questioned by GS and others, EBAY
confirmed the "true" meaning of the chart.
The chart does not distinguish what you call "new members" from the established user base.
The CHART is "disguised" to look like a "growth chart using raw numbers of new users." It is actually
nothing of the sort.
EBAY defines in tiny-footnotes, and oral explanations, "active users" as "those registrants who have bought/sold during
the past 12-months.".................. IT IS NOT A TRACK OR CENSUS OF "new registrants or new users."
The chart wants folks to believe that it details "new" users. When in fact it ONLY details "use of the site by registrants."
Thus, any decline in "user growth" must reveal that "previous users" have bailed and continue bailing.
The EXACT unique "new user" numbers AND the "base numbers" are proprietary and are never
included in the filings.
Analysts do know that about 80% of registered users have more than one-ID. The EBAY fantasy
of 230,000,000+ members is believed to be much closer to 80M-unique worldwide.
Griff did not issue his Chicago classic, "We need all buyers, whether they pay or not," because everything
is OK on the buyer front. Another year at this "growth" rate and EBAY will be on the scrap heap.
.........................................
.........................................
If the item comes in ok I have no problem, it is when the item comes crushed because
the silly seller needed to make 5.50 extra on me is when I would be pixxed.
In that light I have no problem if someone gets negged for sending a card in a PWE
when the buyer clearly paid for more.
In this business, shipments should be sent in a bubble mailer
or better.
Steve