<< <i>I'm in the minority here, too, but I think I'd have to be sky-high on crack to think that it is a good idea for a seller to leave feedback first. As a seller, I want to protect my business. Would a shopkeeper intentionally leave his store unlocked before going home for the night, hoping that his business doesn't get destroyed. Leaving feedback first is leaving the door to your business wide open. Not leaving feedback locks the door. And there's nothing ethical or respectful about leaving feedback first to buyers. It's just the opposite, leaving feedback first shows disrespect for yourself and your business. A seller's only real obligation is to deliver a product that is as described. Feedback is just an ebay mechanism that you can choose to partake in or not. >>
The eBay feedback system is a complete joke. In a brick and mortar world, a 90% rating would be exceptional. On eBay, 90% positive feedback is deplorable. It's become quite an all or nothing system--and it's neither fair nor honest. All this hostage crap, hostage negotiations, mutual withdrawls, terrified little bidiots who won't leave appropriate feedback for fear of their own reputation, too much clout put into these worthless reputations, and the like--pure nonsense. If I sell something and it takes the buyer 2 weeks to pay, that should be a nuetral at the least, a negative most likely--and that doesn't mean the negative should indicate that the buyer is a scammer--it just means in this instance it wasn't a positive experience for me. And other people should read it for what it is. But that's not what happens on ebay. A negative is automatically a red flag and indicitive of thieves, scammers, and worse. If I had to rate all the products I've purchased on eBay, I'd say it was 50/50. I'm pleased half the time. But do I leave half the sellers I buy from negatives? No. I should, though. We all should. And a 90% rating should be a good rating, too.
The eBay feedback system is a complete joke. In a brick and mortar world, a 90% rating would be exceptional. On eBay, 90% positive feedback is deplorable. It's become quite an all or nothing system--and it's neither fair nor honest. All this hostage crap, hostage negotiations, mutual withdrawls, terrified little bidiots who won't leave appropriate feedback for fear of their own reputation, too much clout put into these worthless reputations, and the like--pure nonsense. If I sell something and it takes the buyer 2 weeks to pay, that should be a nuetral at the least, a negative most likely--and that doesn't mean the negative should indicate that the buyer is a scammer--it just means in this instance it wasn't a positive experience for me. And other people should read it for what it is. But that's not what happens on ebay. A negative is automatically a red flag and indicitive of thieves, scammers, and worse. If I had to rate all the products I've purchased on eBay, I'd say it was 50/50. I'm pleased half the time. But do I leave half the sellers I buy from negatives? No. I should, though. We all should. And a 90% rating should be a good rating, too. >>
BASESTEALER
I agree 100%. Unfortunately, as you noted, you live or die on the Ebay feedback system as a seller. So you have to play the game with the cards you are dealt. So in this respect, leaving feedback first I found has not only put me to ease, as the chips will lay as they fall, but it appears to put the buyer at ease also.
The majority of the sellers who are saying they leave feedback immediately on payment, and that it's always worked fine for them, will mostly likely change their practice the minute they encounter a bidder who is bad news. These boards are full of stories about bidders who expect items in one or two days and who file premature 'item not received' complaints through Paypal, or who refuse to cooperate in filing the necessary paperwork for lost packages, or who just simply turn into complete horror shows minutes after they've paid. Many of the sellers who prematurely leave positive feedback pretend they don't care if they get a negative in return (I bet they'll get upset if it actually happens to them). Others say it's good business practice and puts the bidder's mind at ease. Good business practice is shipping an item promptly and safely to the bidder. THAT puts their mind at ease to do more business in the future. They've already made the commitment by buy once from you - it's doubtful a: "Quick payment, great eBayer" feedback is going to do much for their confidence until they actually receive the item, and it is exactly as advertised.
Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. But any reasonable seller (such as ourselves) are happy to leave feedback first. But we're going to wait until the transaction is completed - period. That means the buyer has contacted us through the eBay to let us know they've received it and are pleased, or has SAFELY returned the coin to us for a refund, or has cooperated with us and filled out the necessary paperwork on any packages that have been lost by the USPS.
And many people seem to be missing the point - the feedback system is about letting everyone ELSE know how a particular buyer or seller handled a transaction. It's useless for me, as a seller, to view the feedback of a bidder who has been left nothing but positives simply because he paid quickly. If he turned out to be a cheat or just all around pain who deserved a negative because of how he handled the transaction after he paid, there's no way for me to know that. My blocked bidder list is full of names garnered from posts here on the boards from sellers who were burned in some way AFTER they received payment.
As someone pointed out, the policy of leaving feedback is pretty much a matter of opinion. People will always do it differently. I just do not see how anyone can say a buyer's obligation in the transaction ends at payment. You will change your view when you get burned....and unfortunately, it will eventually happen.
<< <i>The majority of the sellers who are saying they leave feedback immediately on payment, and that it's always worked fine for them, will mostly likely change their practice the minute they encounter a bidder who is bad news. These boards are full of stories about bidders who expect items in one or two days and who file premature 'item not received' complaints through Paypal, or who refuse to cooperate in filing the necessary paperwork for lost packages, or who just simply turn into complete horror shows minutes after they've paid. Many of the sellers who prematurely leave positive feedback pretend they don't care if they get a negative in return (I bet they'll get upset if it actually happens to them). Others say it's good business practice and puts the bidder's mind at ease. Good business practice is shipping an item promptly and safely to the bidder. THAT puts their mind at ease to do more business in the future. They've already made the commitment by buy once from you - it's doubtful a: "Quick payment, great eBayer" feedback is going to do much for their confidence until they actually receive the item, and it is exactly as advertised.
Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. But any reasonable seller (such as ourselves) are happy to leave feedback first. But we're going to wait until the transaction is completed - period. That means the buyer has contacted us through the eBay to let us know they've received it and are pleased, or has SAFELY returned the coin to us for a refund, or has cooperated with us and filled out the necessary paperwork on any packages that have been lost by the USPS.
And many people seem to be missing the point - the feedback system is about letting everyone ELSE know how a particular buyer or seller handled a transaction. It's useless for me, as a seller, to view the feedback of a bidder who has been left nothing but positives simply because he paid quickly. If he turned out to be a cheat or just all around pain who deserved a negative because of how he handled the transaction after he paid, there's no way for me to know that. My blocked bidder list is full of names garnered from posts here on the boards from sellers who were burned in some way AFTER they received payment.
As someone pointed out, the policy of leaving feedback is pretty much a matter of opinion. People will always do it differently. I just do not see how anyone can say a buyer's obligation in the transaction ends at payment. You will change your view when you get burned....and unfortunately, it will eventually happen. >>
Absolutely true. The buyer's obligation is not just to pay--to suggest so is extremely naive. If the buyer's obligation were merely to pay, then once they paid they could also--bounce the check, do a chargeback, come to the seller's home with an axe, leave undeserved negative feedback, return the item after pulling a switharoo, and any number of other things. Many of these have happened to me. So no, the buyer paying is only a small portion of what is expected of him. I need to make sure the buyer is taking the appropriate medications and is sedated with joy and happiness before I want to exchange feedback.
Interesting points from everyone, and many worth pondering.
I used to leave feedback as soon as I was paid, but many buyers never bothered with the courtesy of letting me know that the item had arrived, or with leaving me feedback when it did. When I started waiting to leave feedback until I either heard from the buyer that the item arrived and they were happy with it, or they left feedback for me, the darndest thing happened: ALL of my buyers either notified me as soon as the package arrived or left feedback for me indicating that the deal was done.
<< <i>Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. >>
For many sellers it is. In fact, I'd wager that it's the case for the majority of sellers who engage in this practice.
My theory on Ebay feedback is if I am the seller, once payment is rec'd I leave feedback. If I am the buyer, leave me feedback 1st then I will do the same.
All too often I get sellers that say that their policy is that the buyer leaves FB 1st. My FB is only a 60 and have been on Ebay within the 1st year (98?) of it existance. I should be closer to 100 than 60.
I even had a seller tell me they don't leave FB, but they appreciate the FB they are left. Six months later I get 3 emails from the FBI asking if I rec'd the items I won from the said person because they were going up on fraud charges. I did receive them, 3 months after winning and couldn't leave the negs.
A buyer's job isn't done merely by making their payment. In addition to paying, they have the responsibility to not turn into a raving psycho when their package doesn't show up in the mailbox two days after they pay. In the case of an item that never arrives, they have the responsibility of assisting the seller in filing an insurance claim. Their job also includes not requesting a refund and then switching out the item they received with a similar inferior item of their own, or doing a chargeback without returning the item.
That being said, I still leave feedback when I receive payment because it's easier for me to do it that way. It's a lot more work to try to keep track of who's left feedback and who's due to get it. For the kind of stuff I sell, this method has served me well- of the 9,000+ feedback I've left, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of buyers I've had whose feedback I wish I had waited to leave. If I sold stuff which attracted less responsible buyers, I might rethink my decision, but as it is, buyers seem to appreciate the getting their feedback right away and I see no reason to make them wait. It seems kind of silly to punish good buyers along with making more work for myself, just to insure that the occasional (less than 1 in 1000) nutjob doesn't get away with getting a feedback rating more favorable than deserved.
I am still mulling over how to deal with 2 separate ebay transactions that involved BU rolls which were grossly over-rated. Both sellers have already given me a positive.
One of them was described as gorgeous and brilliant, but the coins were fingerprinted, smudged, yellowed and smelled like smoke.
The other was described as "original", and the roll was obviously "put together", containing an assortment of different uncs, none of which looked like they came from the same roll...........
Should I feel lucky that I even got the coins?
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Sellers who leave FB first are tempting fate. It will work for a while, but in the end it will cost you.
There are MANY more buyers than sellers on EBAY. That means there are more BAD buyers than bad sellers, too.
I have multiple EBAY accounts, and have never left/received a NEG; thousands of transactions in more than 8-years.
Unwarranted chargebacks are now rampant on EBAY. When a buyer lets me know he is happy - by leaving FB - I leave FB to indicate the transaction is completed.
Scamsters who pay with stolen credit cards and bounced echecks hardly deserve positive FB when "they pay." Liars who will claim they received "an empty box" hardly deserve positive FB when "they pay."
In the good old days, it was safe for sellers to leave FB first; not anymore.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
I think the biggest thing in a successful ebay transaction is communication, 2-way, open between the buyer and seller keeping each well informed about the status of the deal from start to finish.
the transaction isnt complete when you get paid, its complete when the item(s) are in the buyers possesion safe and sound. Im happy to leave feedback once delivery is confirmed. Too many variables, potential shipping issues. I'm happy to leave it FIRST once it get there. I send everything with del. conf. so i have a general idea of when its getting there.
I dunno if it puts the buyer at ease, it certainly makes it easier for THEm to hold YOU hostage
<< <i>the transaction isnt complete when you get paid, its complete when the item(s) are in the buyers possesion safe and sound. Im happy to leave feedback once delivery is confirmed. Too many variables, potential shipping issues. I'm happy to leave it FIRST once it get there. I send everything with del. conf. so i have a general idea of when its getting there.
I dunno if it puts the buyer at ease, it certainly makes it easier for THEm to hold YOU hostage >>
How can they hold me hostage? I send them what they bid on. I always ship immediately after payment.
Comments
<< <i>I'm in the minority here, too, but I think I'd have to be sky-high on crack to think that it is a good idea for a seller to leave feedback first. As a seller, I want to protect my business. Would a shopkeeper intentionally leave his store unlocked before going home for the night, hoping that his business doesn't get destroyed. Leaving feedback first is leaving the door to your business wide open. Not leaving feedback locks the door.
And there's nothing ethical or respectful about leaving feedback first to buyers. It's just the opposite, leaving feedback first shows disrespect for yourself and your business. A seller's only real obligation is to deliver a product that is as described. Feedback is just an ebay mechanism that you can choose to partake in or not. >>
The eBay feedback system is a complete joke. In a brick and mortar world, a 90% rating would be exceptional. On eBay, 90% positive feedback is deplorable. It's become quite an all or nothing system--and it's neither fair nor honest. All this hostage crap, hostage negotiations, mutual withdrawls, terrified little bidiots who won't leave appropriate feedback for fear of their own reputation, too much clout put into these worthless reputations, and the like--pure nonsense. If I sell something and it takes the buyer 2 weeks to pay, that should be a nuetral at the least, a negative most likely--and that doesn't mean the negative should indicate that the buyer is a scammer--it just means in this instance it wasn't a positive experience for me. And other people should read it for what it is. But that's not what happens on ebay. A negative is automatically a red flag and indicitive of thieves, scammers, and worse. If I had to rate all the products I've purchased on eBay, I'd say it was 50/50. I'm pleased half the time. But do I leave half the sellers I buy from negatives? No. I should, though. We all should. And a 90% rating should be a good rating, too.
The eBay feedback system is a complete joke. In a brick and mortar world, a 90% rating would be exceptional. On eBay, 90% positive feedback is deplorable. It's become quite an all or nothing system--and it's neither fair nor honest. All this hostage crap, hostage negotiations, mutual withdrawls, terrified little bidiots who won't leave appropriate feedback for fear of their own reputation, too much clout put into these worthless reputations, and the like--pure nonsense. If I sell something and it takes the buyer 2 weeks to pay, that should be a nuetral at the least, a negative most likely--and that doesn't mean the negative should indicate that the buyer is a scammer--it just means in this instance it wasn't a positive experience for me. And other people should read it for what it is. But that's not what happens on ebay. A negative is automatically a red flag and indicitive of thieves, scammers, and worse. If I had to rate all the products I've purchased on eBay, I'd say it was 50/50. I'm pleased half the time. But do I leave half the sellers I buy from negatives? No. I should, though. We all should. And a 90% rating should be a good rating, too. >>
BASESTEALER
I agree 100%. Unfortunately, as you noted, you live or die on the Ebay feedback system as a seller. So you have to play the game with the cards you are dealt. So in this respect, leaving feedback first I found has not only put me to ease, as the chips will lay as they fall, but it appears to put the buyer at ease also.
BB
Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. But any reasonable seller (such as ourselves) are happy to leave feedback first. But we're going to wait until the transaction is completed - period. That means the buyer has contacted us through the eBay to let us know they've received it and are pleased, or has SAFELY returned the coin to us for a refund, or has cooperated with us and filled out the necessary paperwork on any packages that have been lost by the USPS.
And many people seem to be missing the point - the feedback system is about letting everyone ELSE know how a particular buyer or seller handled a transaction. It's useless for me, as a seller, to view the feedback of a bidder who has been left nothing but positives simply because he paid quickly. If he turned out to be a cheat or just all around pain who deserved a negative because of how he handled the transaction after he paid, there's no way for me to know that. My blocked bidder list is full of names garnered from posts here on the boards from sellers who were burned in some way AFTER they received payment.
As someone pointed out, the policy of leaving feedback is pretty much a matter of opinion. People will always do it differently. I just do not see how anyone can say a buyer's obligation in the transaction ends at payment. You will change your view when you get burned....and unfortunately, it will eventually happen.
<< <i>The majority of the sellers who are saying they leave feedback immediately on payment, and that it's always worked fine for them, will mostly likely change their practice the minute they encounter a bidder who is bad news. These boards are full of stories about bidders who expect items in one or two days and who file premature 'item not received' complaints through Paypal, or who refuse to cooperate in filing the necessary paperwork for lost packages, or who just simply turn into complete horror shows minutes after they've paid. Many of the sellers who prematurely leave positive feedback pretend they don't care if they get a negative in return (I bet they'll get upset if it actually happens to them). Others say it's good business practice and puts the bidder's mind at ease. Good business practice is shipping an item promptly and safely to the bidder. THAT puts their mind at ease to do more business in the future. They've already made the commitment by buy once from you - it's doubtful a: "Quick payment, great eBayer" feedback is going to do much for their confidence until they actually receive the item, and it is exactly as advertised.
Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. But any reasonable seller (such as ourselves) are happy to leave feedback first. But we're going to wait until the transaction is completed - period. That means the buyer has contacted us through the eBay to let us know they've received it and are pleased, or has SAFELY returned the coin to us for a refund, or has cooperated with us and filled out the necessary paperwork on any packages that have been lost by the USPS.
And many people seem to be missing the point - the feedback system is about letting everyone ELSE know how a particular buyer or seller handled a transaction. It's useless for me, as a seller, to view the feedback of a bidder who has been left nothing but positives simply because he paid quickly. If he turned out to be a cheat or just all around pain who deserved a negative because of how he handled the transaction after he paid, there's no way for me to know that. My blocked bidder list is full of names garnered from posts here on the boards from sellers who were burned in some way AFTER they received payment.
As someone pointed out, the policy of leaving feedback is pretty much a matter of opinion. People will always do it differently. I just do not see how anyone can say a buyer's obligation in the transaction ends at payment. You will change your view when you get burned....and unfortunately, it will eventually happen. >>
Absolutely true. The buyer's obligation is not just to pay--to suggest so is extremely naive. If the buyer's obligation were merely to pay, then once they paid they could also--bounce the check, do a chargeback, come to the seller's home with an axe, leave undeserved negative feedback, return the item after pulling a switharoo, and any number of other things. Many of these have happened to me. So no, the buyer paying is only a small portion of what is expected of him. I need to make sure the buyer is taking the appropriate medications and is sedated with joy and happiness before I want to exchange feedback.
I used to leave feedback as soon as I was paid, but many buyers never bothered with the courtesy of letting me know that the item had arrived, or with leaving me feedback when it did. When I started waiting to leave feedback until I either heard from the buyer that the item arrived and they were happy with it, or they left feedback for me, the darndest thing happened: ALL of my buyers either notified me as soon as the package arrived or left feedback for me indicating that the deal was done.
My OmniCoin Collection
My BankNoteBank Collection
Tom, formerly in Albuquerque, NM.
<< <i>Seems also too many people are jumping to the conclusion that not leaving feedback immediately upon payment is simply an act of holding the buyer hostage. For some sellers, it is. >>
For many sellers it is. In fact, I'd wager that it's the case for the majority of sellers who engage in this practice.
Russ, NCNE
All too often I get sellers that say that their policy is that the buyer leaves FB 1st. My FB is only a 60 and have been on Ebay within the 1st year (98?) of it existance. I should be closer to 100 than 60.
I even had a seller tell me they don't leave FB, but they appreciate the FB they are left. Six months later I get 3 emails from the FBI asking if I rec'd the items I won from the said person because they were going up on fraud charges. I did receive them, 3 months after winning and couldn't leave the negs.
<< <i>and have been on Ebay within the 1st year (98?) of it existance. >>
eBay's first year was 1995.
Russ, NCNE
That being said, I still leave feedback when I receive payment because it's easier for me to do it that way. It's a lot more work to try to keep track of who's left feedback and who's due to get it. For the kind of stuff I sell, this method has served me well- of the 9,000+ feedback I've left, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of buyers I've had whose feedback I wish I had waited to leave. If I sold stuff which attracted less responsible buyers, I might rethink my decision, but as it is, buyers seem to appreciate the getting their feedback right away and I see no reason to make them wait. It seems kind of silly to punish good buyers along with making more work for myself, just to insure that the occasional (less than 1 in 1000) nutjob doesn't get away with getting a feedback rating more favorable than deserved.
One of them was described as gorgeous and brilliant, but the coins were fingerprinted, smudged, yellowed and smelled like smoke.
The other was described as "original", and the roll was obviously "put together", containing an assortment of different uncs, none of which looked like they came from the same roll...........
Should I feel lucky that I even got the coins?
I knew it would happen.
because the buyer pays you doesn't mean the transaction is over. "
//////////////////////////////////////////////////
Absolutely.
Sellers who leave FB first are tempting fate. It will work for
a while, but in the end it will cost you.
There are MANY more buyers than sellers on EBAY. That
means there are more BAD buyers than bad sellers, too.
I have multiple EBAY accounts, and have never left/received
a NEG; thousands of transactions in more than 8-years.
Unwarranted chargebacks are now rampant on EBAY. When
a buyer lets me know he is happy - by leaving FB - I leave
FB to indicate the transaction is completed.
Scamsters who pay with stolen credit cards and bounced
echecks hardly deserve positive FB when "they pay." Liars
who will claim they received "an empty box" hardly deserve
positive FB when "they pay."
In the good old days, it was safe for sellers to leave FB first;
not anymore.
<< <i>
Sellers who leave FB first are tempting fate. It will work for
a while, but in the end it will cost you. >>
Hmm...I have 2397 positive transactions from 937 different buyers since 1999. No negatives. I see absolutely no evidence of tempting fate.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
The only evidence that you will eventually see
will come too late. Or, your run of luck may continue
forever; I hope so.
<< <i>Hmm...I have 2397 positive transactions from 937 different buyers since 1999. No negatives. I see absolutely no evidence of tempting fate. >>
I have 5206 positives from 2814 buyers. I have three negs, none of which came from buyers for whom a I left feedback first.
Russ, NCNE
The feedback will come.
I dunno if it puts the buyer at ease, it certainly makes it easier for THEm to hold YOU hostage
<< <i>the transaction isnt complete when you get paid, its complete when the item(s) are in the buyers possesion safe and sound. Im happy to leave feedback once delivery is confirmed. Too many variables, potential shipping issues. I'm happy to leave it FIRST once it get there. I send everything with del. conf. so i have a general idea of when its getting there.
I dunno if it puts the buyer at ease, it certainly makes it easier for THEm to hold YOU hostage
How can they hold me hostage? I send them what they bid on. I always ship immediately after payment.
Rookie Joe