I think as coin sellers we have quite a bit of clout. I do this part time and I have $27K in ebay sales in the last 90 days. That has to be on someones radar considering I have an account manager and I am a pion. How many beenie babies do you have to sell to equal a GAE?
Yes, and to all you that say it won't make a difference, just watch the CNN video. It's not just the forum members that are boycotting, a lot of other people are joining in too. If ebay see's their bottom line falling you better believe they will change the policy back to the way it was.
I just went to the post office. While I was quietly mailing thousands of dollars of ebay sales the older guy in line next to me was talking loudly to his clerk about the coming ebay boycot. "Nobody will be selling". "Everybody will be boycotting".... The clerk asked him quietly where the sellers were going to go and he started studdering...
<< <i>Feedback escrow is the answer. Feedback is held and is unviewable by either party until both feedbacks are left. >>
The first time I joined eBay - Sept 1997 - feedback was wide open. Anybody could leave it for anybody else. That was the primary reason I didn't use my eBay account but, instead, did my selling on haggle.com. The feedback system they used was similar to to escrow. The feedback stayed hidden unless one chose to make it public.
There's a thread about this boycott over on the powerseller forum asking who will be particpating. Out of 42 responses so far, a total of five have said they will participate.
<< <i>There's a thread about this boycott over on the powerseller forum asking who will be particpating. Out of 42 responses so far, a total of five have said they will participate.
What's funny is that, reading a lot of those responses, I have to wonder why they even bothered to respond. I can understand someone continuing to sell....it's their business and part of their business model but it is funny to read someone taking the time out to post in there, more than a 1-letter answer of "no", and waxing about why they won't be doing a boycott.
The impending death of eBay (EBAY) as the king of all marketplaces has been rumored for years. Every time management makes a change, raises fees or adds sponsored links, sellers say they will walk.
I've been following eBay since 1999 and I've seen and heard it all. Still eBay continues to be the 800 lb. gorilla of e-commerce. So it didn't surprise me when eBay sellers were once again on the warpath. Granted, this time the unrest seems less about fees and more about the changes to feedback; the perception is that eBay is taking away the ability for sellers to protect their business. In fact, during a conference call Tuesday between PeSA members and eBay management, I did not hear one question concerning fees; instead I heard about DSRs and Feedback.
Sellers are upset for many reasons, but in my view, many of them are concerned that they are losing control of their businesses. I believe if sales were great, they certainly wouldn't be complaining. (Amazon (AMZN) exerts much more control over their sellers, but they don’t complain as much because they are selling a lot of products.) Profitable sales are hard to come by on eBay and sellers are fighting very hard to maintain control of their business. The feedback issue is just a symptom of the feeling of helplessness. By not allowing a seller to leave a negative rating for a buyer, sellers believe the buyers will hold them hostage. This may not mean anything to those outside of the eBay ecosystem, but to eBay sellers, Feedback is their reputation and you don't mess with their reputation without a fight.
So, once again, sellers are upset and threatening to strike. I've never felt that a seller strike would be very beneficial; especially a one-week strike. The one difference I see with the seller unrest is that it's not just limited to one segment of sellers. In August of 2006, eBay raised fees on Store sellers but left Auction sellers alone. Earlier fee increases have affected one group more than another, but this time eBay has messed with Feedback, the most sacred aspect of eBay, and it affects every seller.
So what does all of this have to do with “Death by a Thousand Cuts?" February of 2008 is much different than August of 2006. In 2006 the options for eBay sellers were limited to Amazon and a few small upstarts. Amazon was just starting to expand their categories and open them up to 3P sellers, so there were not very many places to go. Today is much different; Amazon has expanded their 3P offerings, adding WebStore and FBA in addition to opening up more categories. Those upstart companies, that were around in 2006, have grown steadily and are much more viable this time around and paid search isn't so scary to sellers any more. Heck, they can even buy paid search ads on eBay that gives them more exposure than eBay store listings.
I came across a great article at Money.CNN.com entitled EBay rivals circle vulnerable auctions kingpin about the many options available to eBay sellers today. What was interesting were the numbers and trends these sites are seeing. Many of these sites saw an increase in registrations around the time of the eBay announcements. Sure, most of these sites are not seeing huge numbers in real terms, but the combination of the number of available sites and the measurable increases in registrations for each, begins to add up. Blood is in the water and each of these sites is stepping up their efforts to reach out to the unhappy eBay seller. “Death by a thousand cuts” just means that not any one cut is fatal. In fact it may take a thousand cuts to finish off the victim and all the while the victim doesn't feel they are in danger, until it is too late.
Lets start to counts the cuts: (Most data is from the article)
“OnlineAuction.com, based in Grants Pass, Ore., reports that roughly 7,500 new sellers have opened accounts since eBay announced its new policies last week. That's a 15% jump in the site's user base, within a matter of days.” “Another contender, eCrater, has registered 1,400 new sellers within the last few days. That's more than double the site's average weekly total.” “Another upstart attracting attention from fleeing eBayers, San Francisco's iOffer, is built around a focus on friendly engagement between buyers and sellers. Sellers can transfer their eBay feedback scores to iOffer. . . iOffer has accumulated 75,000 sellers and nearly 1 million total users since its 2002 launch.” Another auction site, Chicago-based uBid, targets bulk sellers liquidating excess inventory. Its 7,000 participants include Sony (SNE), Motorola (MOT) (Fortune 500) and Dell (DELL) (Fortune 500). All sellers submit to a 10-point financial exam to ensure they're qualified to do business on the site: "That's part of our stringent anti-fraud stance," said uBid CEO Jeff Hoffman.” “… the auction site Bidville, which uBid purchased in 2006, does focus on what Hoffman calls "consumer-to-consumer" sales - the market eBay now dominates. More than 350,000 sellers are registered on Bidville, but 25,000 active accounts provide most of the site's 1 million listings, Hoffman said. “ “Following eBay's announcement last week, the Overstock (OSTK) team worked through the weekend to design a new strategy highlighting its lesser-known auctions space, said Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne. The result? Overstock, in Salt Lake City, will redesign the header on its homepage to direct more traffic to its auctions tab. It plans to accelerate a software rollout that will beef up its auctions community message boards - and it's laying plans to produce 15-second Internet commercials to get the word out. "We think the time is right to position ourselves in this category," Byrne said. “Even Amazon has noticed an uptick in new seller accounts in the last week. Best known in its early days as an online bookstore, Amazon (AMZN, Fortune 500) expanded into consumer electronics and other categories, and in 2000 began allowing third-party sellers to list their wares alongside Amazon's offerings. All products are offered at a fixed price.Today, 26% of all items sold on Amazon come from its 1.3 million third-party sellers, who range from mom-and-pop vendors to Target Corp (TGT) (Fortune 500).” And the cuts go on: Yahoo Stores, Independant WebStore platforms, eBid.net, Play.com, Etsy.com, Google (GOOG) Product Search, Google and Yahoo (YHOO) paid search and BuyBack sites are going after consumers who may become casual sellers. Not one of these cuts will be fatal, but when you add them up they are beginning to drain the lifeblood of eBay, the seller.
I'm not predicting the imminent demise of eBay, but if they don't do something quickly to stop the bleeding, they may find themselves as just another marketplace and my guess is that this 800 lb. gorilla is going to weight a lot less.
No I will not boycott since it is currently the only venue I wish to sell my coins. An alternative would be Teletrade but it takes a lot more effort to sell in that venue.
I think those boycotting are missing the point. Tons of good buyers are the ones boycotting eBay at an alarming rate because of being wronged by bad sellers on the site. In the end this hurts everyone. eBay needed to implement drastic changes in order to bring back buyer trust to the site. If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. In the end a one week boycott only hurts those that choose to participate.
Never teach a pig to sing. You'll waste your time and annoy the pig
<< <i>I think those boycotting are missing the point. Tons of good buyers are the ones boycotting eBay at an alarming rate because of being wronged by bad sellers on the site. In the end this hurts everyone. eBay needed to implement drastic changes in order to bring back buyer trust to the site. If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. In the end a one week boycott only hurts those that choose to participate. >>
Seems like some good sellers acknowledge that problem but think there has to be a better solution.
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way.
I don't really see how not allowing negatives on buyers is going to help weed out the bad sellers...they'll still be able to set up fully-padded accounts with hundreds of positives-through-friends. The only ones that are going to get hurt are the honest sellers victimized by unscrupulous buyers. Before, there was at least an even playing field, now it's completely tilted to the buyer.
I know a lot of people say the customer is king in the B&M stores, too, but the obvious difference here is they control the money...and if the customer is unhappy, they will refund the $$, providing they get their merchandise back. No guarantee from an anonymous forum like Ebay.
BTW: My wife is hugely into Gymboree clothing (kids clothes), and her particular forum is HUGELY upset, and over 90% are at least writing they will be boycotting. We'll see, of course, but I wonder what the cumulative affect of the boycott will be?
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way. >>
Then you may be happy that those buyers will soon start leaving appropriate negs for sleazy sellers. That will be one result of the new policies.
<< <i>Then you may be happy that those buyers will soon start leaving appropriate negs for sleazy sellers. That will be one result of the new policies. >>
Another result will be that there are good sellers who are considering abandoning eBay altogether over this. I'm not sure how that will help buyers, but at least they'll be able to leave negs. Not that they couldn't before, of course.
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way. >>
That is the problem. The data shows when a buyer is retaliated against by a seller they leave the site. All the money transacted on eBay comes from buyers. They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. Sellers are on eBay to receive money from buyers not feedback.
Never teach a pig to sing. You'll waste your time and annoy the pig
<< <i>I think those boycotting are missing the point. Tons of good buyers are the ones boycotting eBay at an alarming rate because of being wronged by bad sellers on the site. In the end this hurts everyone. eBay needed to implement drastic changes in order to bring back buyer trust to the site. If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. In the end a one week boycott only hurts those that choose to participate. >>
eBay must keep buyers happy or both eBay and the Sellers will lose. Are there statistics on the rate at which disgruntled buyers are leaving? Has eBay publically stated that they are losing buyers because of bad sellers? If the evidence points to heavy buyer attrition, then eBay has no choice but to take strong action. And it ultimately helps the sellers because it cuts down on the loss of buyers. Fewer buyers creates less demand and means lower realized prices per sale; while more buyers means greater demand and higher prices--basic supply and demand theory.
How many sellers does E-bay have? Could it be in the hundreds of thousands? If so, I don't think a boycott by anything less than twenty thousand is going to have much effect. Fewer sellers means less competition. Fewer items for sale means higher realized prices given the same number of buyers, therefore the sellers which do not participate in the boycott will on average realize greater auction prices. In fact, if I was a seller and wanted to maximize my auction prices, Increasing my listings during the same time as the boycott, might be a way of making some nice money--but I don't know that I would broadcast what I was doing on this forum!
there is no doubt that ebay has its share of problems, this new ebay policy is in my opinion not the answer. it penalizes those that DO play by the rules. shady sellers are always gong to be just that. and there are always going to be buyers that want something for free, sellers should have the same rights as buyers when it comes to feedback. if a guy has a 99.7% positive on 1000 transactions, im willing to gamble that i wont be the guy that he decides to screw. if anyone takes the time to review anyone elses feedback it is easy to see who you dont want to deal with. if the current feedback system was actually USED then there would be no reason to change it. allowing open season on sellers is a grave mistake on the part of ebay should they decide to follow through with this. as long as people remain human there will always be disagreements, who would have known that the demise of ebay would be at thier own hand ??? i will certainly participate in this, and so should anyone that disagrees with the new policy, it unfairly disadvantages the seller. how would it affect a seller of bogus crap ? a seller that could care less about his feedback in the first place ?? it doesnt. it only affects the guy that does
<< <i>there is no doubt that ebay has its share of problems, this new ebay policy is in my opinion not the answer. it penalizes those that DO play by the rules. shady sellers are always gong to be just that. and there are always going to be buyers that want something for free, sellers should have the same rights as buyers when it comes to feedback. if a guy has a 99.7% positive on 1000 transactions, im willing to gamble that i wont be the guy that he decides to screw. if anyone takes the time to review anyone elses feedback it is easy to see who you dont want to deal with. if the current feedback system was actually USED then there would be no reason to change it. allowing open season on sellers is a grave mistake on the part of ebay should they decide to follow through with this. as long as people remain human there will always be disagreements, who would have known that the demise of ebay would be at thier own hand ??? i will certainly participate in this, and so should anyone that disagrees with the new policy, it unfairly disadvantages the seller. how would it affect a seller of bogus crap ? a seller that could care less about his feedback in the first place ?? it doesnt. it only affects the guy that does >>
The point of the new feedback system is to allow buyers to accurately rate sellers, something the current feedback system is not giving buyers the opportunity to do from the fear of seller retaliation. Once the new feedback system is in place, a sellers feedback rating will now more accurately depict their business practices, instead of the padded figure it currently is due to seller coercion. It will restore buyer confidence in the eBay feedback system and it will give buyers a good indication of a sellers business practices before deciding on wether they should be sending the seller their money.
Never teach a pig to sing. You'll waste your time and annoy the pig
<< <i>They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. >>
They wouldn't have to fear retaliation if they avoided sellers who practice it.
<< <i>The point of the new feedback system is to allow buyers to accuratly rate sellers, something the current feedback system is not allowing buyers the opportunity to do from the fear of seller retaliation. >>
I buy on eBay too, and for the life of me, I don't see where this "fear" is coming from. I've gotten a couple of negs from sellers who I negged first and you know what- it hasn't hurt me or limited my ability to buy on eBay in any way whatsoever. So I don't have a 100% rating on my feedback record- BFD.
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way. >>
That is the problem. The data shows when a buyer is retaliated against by a seller they leave the site. All the money transacted on eBay comes from buyers. They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. Sellers are on eBay to receive money from buyers not feedback. >>
FL I strongly disagree...
The problem is...
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome...
The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome... >>
Now that buyers have an incentive to accurately rate a seller and eBay is using those reports in determining a sellers standing in the commumity, I predict bad sellers will be much easier to indentify than under the current system.
<< <i>The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Good game plan, I would do the same... >>
The buyer protection no longer has a $25 fee and has coverage of up to $2,000 for payments made by PayPal.
Never teach a pig to sing. You'll waste your time and annoy the pig
FL, i know it is probably not going to happen but do you think there might be a chance that if a buyer has full control of the feedback, do you think maybe he would take an unfair advantage with that ?? i mean, what is to keep the BUYER honest ?? he can leave negative feedback at will just as the seller rips everyone off at will (???) i have bought and sold and ive had very few problems, but i have had problems with buyers who dont read the damn listing, they bid then dont want to pay for the item or didnt really want it in the first place, i have had that happen, and i have had nonpaying bidders leave me negativ feedback after i filed on them, i dont see how that "more accurately rates a seller" when a buyer has such an unfair advantage is it just a "now we can get ours" thing or what ???
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome... >>
Now that buyers have an incentive to accurately rate a seller and eBay is using those reports in determining a sellers standing in the commumity, I predict bad sellers will be much easier to indentify than under the current system.
<< <i>The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Good game plan, I would do the same... >>
The buyer protection no longer has a $25 fee and has coverage of up to $2,000 for payments made by PayPal. >>
There are still sellers with the $200.00 limit...
How come... Because Ebay/PayPal dose not trust them...
It's a totaly differant story if it's your money...
a bad seller is easy to identify now, the "holding feedback hostage" theory is BS if someone rips me off, im going to leave a negaative, i dont care if he negs me back. if i dont have to worry that i will get neg'd back, maybe i will just leave negs at will, maybe i dont like the way that i had to use up all my snipe t get the coin, or maybe i dont like the color of the envelope it came in, or maybe i feel it sould have gotten to michigan from el salvadore in one day instead of three. it happens. it is unfair and unhealthy to give one party a big disadvantage over the other. no justification needed its just a bullsheet bandaid to appease a group of crybabies
<< <i>FL, i know it is probably not going to happen but do you think there might be a chance that if a buyer has full control of the feedback, do you think maybe he would take an unfair advantage with that ?? i mean, what is to keep the BUYER honest ?? he can leave negative feedback at will just as the seller rips everyone off at will (???) i have bought and sold and ive had very few problems, but i have had problems with buyers who dont read the damn listing, they bid then dont want to pay for the item or didnt really want it in the first place, i have had that happen, and i have had nonpaying bidders leave me negativ feedback after i filed on them, i dont see how that "more accurately rates a seller" when a buyer has such an unfair advantage is it just a "now we can get ours" thing or what ??? >>
IMO, the current feedback system does little if anything to keep buyers honest. Sellers have little control over who bids on their items. If some one is set out to rip you off, his motivation is likely not going to be affected by the fear of negative feedback from the seller. As a seller, they should learn to use safe selling guidelines in order to help protect yourself from unscrupulous buyers. On the other side, a buyer that does nothing wrong except buy from a shady seller and then gets a negative feedback as a reward for doing what he should do to alert the community, is much more likely to occur and is the main reason why buyers stop doing business on eBay. The new policy also better addreses non-paying bidders by removing any feedback they may have left for the transaction.
Never teach a pig to sing. You'll waste your time and annoy the pig
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>But neither of those address feedback extortion by bad sellers. >>
That's already addressed by the upcoming policy change removing the ability of sellers to leave negatives. Russ, NCNE >>
That's what I thougth I said I was agreeing with. perhaps I'm easily confused today. This cold/sinus infection has been dragggggggging on. --Jerry
<< <i>The feedback rating on a person who ONLY BUYS, is meaningless.
Why have it ?? >>
Not really. I've canceled bids on a few bad buyers over the years...
One guy once emailed me and asked why and I told him I didn't like his feedback (then blocked him.)
--Jerry
I'll just throw some numbers at ya...
in 2004 ebay had gross sales of 3,271,300,000 their profit was 778,200,000
in 2005 ebay had gross sales of 4,552,400,000 their profit was 1,082,000,000
in 2006 ebay had gross sales of 5,969,700,000 their profit was 1,125,600,000
in 2007 ebay had gross sales of 7,672,300,000 their profit was 348,200,000
Just adding up the profit for 4 years 3,334,000,000
that is ....3 Billion, 334 Million dollars after the bills are payed....
They have made a profit every year since they have been a public company. I only showed you 4 years....When did they go public?
Now I ask again what kind of impact do you think the Boycott will have?
<< <i>If ebay see's their bottom line falling you better believe they will change the policy back to the way it was. >>
The policy is a done deal. It ain't changing back to the way it was.
Russ, NCNE
JJ
<< <i>Feedback escrow is the answer. Feedback is held and is unviewable by either party until both feedbacks are left.
JJ >>
That that would be a bit intersting
<< <i>Feedback escrow is the answer. Feedback is held and is unviewable by either party until both feedbacks are left. >>
The first time I joined eBay - Sept 1997 - feedback was wide open. Anybody could leave it for anybody else. That was the primary reason I didn't use my eBay account but, instead, did my selling on haggle.com. The feedback system they used was similar to to escrow. The feedback stayed hidden unless one chose to make it public.
Russ, NCNE
http://www.medved.net/cgi-bin/cal.exe?SIND
http://forums.ebay.com/db1/thread.jspa?threadID=1000643135&tstart=0&mod=1202439341784
Russ, NCNE
eBay Boycott
<< <i>I think you have to be a PowerSeller to access the thread... >>
I just confirmed that.
I put my last bid in today, and will not bid again on ebay until the boycott is over. For what's its worth.
But this has been done many times before, with little effect. But if it feels good, I say do it!
Dave
<< <i>There's a thread about this boycott over on the powerseller forum asking who will be particpating. Out of 42 responses so far, a total of five have said they will participate.
http://forums.ebay.com/db1/thread.jspa?threadID=1000643135&tstart=0&mod=1202439341784
Russ, NCNE >>
What's funny is that, reading a lot of those responses, I have to wonder why they even bothered to respond.
I can understand someone continuing to sell....it's their business and part of their business model but it is funny to read someone taking the time out to post in there, more than a 1-letter answer of "no", and waxing about why they won't be doing a boycott.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
The impending death of eBay (EBAY) as the king of all marketplaces has been rumored for years. Every time management makes a change, raises fees or adds sponsored links, sellers say they will walk.
I've been following eBay since 1999 and I've seen and heard it all. Still eBay continues to be the 800 lb. gorilla of e-commerce. So it didn't surprise me when eBay sellers were once again on the warpath. Granted, this time the unrest seems less about fees and more about the changes to feedback; the perception is that eBay is taking away the ability for sellers to protect their business. In fact, during a conference call Tuesday between PeSA members and eBay management, I did not hear one question concerning fees; instead I heard about DSRs and Feedback.
Sellers are upset for many reasons, but in my view, many of them are concerned that they are losing control of their businesses. I believe if sales were great, they certainly wouldn't be complaining. (Amazon (AMZN) exerts much more control over their sellers, but they don’t complain as much because they are selling a lot of products.) Profitable sales are hard to come by on eBay and sellers are fighting very hard to maintain control of their business. The feedback issue is just a symptom of the feeling of helplessness. By not allowing a seller to leave a negative rating for a buyer, sellers believe the buyers will hold them hostage. This may not mean anything to those outside of the eBay ecosystem, but to eBay sellers, Feedback is their reputation and you don't mess with their reputation without a fight.
So, once again, sellers are upset and threatening to strike. I've never felt that a seller strike would be very beneficial; especially a one-week strike. The one difference I see with the seller unrest is that it's not just limited to one segment of sellers. In August of 2006, eBay raised fees on Store sellers but left Auction sellers alone. Earlier fee increases have affected one group more than another, but this time eBay has messed with Feedback, the most sacred aspect of eBay, and it affects every seller.
So what does all of this have to do with “Death by a Thousand Cuts?" February of 2008 is much different than August of 2006. In 2006 the options for eBay sellers were limited to Amazon and a few small upstarts. Amazon was just starting to expand their categories and open them up to 3P sellers, so there were not very many places to go. Today is much different; Amazon has expanded their 3P offerings, adding WebStore and FBA in addition to opening up more categories. Those upstart companies, that were around in 2006, have grown steadily and are much more viable this time around and paid search isn't so scary to sellers any more. Heck, they can even buy paid search ads on eBay that gives them more exposure than eBay store listings.
I came across a great article at Money.CNN.com entitled EBay rivals circle vulnerable auctions kingpin about the many options available to eBay sellers today. What was interesting were the numbers and trends these sites are seeing. Many of these sites saw an increase in registrations around the time of the eBay announcements. Sure, most of these sites are not seeing huge numbers in real terms, but the combination of the number of available sites and the measurable increases in registrations for each, begins to add up. Blood is in the water and each of these sites is stepping up their efforts to reach out to the unhappy eBay seller. “Death by a thousand cuts” just means that not any one cut is fatal. In fact it may take a thousand cuts to finish off the victim and all the while the victim doesn't feel they are in danger, until it is too late.
Lets start to counts the cuts: (Most data is from the article)
“OnlineAuction.com, based in Grants Pass, Ore., reports that roughly 7,500 new sellers have opened accounts since eBay announced its new policies last week. That's a 15% jump in the site's user base, within a matter of days.”
“Another contender, eCrater, has registered 1,400 new sellers within the last few days. That's more than double the site's average weekly total.”
“Another upstart attracting attention from fleeing eBayers, San Francisco's iOffer, is built around a focus on friendly engagement between buyers and sellers. Sellers can transfer their eBay feedback scores to iOffer. . . iOffer has accumulated 75,000 sellers and nearly 1 million total users since its 2002 launch.”
Another auction site, Chicago-based uBid, targets bulk sellers liquidating excess inventory. Its 7,000 participants include Sony (SNE), Motorola (MOT) (Fortune 500) and Dell (DELL) (Fortune 500). All sellers submit to a 10-point financial exam to ensure they're qualified to do business on the site: "That's part of our stringent anti-fraud stance," said uBid CEO Jeff Hoffman.”
“… the auction site Bidville, which uBid purchased in 2006, does focus on what Hoffman calls "consumer-to-consumer" sales - the market eBay now dominates. More than 350,000 sellers are registered on Bidville, but 25,000 active accounts provide most of the site's 1 million listings, Hoffman said. “
“Following eBay's announcement last week, the Overstock (OSTK) team worked through the weekend to design a new strategy highlighting its lesser-known auctions space, said Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne. The result? Overstock, in Salt Lake City, will redesign the header on its homepage to direct more traffic to its auctions tab. It plans to accelerate a software rollout that will beef up its auctions community message boards - and it's laying plans to produce 15-second Internet commercials to get the word out. "We think the time is right to position ourselves in this category," Byrne said. “Even Amazon has noticed an uptick in new seller accounts in the last week. Best known in its early days as an online bookstore, Amazon (AMZN, Fortune 500) expanded into consumer electronics and other categories, and in 2000 began allowing third-party sellers to list their wares alongside Amazon's offerings. All products are offered at a fixed price.Today, 26% of all items sold on Amazon come from its 1.3 million third-party sellers, who range from mom-and-pop vendors to Target Corp (TGT) (Fortune 500).”
And the cuts go on: Yahoo Stores, Independant WebStore platforms, eBid.net, Play.com, Etsy.com, Google (GOOG) Product Search, Google and Yahoo (YHOO) paid search and BuyBack sites are going after consumers who may become casual sellers.
Not one of these cuts will be fatal, but when you add them up they are beginning to drain the lifeblood of eBay, the seller.
I'm not predicting the imminent demise of eBay, but if they don't do something quickly to stop the bleeding, they may find themselves as just another marketplace and my guess is that this 800 lb. gorilla is going to weight a lot less.
It will also hurt my pocket but there is more to life than money.
Some say the only people that say that have none. That maybe true but I think principals are worth more.
Thanks I hope you join.
Box of 20
It won't hurt me at all to boycott for one week.
<< <i>I think those boycotting are missing the point. Tons of good buyers are the ones boycotting eBay at an alarming rate because of being wronged by bad sellers on the site. In the end this hurts everyone. eBay needed to implement drastic changes in order to bring back buyer trust to the site. If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. In the end a one week boycott only hurts those that choose to participate. >>
Seems like some good sellers acknowledge that problem but think there has to be a better solution.
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way.
I know a lot of people say the customer is king in the B&M stores, too, but the obvious difference here is they control the money...and if the customer is unhappy, they will refund the $$, providing they get their merchandise back. No guarantee from an anonymous forum like Ebay.
BTW: My wife is hugely into Gymboree clothing (kids clothes), and her particular forum is HUGELY upset, and over 90% are at least writing they will be boycotting. We'll see, of course, but I wonder what the cumulative affect of the boycott will be?
<< <i>
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way. >>
Then you may be happy that those buyers will soon start leaving appropriate negs for sleazy sellers. That will be one result of the new policies.
<< <i>Then you may be happy that those buyers will soon start leaving appropriate negs for sleazy sellers. That will be one result of the new policies. >>
Another result will be that there are good sellers who are considering abandoning eBay altogether over this. I'm not sure how that will help buyers, but at least they'll be able to leave negs. Not that they couldn't before, of course.
<< <i>
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way.
That is the problem. The data shows when a buyer is retaliated against by a seller they leave the site. All the money transacted on eBay comes from buyers. They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. Sellers are on eBay to receive money from buyers not feedback.
<< <i>I think those boycotting are missing the point. Tons of good buyers are the ones boycotting eBay at an alarming rate because of being wronged by bad sellers on the site. In the end this hurts everyone. eBay needed to implement drastic changes in order to bring back buyer trust to the site. If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. In the end a one week boycott only hurts those that choose to participate. >>
eBay must keep buyers happy or both eBay and the Sellers will lose. Are there statistics on the rate at which disgruntled buyers are leaving? Has eBay publically stated that they are losing buyers because of bad sellers? If the evidence points to heavy buyer attrition, then eBay has no choice but to take strong action. And it ultimately helps the sellers because it cuts down on the loss of buyers. Fewer buyers creates less demand and means lower realized prices per sale; while more buyers means greater demand and higher prices--basic supply and demand theory.
How many sellers does E-bay have? Could it be in the hundreds of thousands? If so, I don't think a boycott by anything less than twenty thousand is going to have much effect. Fewer sellers means less competition. Fewer items for sale means higher realized prices given the same number of buyers, therefore the sellers which do not participate in the boycott will on average realize greater auction prices. In fact, if I was a seller and wanted to maximize my auction prices, Increasing my listings during the same time as the boycott, might be a way of making some nice money--but I don't know that I would broadcast what I was doing on this forum!
I never liked buyer being able to give negs when they don't pay.
As otehrs have said, feedback needs to be 2 way to have any impact.
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
<< <i>there is no doubt that ebay has its share of problems, this new ebay policy is in my opinion not the answer. it penalizes those that DO play by the rules. shady sellers are always gong to be just that. and there are always going to be buyers that want something for free, sellers should have the same rights as buyers when it comes to feedback. if a guy has a 99.7% positive on 1000 transactions, im willing to gamble that i wont be the guy that he decides to screw. if anyone takes the time to review anyone elses feedback it is easy to see who you dont want to deal with. if the current feedback system was actually USED then there would be no reason to change it. allowing open season on sellers is a grave mistake on the part of ebay should they decide to follow through with this. as long as people remain human there will always be disagreements, who would have known that the demise of ebay would be at thier own hand ??? i will certainly participate in this, and so should anyone that disagrees with the new policy, it unfairly disadvantages the seller. how would it affect a seller of bogus crap ? a seller that could care less about his feedback in the first place ?? it doesnt. it only affects the guy that does >>
The point of the new feedback system is to allow buyers to accurately rate sellers, something the current feedback system is not giving buyers the opportunity to do from the fear of seller retaliation. Once the new feedback system is in place, a sellers feedback rating will now more accurately depict their business practices, instead of the padded figure it currently is due to seller coercion. It will restore buyer confidence in the eBay feedback system and it will give buyers a good indication of a sellers business practices before deciding on wether they should be sending the seller their money.
<< <i>They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. >>
They wouldn't have to fear retaliation if they avoided sellers who practice it.
<< <i>The point of the new feedback system is to allow buyers to accuratly rate sellers, something the current feedback system is not allowing buyers the opportunity to do from the fear of seller retaliation. >>
I buy on eBay too, and for the life of me, I don't see where this "fear" is coming from. I've gotten a couple of negs from sellers who I negged first and you know what- it hasn't hurt me or limited my ability to buy on eBay in any way whatsoever. So I don't have a 100% rating on my feedback record- BFD.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If you want to blame somebody, blame the sellers with shady business practices and manipulating their feedback for a buyer as a tool for cohersion instead of the accurate representation of a transaction by those involved. >>
No thanks. I choose to blame buyers who refuse to leave appropriate negative feedback for sleazy sellers for fear of getting a neg themselves, which allows said sellers to continue merrily on their way.
That is the problem. The data shows when a buyer is retaliated against by a seller they leave the site. All the money transacted on eBay comes from buyers. They should be able to leave their opinion on how well a seller conducts their business without the fear of retaliation. Sellers are on eBay to receive money from buyers not feedback. >>
FL I strongly disagree...
The problem is...
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome...
The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Good game plan, I would do the same...
I say WTF and BOYCOTT VICTORIOUSLY...!
Currently Listed: Nothing
Take Care, Dave
<< <i>FL I strongly disagree...
The problem is...
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome... >>
Now that buyers have an incentive to accurately rate a seller and eBay is using those reports in determining a sellers standing in the commumity, I predict bad sellers will be much easier to indentify than under the current system.
<< <i>The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Good game plan, I would do the same... >>
The buyer protection no longer has a $25 fee and has coverage of up to $2,000 for payments made by PayPal.
Link
Rob
"Those guys weren't Fathers they were...Mothers."
<< <i>
<< <i>FL I strongly disagree...
The problem is...
Ebay lets the Scum of the Earth Steal from people and still dose...
All the time claiming no responsibility, we are "Just A Venue" and have no control over the outcome... >>
Now that buyers have an incentive to accurately rate a seller and eBay is using those reports in determining a sellers standing in the commumity, I predict bad sellers will be much easier to indentify than under the current system.
<< <i>The Buyers Protection Plan is a joke, $200.00 Max, $25.00 Fee and 60 days of hoops...
So lets make our quality sellers pay the bill and we will clean it up, no to mention the tidy profit we will make...
Good game plan, I would do the same... >>
The buyer protection no longer has a $25 fee and has coverage of up to $2,000 for payments made by PayPal. >>
There are still sellers with the $200.00 limit...
How come... Because Ebay/PayPal dose not trust them...
It's a totaly differant story if it's your money...
Currently Listed: Nothing
Take Care, Dave
<< <i>FL, i know it is probably not going to happen but do you think there might be a chance that if a buyer has full control of the feedback, do you think maybe he would take an unfair advantage with that ?? i mean, what is to keep the BUYER honest ?? he can leave negative feedback at will just as the seller rips everyone off at will (???) i have bought and sold and ive had very few problems, but i have had problems with buyers who dont read the damn listing, they bid then dont want to pay for the item or didnt really want it in the first place, i have had that happen, and i have had nonpaying bidders leave me negativ feedback after i filed on them, i dont see how that "more accurately rates a seller" when a buyer has such an unfair advantage is it just a "now we can get ours" thing or what ??? >>
IMO, the current feedback system does little if anything to keep buyers honest. Sellers have little control over who bids on their items. If some one is set out to rip you off, his motivation is likely not going to be affected by the fear of negative feedback from the seller. As a seller, they should learn to use safe selling guidelines in order to help protect yourself from unscrupulous buyers. On the other side, a buyer that does nothing wrong except buy from a shady seller and then gets a negative feedback as a reward for doing what he should do to alert the community, is much more likely to occur and is the main reason why buyers stop doing business on eBay. The new policy also better addreses non-paying bidders by removing any feedback they may have left for the transaction.
<< <i>The new policy also better addreses non-paying bidders by removing any feedback they may have left for the transaction. >>
That sounds good.