EBAY's new policy - The customer (in this case the buyer) is always right

oxy8890 · February 8, 2008 5:54AM

The new EBAY policy is the buyer may leave feedback and the seller may not. This new policy is unacceptable to me. The majority of the individuals in the EBAY community have integrity; unfortunately there are a few individuals that have little or no honesty and accountability at all.

As someone who has been in sales and account management for nearly 20 years along with making purchases as a consumer for longer than that, it is IMHBCO (in my humble but confident opinion)

that there are just as many buyers with a lack of integrity as there are sellers.

I will be the first to agree that the ebay system of feedback is flawed, but to unilaterally give negative feedback capabilities to the buyers will not solve the problem. It will just create a larger group of demanding, unreasonable and unaccountable buyers.

Many people have suggested boycotting ebay from Feb. 18th to Feb 25th. I have decided to take it one step further. I will no longer be selling on ebay at all. I will sell my coins through my website and the PCGS BST.

I will be looking into additional avenues as to how to sell my treasures (IMHO) and I am open to suggestions.

Thank you for reading and enjoy the hunt,

Russ · February 8, 2008 5:57AM

<< unfortunately there are a few individuals that have little or no honesty and accountability at all. >>

Yep, like the sellers who practice retaliation and are the reason for the new policy.

Russ, NCNE

oxy8890 · February 8, 2008 6:02AM

Russ,

I agree, I just think these new rules will make this situation a lot uglier. I hope I am wrong.

lathmach · February 8, 2008 6:27AM

<< 

<< unfortunately there are a few individuals that have little or no honesty and accountability at all. >>

Yep, like the sellers who practice retaliation and are the reason for the new policy.

Russ, NCNE >>

Russ is right on. I have one neg, and it's a retaliatory.

Ray

BECOKA · February 8, 2008 6:29AM

On the plus side as a buyer I will speak my mind now.

I just don't plan on selling as much now.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 6:35AM

<< Russ is right on. I have one neg, and it's a retaliatory. >>

It sucks when that happens, but what harm does it cause? Have you had bids cancelled by other sellers because you have a neg? Are you unable to do anything through eBay now that you could do before you received the neg?

jdillane · February 8, 2008 6:44AM

It seems that feedback scores will carry a much different meaning going forward. It has been suggested that sellers should simply try to be fair and reasonable in the conduct of their business - vis a vis shipping fees, description and image accuracy. Indeed sellers will encounter feedback hostages. This will likely be experienced across the board. And, while sellers cannot leave negs, they can describe the experience in the comments. Eventually, ebay will need to adjust their standards. A 4.8 will not survive for many in the new world.

I wonder if toolhaus sorts reciprocal feedback to allow one to see the seller's response to a neg.

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 6:48AM

It sucks when that happens, but what harm does it cause? Have you had bids cancelled by other sellers because you have a neg? Are you unable to do anything through eBay now that you could do before you received the neg?

So, if the buyer neg's don't mean anything, why do people care if they are no longer able to leave neg's for buyers?

Russ · February 8, 2008 6:52AM

<< So, if the buyer neg's don't mean anything, why do people care if they are no longer able to leave neg's for buyers? >>

The fear is that without the checks and balances of a two way system, buyers will use the advantage to extort sellers. I don't really see this as a huge issue, but I certainly understand the fear.

Russ, NCNE

ziggy29 · February 8, 2008 6:54AM

<< I agree, I just think these new rules will make this situation a lot uglier. I hope I am wrong. >>

It could play out in different ways. On one hand, it seems to give the buyer way too much of the leverage. On the other hand, the playing field should be level for all sellers (at least after a certain date). So if negs are more commonly given to sellers now, even if *all* percentages fall, the scumbag sellers should fall more. Whereas 99.5% used to be rather good, maybe 97% will be in the future -- who knows? And some of the slimy sellers who have 99%+ feedback only by issuing retaliation feedback will lose that leverage and get some negs they badly deserve and fall to 90% or worse. It remains to be seen.

Although I do think this holds even good sellers hostage to a degree, if we accept that even they will get some negs for refusing to cave in to unreasonable and/or slimeball extortionist buyers, the slimeball sellers will still look a lot worse. So maybe it won't be so horrible after all. It may simply change what a "good" feedback score/percentage is over time.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:00AM

<< So, if the buyer neg's don't mean anything, why do people care if they are no longer able to leave neg's for buyers? >>

They don't mean anything if you're not in the habit of collecting them- nobody cares about the occasional neg that lots of buyers have received. However, when you (as a seller) get a feeling from the email you just received from one of your winning bidders that something's not quite right, it's kind of helpful to be able to check out their feedback record to see if there might be something hinky going on.

So, if the buyer's negs (the random retaliatory kind) *do* mean something, just what is it that they mean? And why do some buyers get themselves so twisted up over them?

ziggy29 · February 8, 2008 7:03AM

<< 

<< So, if the buyer neg's don't mean anything, why do people care if they are no longer able to leave neg's for buyers? >>

They don't mean anything if you're not in the habit of collecting them- nobody cares about the occasional neg that lots of buyers have received. However, when you (as a seller) get a feeling from the email you just received from one of your winning bidders that something's not quite right, it's kind of helpful to be able to check out their feedback record to see if there might be something hinky going on. >>

This is true, but that might make it more important as a seller to look at high bidders in your auctions from time to time and examine the feedback they left for others. If they have an unreasonably high frequencies of leaving negs and neutrals, you may want to cancel their bids and block them.

Russ · February 8, 2008 7:06AM

<< This is true, but that might make it more important as a seller to look at high bidders in your auctions from time to time and examine the feedback they left for others. If they have an unreasonably high frequencies of leaving negs and neutrals, you may want to cancel their bids and block them. >>

Not really a realistic idea if one is doing many listings. It also does nothing to stop snipers.

Russ, NCNE

FatMan · February 8, 2008 7:08AM

Level playing field. In the past the seller who used the retaliatory neg were not on equal footing as those sellers who did not. I understand the fear, but in the real business world the seller has never had the ability to neg a buyer. It is only the buyer who has the power of word of mouth against the seller.

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:09AM

However, when you (as a seller) get a feeling from the email you just received from one of your winning bidders that something's not quite right, it's kind of helpful to be able to check out their feedback record to see if there might be something hinky going on.

So, in this case, you wait for payment to clear, then send the item out. Registered and insured as always, to the confirmed address. How is this different from a normal buyer?

Russ · February 8, 2008 7:13AM

BTW, I think it's the sellers with crappy DSR's that have the most to fear. Conversely, the sellers with strong DSR's have much less to fear. The DSR's are anonymous, so buyers have never had to fear retaliation for their ratings.

Russ, NCNE

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:16AM

I already answer emails from buyers asking when I shipped their item, even though I told them that in the email I sent when I received their payment. I also have to take time to refund PayPal payments when the buyers don't include money for shipping. Then, there's the emails from buyers I need to answer asking for feedback, which I already told them I left, and which I double-check to see if I missed. Plus the questions from bidders I answer about stuff that's explained in the auction listing, not to mention questions from the people who are not interested in bidding, but have one just like it and want to know what it's worth.

And this is all in addition to doing things which are actually productive, like finding decent coins to sell, taking photos and writing auction descriptions and shipping paid-for stuff.

<< This is true, but that might make it more important as a seller to look at high bidders in your auctions from time to time and examine the feedback they left for others. If they have an unreasonably high frequencies of leaving negs and neutrals, you may want to cancel their bids and block them. >>

Great.

I'll add it to the list.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:21AM

<< So, in this case, you wait for payment to clear, then send the item out. Registered and insured as always, to the confirmed address. How is this different from a normal buyer? >>

For normal buyers, I don't require registered delivery or confirmed addresses. And I don't wait for their payment to clear before shipping.

But other than that, I guess no different.

<< So, if the buyer's negs (the random retaliatory kind) *do* mean something, just what is it that they mean? >>

You missed a question...

LindeDad · February 8, 2008 7:24AM

So when does this go into effect. I need to neg a crook that has a bunch of my money and has not delived the coin I paid for.
And he is a Power Screwer to the core.

Russ · February 8, 2008 7:25AM

<< So when does this go into effect. >>

Not until May.

Russ, NCNE

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:28AM

So, if the buyer's negs (the random retaliatory kind) *do* mean something, just what is it that they mean? And why do some buyers get themselves so twisted up over them?

I don't think they mean anything to eBay'ers that are buyers only.

For those that buy and sell, buyer neg's have a negative impact.

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:29AM

So when does this go into effect. I need to neg a crook that has a bunch of my money and has not delived the coin I paid for.

You can still neg a seller.

LindeDad · February 8, 2008 7:30AM

Well then I might get my first neg. Item was bought on Jan 18th. paid for on Jan, 20.
Working the problem through PayPal now.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:31AM

<< For those that buy and sell, buyer neg's have a negative impact. >>

If you're worried about buyer negs affecting you when you sell, get a separate account for buying only.

ziggy29 · February 8, 2008 7:35AM

<< If you're worried about buyer negs affecting you when you sell, get a separate account for buying only. >>

A lot of people already do that. Many an eBayer has been busted on this board in buying a coin, doctoring it and reselling it a few weeks later with the same ID. And then there are also those who flip and don't want others to know what they paid for what they are selling.

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:36AM

If you're worried about buyer negs affecting you when you sell, get a separate account for buying only.

I'm a buyer only, and I couldn't care about my feedback (it's 100%, though).

I just don't see what the big fuss is about the inability for Sellers to leave feedback for Buyers. In my mind, the buyer's feedback is irrelevant. Either Buyer pays, or he doesn't. Nothing happens until the Buyer pays. And, if the Buyer doesn't pay, the Buyer gets NARU's for NPB's - regardless of the Buyer's feedback.

The Seller feedback is much more important. Does the Seller bother to ship the item once paid? Now, that's important.

ziggy29 · February 8, 2008 7:39AM

<< I just don't see what the big fuss is about the inability for Sellers to leave feedback for Buyers. In my mind, the buyer's feedback is irrelevant. Either Buyer pays, or he doesn't. >>

You obviously never had a buyer jerk you around after they paid.

Having said that -- as I said before, when and if this new policy goes into place, the cream of the sellers will still rise to the top; it's just that the overall percentages may fall. But if you think about it, a "real world" customer satisfaction rate of 95-98% is pretty damn good. It's only in the twisted world of eBay feedback where it currently sucks.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:39AM

<< In my mind, the buyer's feedback is irrelevant. >>

Ok then- if the buyer's feedback is irrelevant, why would you care if you get an unearned neg somewhere along the line?

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:42AM

You obviously never had a buyer jerk you around after they paid.

No, I haven't. But, how does leaving feedback make that any better? It may feel good, but it's ultimately pointless.

Ok then- if the buyer's feedback is irrelevant, why would you care if you get an unearned neg somewhere along the line?

I've already said I couldn't care about my feedback, as I am a buyer only.

oxy8890 · February 8, 2008 7:42AM

<< 

<< I agree, I just think these new rules will make this situation a lot uglier. I hope I am wrong. >>

It could play out in different ways. On one hand, it seems to give the buyer way too much of the leverage. On the other hand, the playing field should be level for all sellers (at least after a certain date). So if negs are more commonly given to sellers now, even if *all* percentages fall, the scumbag sellers should fall more. Whereas 99.5% used to be rather good, maybe 97% will be in the future -- who knows? And some of the slimy sellers who have 99%+ feedback only by issuing retaliation feedback will lose that leverage and get some negs they badly deserve and fall to 90% or worse. It remains to be seen.

Although I do think this holds even good sellers hostage to a degree, if we accept that even they will get some negs for refusing to cave in to unreasonable and/or slimeball extortionist buyers, the slimeball sellers will still look a lot worse. So maybe it won't be so horrible after all. It may simply change what a "good" feedback score/percentage is over time. >>

Ziggy,

Some good points, I hope you are correct.

VicThrust · February 8, 2008 7:45AM

On the whole feedback thing - as a seller I am not happy but if you listen to Ebay their new member enrollment growth rates are slowing. This new feedback policy serves the buyer not the seller. The new rates serveres their shareholders.

My approach on feedback will be "The Positive Negative". If a buyer gives me trouble I WILL leave a positive but my comment will be apropriately negative.

Tyler1924S · February 8, 2008 7:46AM

My buyer/seller ratio has been about 50/50. I've decided to no longer sell on ebay. I had only been selling coins I had bumped from my collection, or had purchased from B&M shops and decided not to use. The thing I am most concerned about, is that another seller (who buys one of my coins to flip) can turn around and neg me at the same time, without fear of reprisal.

oxy8890 · February 8, 2008 7:46AM

<< Level playing field. In the past the seller who used the retaliatory neg were not on equal footing as those sellers who did not. I understand the fear, but in the real business world the seller has never had the ability to neg a buyer. It is only the buyer who has the power of word of mouth against the seller. >>

This is what I liked about ebay. The fact that one could easily out an unreasonable buyer.

Unfortunately, there were too many deadbeat sellers that found a way around the system.

Moki · February 8, 2008 7:48AM

If the new system does not work well, you can bet that Ebay will eventually modify it until it does--it might just take some time. Sellers have to be profitable to stay in business and sell, so ultimately there will be a balance of fairness, so to speak, that keeps the system working effectively for both sellers and buyers. Ebay's livelihood depends on it. I don't blame sellers for being concerned, but until the system is actually implemented for awhile, no one can be certain of the outcome.

Russ · February 8, 2008 7:49AM

<< You obviously never had a buyer jerk you around after they paid.

No, I haven't. But, how does leaving feedback make that any better? It may feel good, but it's ultimately pointless. >>

Are you deliberately missing the point? Removing the seller's ability to neg a buyer makes it far easier for a bad buyer to jack the seller around.

<< Ok then- if the buyer's feedback is irrelevant, why would you care if you get an unearned neg somewhere along the line?

I've already said I couldn't care about my feedback, as I am a buyer only. >>

You may not care about your feedback, but the vast majority of buyers do. That's why sellers have been able to use retaliation to force mutual withdrawals.

Russ, NCNE

LindeDad · February 8, 2008 7:53AM

<< Unfortunately, there were too many deadbeat seller that found a way around the system. >>

And some of them are the reason the new rules are needed IMO. Many of these are the same one that brought about the rule changes on selling RAW and Garage graded slabbed coins.

mrpotatoheadd · February 8, 2008 7:54AM

<< That's why sellers have been able to use retaliation to force mutual withdrawals. >>

Sellers who retaliate through feedback could be easily enough avoided if buyers would read the feedback those sellers have left for other buyers before bidding.

nencoin · February 8, 2008 7:54AM

<< Having said that -- as I said before, when and if this new policy goes into place, the cream of the sellers will still rise to the top; it's just that the overall percentages may fall. But if you think about it, a "real world" customer satisfaction rate of 95-98% is pretty damn good. It's only in the twisted world of eBay feedback where it currently sucks. >>

I think this is a great point, and is most likely what is going to happen.

There will be more hassle and angst involved for the seller, since we'll have to deal with feedback extorting bidders and also outright crooks (crooks who we could have possibly blocked based on their low feedback, but can no longer do so because now there won't be any negative feedback bidders, and thus no true feedback on which we can determine if we want them to bid).

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 7:56AM

Are you deliberately missing the point? Removing the seller's ability to neg a buyer makes it far easier for a bad buyer to jack the seller around.

You'll have to define "jack the seller around". Maybe I'm not devious enough to think of ways to screw with a Seller.

1. Don't pay ... Seller claims a NPB, Buyer gets NARU'd after a few of these
2. Pull any of the known Buyer scams (claim item not received, etc)
3. Hold feedback hostage for a cash settlement

How are these any different from now, when the Seller can neg?

ebaytrader · February 8, 2008 7:59AM

<< If you're worried about buyer negs affecting you when you sell, get a separate account for buying only.

I'm a buyer only, and I couldn't care about my feedback (it's 100%, though).

I just don't see what the big fuss is about the inability for Sellers to leave feedback for Buyers. In my mind, the buyer's feedback is irrelevant. Either Buyer pays, or he doesn't. Nothing happens until the Buyer pays. And, if the Buyer doesn't pay, the Buyer gets NARU's for NPB's - regardless of the Buyer's feedback.

The Seller feedback is much more important. Does the Seller bother to ship the item once paid? Now, that's important. >>

As a seller, I suspect that I'll be getting a ton of FB extortion attempts weekly. I used to give FB as soon as the buyer paid and would spend at least 1 hour a week dealing with FB extortion. That ended when I stopped leaving FB first.

Also, there is a percentage of the population that is on the outside of the norm. They'll neg you now just because they can do it with impunity. After the 1st year, I think a great FB score will be in the 95% range. If feebay thinks that will bolster buyers confidence about purchasing, they're just kidding themselves. This will be one of the unintended consequences of the policy change.

Regarding buyers that don't pay, eBay doesn't do jack until the 3rd strike. Feebay allows people to pay whenever the hell they please. They want to generate that FVF. I just rec'd a payment from someone that didn't even mail the payment until 10 days after they won their last auction. They never used checkout and I had no idea if they were even alive until I rec'd the check. Sellers have a right to be forewarned about these buyers.

When it comes to Power Seller discounts based on DSR, I laugh a little when when I get bounced notification emails and the buyers gives a low star rating because of seller's poor communication. Feebay should ping every users email address and, if the email is returned as undeliverable, suspend their account until it's corrected. Also, I think that most buyers don't have a clue what it costs to ship items and lower your star rating accordingly.

Russ · February 8, 2008 8:01AM

<< Are you deliberately missing the point? Removing the seller's ability to neg a buyer makes it far easier for a bad buyer to jack the seller around.

You'll have to define "jack the seller around". Maybe I'm not devious enough to think of ways to screw with a Seller.

1. Don't pay ... Seller claims a NPB, Buyer gets NARU'd after a few of these
2. Pull any of the known Buyer scams (claim item not received, etc)
3. Hold feedback hostage for a cash settlement

How are these any different from now, when the Seller can neg? >>

Because the buyer will be able to do so without fear of repercussion.

Russ, NCNE

VicThrust · February 8, 2008 8:03AM

I had someone bidding on a gold coin - I happened to check his feedback and it was 15 total with six negs and his feedback turned to private. I nuked his bid and blocked him to save myself some headaches. My ability to make that decision going forward will be impaired by the new feedback system.

SeaEagleCoins · February 8, 2008 8:06AM

My take on this new FB policy is...

...it is a very "wise(?)" move on the part of ebay...because the FB is tied to the "supposed" FVF discounts...

...with this new system, I believe very few sellers will be able to maintain the FB ratings needed to "earn" the discounts...

...all it will take is an occasional PITA in a bad mood to undo even the best sellers...

...only time will tell how this all will really turn out...

I intend to list a few items this weekend to end before the fees go up...then I might cautiously list a few more items before the FB change in May...then I will sit back and watch for a while...

For those who will confidently continue listing after the FB change...I wish you the best of luck...and I will wait to hear the results...

Will we have "horror story" threads here on the forum? (More than we have now

..) ...or will it be business as usual for the sellers...

...only time will tell...

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 8:07AM

Because the buyer will be able to do so without fear of repercussion.

If you can point me to one Seller (just one) that has not gone through with a completed auction because of the Buyer's feedback, I might be convinced. Otherwise, I maintain that the Buyer's feedback is irrelevant.

nencoin · February 8, 2008 8:10AM

PBRat, we often cancel bids from bidders with a poor feedback rating. We don't always have the time to check out our current high bidders, but when we do, if we see someone with a bunch of deserved negatives, then we cancel their bid immediately (no questions asked).

WorldTypeSet · February 8, 2008 8:11AM

PBRat, we often cancel bids from bidders with a poor feedback rating. We don't always have the time to check out our current high bidders, but when we do, if we see someone with a bunch of deserved negatives, then we cancel their bid immediately (no questions asked).

Fair enough.

nencoin · February 8, 2008 8:12AM

I guess eBay needs to update their new feedback policy. This is copied and pasted from their Upcoming Changes to Feedback page:

<< Ensuring seller protection and performance

Will sellers still have access to Buyer Requirements to manage their buyers?

Yes. The Buyer requirements tool enables sellers to prevent or limit the buyers from bidding or buying their items if certain criteria have not been met. The criteria are:
buyer is registered in a country where seller doesn't ship to
buyer has negative FB score
buyer has a recent Unpaid item strike
buyer does not have a PayPal account >>

I've bolded the section they need to change. I guess we can no longer limit buyers with a negative FB score, since buyers will no longer be able to receive negative feedback!

ziggy29 · February 8, 2008 8:15AM

<< Yes. The Buyer requirements tool enables sellers to prevent or limit the buyers from bidding or buying their items if certain criteria have not been met. The criteria are:
buyer is registered in a country where seller doesn't ship to
buyer has negative FB score
buyer has a recent Unpaid item strike
buyer does not have a PayPal account/q]

I've bolded the section they need to change. I guess we can no longer limit buyer's with a negative FB score, since buyer's will no longer be able to receive negative feedback! >>

Maybe they need to change the "negative FB score" piece to something like "buyer leaves negative feedback for the seller more than 5% of the time" (or whatever threshold turns out to be appropriate). Under the new system, a "problem buyer" can likely be identified by the percentage of negatives they leave behind. If that percentage is too high, they probably either want to extort more than they bargained for or else they simply have unreasonable expectations.

nencoin · February 8, 2008 8:18AM

<< Maybe they need to change the "negative FB score" piece to something like "buyer leaves negative feedback for the seller more than 5% of the time" (or whatever threshold turns out to be appropriate). Under the new system, a "problem buyer" can likely be identified by the percentage of negatives they leave behind. If that percentage is too high, they probably either want to extort more than they bargained for or else they simply have unreasonable expectations. >>

At first thought, I think this is a good idea. I can't imagine wanting anyone bidding on my coins that has that many issues with sellers.

johnsim03 · February 8, 2008 8:18AM

<< On the whole feedback thing - as a seller I am not happy but if you listen to Ebay their new member enrollment growth rates are slowing. This new feedback policy serves the buyer not the seller. The new rates serveres their shareholders.

My approach on feedback will be "The Positive Negative". If a buyer gives me trouble I WILL leave a positive but my comment will be apropriately negative. >>

This is an important point - some of these "negative positives" will be entertaining, to say the least. Probably won't see many of the "buyer is
liar, and probably a terrorist" types of feedback, but, if certain buzzwords are used, the purpose will be served.

A simple one might be:

"Sellers beware-I blocked this terrible buyer - you should too."

Would that stand as positive feedback?!

It will be interesting to see how sellers cope with this change...

John

JohnMaben · February 8, 2008 8:21AM

I think alot of ebayers who give a negative, then get one cry retaliation when it isn't. If a seller feels he was given the negative WRONGLY, he has every right to give a negative back for that reason alone. This is not retaliation, it is showing the buyer that he was , at least in the sellers opinion, unreasonable in leaving the negative. If a seller was clearly in the wrong or negligent and leaves a neg for the buyer, yes that is retaliation. But how many of these are clearcut? 9 out of 10 times it is buyers simply being unreasonable, expecting too much, or not giving the seller a chance to right an honest mistake. Buyers should not be exempt from negative feedback. It's absurd.

EBAY's new policy - The customer (in this case the buyer) is always right

Comments

Leave a Comment