|
|
Ask Griff - August 2009
This topic is locked - replies are not allowed.
|
|
Ask Griff - August 2009
Jul 31, 2009 05:29 PM
|
Hello all,
Welcome to the Ask Griff Discussion Board thread for August 2009. My name is Jim Griffith (known to most as Griff). I have been an eBay buyer, seller and employee since 1996. You can learn more about me on my About Me page.
Please read the following information carefully before posting to this thread.
Ask Griff Thread Posting Tips & Guidelines
- If you have a question about an eBay feature or policy, feel free to post it to this current month's Ask Griff thread.
- It can take a few days for me to post responses to questions. If your question or issue requires timely assistance, you should direct it to Customer Support. (Click the Contact Us link). You can also email your questions, account issues, etc to me at griff@ebay.com (using your regular email service, not My Messages). Include the phrase: "Ask Griff Thread Question" in the subject line and provide the User ID you wish to associate with the question as a "by" line. (For the thread, no anonymous posts please).
- Please only post here using an active eBay selling ID as opposed to a dedicated posting ID (an eBay account and ID used solely for posting on eBay Discussion Boards). Posts using what is clearly a posting ID will be deleted without response.
- Limit your post to no more than three specific, non rhetorical questions on a single topic that is directly related to selling on eBay. Use separate posts for separate topics and their questions, limited to three posts per day. When in doubt, summarize.
- I answer posts in groups roughly 50 (give or take 10). Depending on the volume of posts, I may close the thread temporarily after about 50 or so posts to provide time for me to compile answers. If the thread is locked, I may open it for a new session (unlock the thread) after I have posted a response post. If posting volume is slow, I will keep the thread open between responses.
- A response post will contain all of the previous questions and my responses in one, single (and long!) post. Once a response post is uploaded, I will delete all of the original posts (to save space and avoid duplication). If a post is not deleted, it is because I am waiting on more information and input before creating a response.
- If your posted question is not included in a response post, then your post:
- was answered in a recently-posted group of responses, or....
- was primarily editorial, or commentary in nature or a conversation between two posters, or...
- contained only rhetorical questions, or...
- requires more input from an eBay team or employee prior to a response, or...
- violated the general eBay Discussion Forum Rules and Policies. (For example, posts asking about deleted posts will, per the discussion forum general posting rules, be deleted without response.)
A Short Ask Griff Thread FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
Q: Whose idea was the Ask Griff thread?
A: The idea was suggested by sellers here last January (2009) after I made a few posts on a Seller Central thread. I liked the idea and agreed to oblige with a regular, on-going Seller Central thread which I named Ask Griff. The project has evolved since then but the purpose of Ask Griff remains the same.
Q: What is the purpose of Ask Griff?
A: As I see it, the purpose is four-fold. 1. To provide answers to your questions about eBay, eBay policy, features, etc; 2. To give some perspective on the"why" of changes and decisions we make to eBay; 3. To offer advice, tips and information - when requested - for navigating and it is hoped, succeeding on eBay as a seller; and 4. To lend an ear or give direct support via email to those sellers who require it.
Q: I have a suggestion. Can I post it here?
A: Yes, you may post constructive suggestions here. I forward suggestions to the appropriate person(s) or teams for their consideration. I compile comments, complaints and concerns into a summary which I send to my colleagues across and up the eBay Marketplace organization on a regular basis. Input from this thread also informs all recommendations and advice I provide to all my colleagues throughout eBay when advocating on the behalf of small sellers.
Q: Do other employees, (i.e, upper management) read Ask Griff?
A: Yes, many of them they do.
Q: When will the next round of site, policy and feature changes be announced?
A: We just released the Fall Seller Updates for 2009. The next release of updates will occur in early 2010.
Q: What will be announced in early 2010? Come on Griff, give us a hint!
A: Sorry, no can do. 
Helpful Links
The following are links to information on eBay regarding topics currently of interest to sellers. Please take a moment to read through them. Also, you may find an answer to your question there. In addition, read through previous Ask Griff threads. Your question may have been previously asked and answered there.
- Seller Update July 2009
- Seller Update July 2009 Details
- At a Glance Chart of Requirements for new eBay Top Rated Seller and PowerSeller Programs
- How DSRs are Calculated for TRS Eligibility
- Seller Checklist for 2009 Changes and Updates.
- Upcoming First Five Listings Free Pricing
Fee Schedule and FAQ
- Picture Manager Retirement (date changed to January 2010)
- New Item Page Information (Note: All the seller-facing links like Relist, Sell Similar, Mark as Shipped, Revise, etc will be added back to the closed and current views of New Item Page in early July. In addition, Store Category list will also be added back to the New Item page around the same time.)
- News for Sellers in Books, Movies & DVDs, Music and Video Games
- eBay Bucks Beta Program Terms and FAQ.
- Seller Update April 2009 Annoucement, Overview, Details, and FAQ. In addition, you might want to read through the April 14th Discussion Forums with common Seller News questions and answers about all topics announced on April 14th including Resolution and Tracking.
- Feedback Removal and Withdrawal Policy
- Detailed Seller Ratings. (aka, DSRs)
- To report a problem with a buyer (feedback abuse, feedback extortion, Unpaid Item, etc), go to the Resolving Problems hub page. This is the page where you can file an Unpaid Item Report, a report of possible Feedback Abuse or Extortion, or any other problem you as a seller, need to report to eBay.
Regards,
Griff
Jim Griffith
______________
eBay Inc
Griff
_________________
eBay
|
|
|
|
(2 of 4)
Re: Ask Griff - August 2009
Aug 10, 2009 06:18 PM
|
Posted by marsull_inla on Jul 31, 2009 6:48 PM
Automated Payment Reminders
Hi Griff,
Can you please ask the powers that be to allow for sellers to opt out of the automatic payment reminders at 48 and 96 hours? Who does this benefit? Sellers who don't have enough time or staff to send reminders themselves? Why help sellers with poor customer service?
I am very flexible as far as payments if the buyers contact me and we make other arrangements (later pay, later ship). Also there are many sellers who have repeat customers over several weeks who will have to explain to buyers they are not hounding them.
I feel this auto email will hurt sellers because buyers will NOT know the message is coming from ebay. Down goes the communication star.
We received quite a bit of email and there were quite a few posts on this topic (It was also a popular topic during the last Town Hall. I have some updates from the team working on this project:
1. We will not be including the 96 hr reminder.
2. For Fixed Price items, this project does not involve sending an additional message to what is already in place for buyers (also known as the “You’ve Won email..”) Instead, we are delaying the message to 24 hrs, and only sending if the buyer hasn’t paid.
3. As we finalize the text for these reminder messages, we will share examples (probably on the Seller Central board. Stay tuned.)
4. We will explore your suggestion of providing the option for sellers to opt-out of these reminder messages sent by eBay.
Posted by ranchonan on Jul 31, 2009 6:50 PM
Search Visibility Tool (aka: Best Match Tool )
From "Title Optimizer [does not equal]? Best Match Tool"
Griff sez:The Title Optimizer tool is definitely not the Best Match tool that has been mentioned in various places around the web. Stay tuned to next week’s announcements for more.
Was this Best Match tool announced Monday with the new Seller Release?
Yes. It is called The Search Visibility Tool.
Posted by manny_velasco on Jul 31, 2009 7:26 PM
New Seller Standards
I fear (and that fear has excellent basis) that the new DSR system will kill off many sellers, and be a significant determent to the eBay market place.
I strongly disagree. The new way of using DSRs to rate sellers will actual benefit the marketplace.
Please tell us when the April 2010 model is run against the current numbers for sellers, how many sellers will be removed from Ebay. This number has surely be calculated or can easily be done. The number I fear is large.
First, sellers won’t necessarily be “removed.” The possible consequences for dropping below the minimum standards are listed here. They state:
What happens to sellers who do not meet the new standard?
Sellers will be lowered in search standing. They may be offered coaching and training on selling best practices. In more serious situations, other consequences may also apply including limits to further selling, loss of PowerSeller status and discounts, and in some cases account suspension.
As for the number of sellers whose percentage of 1 or 2 ratings as of this date are high enough to risk possible suspension if the seller standards were in place today is not a significant number (and no, I cannot release it). More importantly, there are seven months between now and April 10th providing ample time to any seller who is at risk of sanctions to increase their performance metrics.
The current system of Feedback, Positive Neutral, Negative is rendered meaningless. A person can have 100% feedback in the past 3 months on 99 transactions, and have three DSRs of 1 or 2, and the seller will be banned from Ebay. Why even have standard feedback if that is not the measure. Why have a metric if you don't intend on using it.
A seller with 100% feedback in the prior 3 months on 99 transactions with three DSRs or 1 or 2 would absolutely not be “banned from eBay.” Nowhere in the posted consequences does it say this. In fact, the language for the consequences is intentionally non specific with regards to absolutes in order to leave ample room for reps to judge each case on its merits, including for example, the past history of the seller.
As for traditional eBay feedback, except for percentage positive requirements, feedback has always been primarily intended for use by buyers and sellers and not so much by eBay to measure a seller or buyer. Feedback is public, and not anonymous. It also provides space for a text statement from the person leaving the feedback. DSRs however, are anonymous (and shall remain so). DSRs do provide metrics which are used by eBay to measure a seller’s performance.
A single buyer of multiple items can leave multiple 1 or 2 DSRs and they will all be counted against the seller. This is confirmed. And its a major shift away from the current model for standard feedback.
Feedback abuse is not being successfully caught by eBay. Per BBurke "Today 2 million FB are left a day, weekly we identify less than 100 cases of buyer FB abuse a week" So out of 14 Million feedbacks only 100 are caught, this does not imply the instances are low, it shows the method of identification is lacking.
Your statement assumes that there are substantially more than 100 cases per week of actual feedback abuse. That is an incorrect assumption.
Under the new system a competitor can use a friends eBay login, but several items, and leave negative DSRs. Space it out over a couple of weeks and 5 such purchases can remove a Seller from eBay. The competitor resells the product and its practically cost free to remove a competitor. This will not be caught by Ebay, you only see 7 feedback violations for every 1 million left.
Your statement assumes that we would not catch such activity or that we wouldn’t take action. That would be an incorrect assumption. Any seller who abuses the feedback forum in an attempt to disadvantage a competitor will find said activity to be counterproductive to their business (in the extreme).
5. A seller sells 100 items per month. For every 100 customers 1 customer dislikes something, and leaves a all 1s on the DSRs. On the third month a buyer buys two items and leaves 1s on the DSRs. This seller is banned from eBay. Under some interpretations of the new rules he is Banned from Ebay on the 4th month when he gets 5 dings.
Again, an incorrect assumption (“under some interpretations…”) Here are the actual minimum standards:
New minimum standard for all sellers
What are the new standards for all eBay sellers?
Beginning in October, the current 4.3 minimum average DSR requirement will be replaced with new requirements based on a seller's incidence of DSR 1s and 2s on transactions with U.S. buyers:
- In October, all eBay sellers will be required to have 1s or 2s for item as described on no more than 3.00% of transactions, and on a maximum of 4.00% of transactions for communication, 4.00% for shipping time, and 4.00% for shipping and handling charges.
To ensure sellers—especially lower-volume sellers—are not penalized as the result of just one low rating, it will take at least four instances of low DSRs (1s or 2s) in one DSR for consequences to be applied.
- In April 2010, the standards will be stricter. All eBay sellers will be required to have 1s or 2s for item as described on no more than 1.00% of transactions, and no more than 2.00% of transactions for communication, 2.00% for on shipping time, and 2.00% on shipping and handling charges.
To ensure sellers—especially lower-volume sellers—are not penalized as the result of just one low rating, it will take at least four instances of low DSRs (1s or 2s) in one DSR for this requirement to apply.
Now let’s look again at the consequences:
What happens to sellers who do not meet the new standard?
Sellers will be lowered in search standing. They may be offered coaching and training on selling best practices. In more serious situations, other consequences may also apply including limits to further selling, loss of PowerSeller status and discounts, and in some cases account suspension.
So in the scenario you posited, the seller might be subject to lowered search standing or even limits (actual human beings will be making these calls by the way). But no one is stating an automatic “banning” for reaching these thresholds.
6. Instead of having confidence in Ebay sellers believe they are at the whims of a couple of customers, or 1 customer buying multiple items....just 1% on DSRs and your are Banned from Ebay April 2010.
Again, not true. See above. A seller in this scenario would not be “banned from eBay.”
So sellers are nervous, and basically in fear. This is a rational fear.
Perhaps some sellers are, many without reason (and some with good reason). However, I can tell you with confidence that not all sellers are “in fear.” Response to date regarding the minimum standards from sellers has been very positive. Keep in mind that there are tens of thousands of sellers who will qualify for Top Rated Seller immediately, the majority of these sellers are small volume sellers as well.
7. Sellers are already using best practices. When Seller concerns are raised in Townhalls the Corporate responses are always....do this or that, and RAISE those scores. I think it is a better assumption to conclude that Sellers are already using best practices.
Most sellers are using the very best business practices (evidenced by their exceptional DSR ratings, lack of 1’s and 2’s and high feedback.) Many of them will automatically qualify for Top Rated Seller when the program goes live in October. And many of these sellers who employ the very best customer service practices and are expressing concerns are doing so based on “what if” and not actual past or recent transaction experiences . Still, the real deciders regarding a seller’s business practices are that seller’s customers, (not the seller). If a seller is seeing more than one 1 or 2 in their DSRs, their customers are trying to tell them something (for example, the seller’s shipping costs are “unreasonable” or “very unreasonable” or their item description is “inaccurate” or “very inaccurate.” For those sellers, it would be a very smart business strategy to take this input and change their current business practices to lower the rate of 1 or 2 DSRs.
Which takes us back to item 1. How many sellers will have their DSRs over the 1% description or 2% other DSRs. Lets look at today. How many sellers will be banned. Don't assume the manually by person by specific evaluation of the sellers merit. Yes we understand that some cases can be overridden by eBay employees. But lets just look at the raw metrics and the results of what they would be on the current population of sellers. How many fall under the bar. BBurke said. " wish you wouldn’t worry, but I don’t think I will be able to stop you. " Why not worry? 4 all 1s on the DSR on a seller of 300 items in 3 months get the Seller banned under the rules as written for April 2010.
No it does not. See above.
And what is worse in what has been laid out, in the spirit of partnership of Ebay with its sellers. Is that our feedback our suggestion and comments about the changes was never considered. I was only solicited after the decisions were made. So in the Townhall talking about this all, our feedback was meaningless. The ship had left the dock.
And this is one statement with which I take strong exception. Seller feedback on ratings has most definitely resulted in this change and all suggestions were considered. We have been hearing from sellers for nearly over a year now that using a DSR threshold of 4.1 as a minimum seller standard was unfair (“4 is good, how can we be restricted with an average of 4?”). We took this input, and evaluated the rating system to determine a better way to use them to measure seller performance standards, one that would make more sense to sellers. Since the incidence of a 1 or 2 rating clearly indicates a sub par experience, we are focusing on these as the determinate factors for seller standards. You personally may disagree with the outcome of this change but this change was most definitely done with seller input in mind.
DSRs and the way they will be used will Fundamentally change Ebay for Sellers. A 99.5% feedback score is meaningless, the number does no good. Feedback, the basis of Ebays original success is gone. DSR take their place. And each DSR by itself can ban a Seller from Ebay.
No it cannot not. A single low DSR will not result in a “ban” of a seller.
Sellers don't like the shipping price, you get a 1 or a 2, its what they agreed to before they bought it. Just 4 of those buyers and the seller of 300 times per 90 days is Banned.
There is a misconception among some that a buyer forfeits the right to rate a buyer once they agree to purchase. This is not true. A buyer may agree to pay a certain amount for shipping but that doesn’t mean that they don’t have an opinion on that shipping cost. I was witness to just such a case last week. The seller charged four times what it should cost to ship a particular item. The buyer wanted it, paid for the shipping and realized upon receipt that the item should have cost a lot less to ship. They left a positive (they liked the item) and a 1 for shipping costs. This was the correct thing for the buyer to do. And the seller in this case would be wise to review their shipping costs and make changes or risk more 1’s in the future.
So how many sellers will be gone? How will lack of competitors boost up Ebay prices, how will the higher prices effect page views. I don't know either.
I cannot release numbers regarding how many sellers the minimum standards might impact today (it’s a hypothetical question anyway. The standards go into effect in April 2010, not now. ) I also won’t speculate about how many sellers will not meet the standards as of April 10th. Definitely, some will not and out of those “some,” there’s a group who may be restricted from eBay or suspended. But not all will be subject to the more severe consequences. Each case will be judged on its merits. Some will be lowered in Search. Some might be required to receive coaching. Some might experience no impact.
Posted by sammyjewels on Jul 31, 2009 7:31 PM
Using Help Pages
Is there any way I can get a complete printout of all Ebay's rules and regs? This would save a tremendous amount of time flitting around Ebay when I have a question about something.
No there is not, at least not easily in a single format. You would have to visit and print out each of the policy and rules pages on the Help pages. However, using the Help pages online is easier than thumbing through a stack of print outs of the same pages. Just click the Help link on the top of any eBay page and enter a search term that matches the topic for which you seek a policy or rules or advice page. For example, type “feedback” for a list of links to all pages related to Feedback, including feedback removal, abuse, etc.
Posted by ozzie3 on Jul 31, 2009 8:49 PM
July Thread
well, what happened to the July thread? Can find the questions or the answers!
As I posted last month regarding the new Ask Griff thread procedure: I leave the current month and the previous month’s threads on the top of Seller Central (the July Thread is still there. I just checked.) All earlier threads have been moved to a new area called Ask Griff located under the eBay News and Information Boards on the Discussion Forums Hub Page.
Posted by theferretsden on Jul 31, 2009 10:48 PM
Shipping Insurance
Regarding the new Shipping Insurance policy.
As a Buyer I’m miffed I don’t have the option anymore to insure or not insure incase of breakage/loss.
As a Seller I’m miffed I basically have to insure all my auctions, even cheap ones, “just in case” a buyer claims breakage/loss. And I have to eat the cost or pass it on to buyers, who won’t like the new higher shipping rates.
It’s a lose – lose for both parties, without “optional” insurance
.
1)Why doesn’t ebay insure all transactions and handle/pay the insurance claims? Buyers will have more confidence in ebay if they knew ebay had their back and insured their purchases.
We already offer Buyer Protection:
http://pages.ebay.com/paypal/buyer/protection.html
2)What happens if something breaks and the seller didn’t insure it? Will Paypal (Buyer Protection) pay the claim using Paypal’s $ or are they going to take it from the Sellers account?
It depends. For instances where an item is damaged in transit and the damage is not due to poor packing, PayPal (or eBay Resolutions) could make a determination of “no fault” with no consequences for the seller (and eBay would refund the buyer out of our pocket). In other instances, depending upon the particular circumstances, the seller may be required to refund the amount to the buyer.
3) If we’re basically being forced to insure all auctions (making $ for ebay & USPS), will ebay get reduced insurance rates for us from USPS?
It is unlikely eBay will do this. Most carriers do offer discounted pricing on all their products to sellers who have business accounts. However, there are some important facts about shipping insurance that all sellers should consider:
Shipping insurance does not protect the buyer, it protects the seller. Buyers are already protected by eBay. Many buyers, when presented with an option to purchase insurance, are confused since they usually know that eBay already offers them “insurance” in Buyer Protection. They wonder why they have to “pay” for the same protection eBay offers them for free. This is why we are removing the line item for including optional or required insurance.
All sellers should of course, protect their businesses by reducing their risk of loss, including the shipment of goods to buyers. And on eBay, sellers may pass some or all of these costs to the buyer by folding them into handling or shipping costs (where it can be done reasonably). There are also other insurance options besides –purchasing “one off” insurance from the carrier for each sent parcel. Many sellers purchase insurance or policies that cover their shipments for a single periodic cost. (There are several companies that offer this service online). With single cost policy insurance, a seller can either include the cost as an operating expense or, determine an effective and reasonable way of recouping the single cost from buyers. For example, by using the seller’s most recent sales data to estimate a yearly transaction number and dividing the insurance premium costs for that year by the number of transactions, and then adding that amount as handling or folding it into the shipping costs.
Posted by kashmier on Jul 31, 2009 11:20 PM
Zoom
Hi
I was hoping you could tell me how to get the zoom feature working. I see auctions with it working fine but mine only allow to enlarge and the photos look kinda sad. Is there somewhere that I have to enable this or is it only for pro stores?
Currently, there is no dynamic zoom feature for eBay photos. There could be in the future. On some listings, you may see a zoom feature but that would be a third party product (where the images are hosted by a third party that offers this feature).
Posted by teddibubbles on Jul 31, 2009 11:22 PM
Editing Live Listings
Hello. one thing I wish they would let you edit you're auctions. I chose a option . post the auction. and then see it opted to a defalt.not what I chose.. and won't let you fix the auction. like time ending. or days to run. even when you just posted. no one is perfect.
and if you try to edit the > new listed< auction in the discription. the page jumps to some other part. when you are trying to just add to the discrptions begining. not alowing you to add that new text
I understand ebay wants the fees.of these mistake auctions. but I do hate not being able to control my auction.
Once there is a bid on a listing, it cannot be edited. This has always been the case on eBay. This is because the bidder(s) on the item made a bid based on the information that was there on the page prior to making a bid. Allowing for edits would not be fair to these bidders.
All sellers should carefully review their listing information and selected options prior to submission (this is why we provide a Review Listing page.
Posted by toneee on Aug 1, 2009 7:00 AM
Item Specifics
Griff ... Please explain something for me
eBay is recommending seller's use Item Specifics whenever the option exists but any purpose they serve, beyond giving a potential bidder/buyer relevant information, has never been fully defined
Does the search algorithm include item specifics in the standard title search?
Yes, they do and they can be very important for determining relevancy. If a buyer is searching for “new tomtom GPS”, the search will return items that have those words in the title and those that have the “new” item specific set by the seller, even if that item does not have the word “new” in the title. Since title space is limited to 55 characters, it may be that the seller needs all that space for keywords that are more important than “new.” Using item specifics provides a way to use the word “new” without having to put it in the item title.
[If so, do custom item specifics count or is it just the eBay defaults?
They count the same as eBay defaults.
Posted by ac-ebiz on Aug 1, 2009 7:57 AM
All Flat Rate Priority Boxes
In a July post, just before the thread was locked, you posted this:
All Four Flat Rate Priority Boxes Now Available In eBay Label Printing
Will they EVER list all 4 USPS Priority flat rate boxes , as of now and since I started useing it it only list's the Medium FR box..
The PayPal Print Postage tool will include all the available Flat Rate Boxes in the future. However, the eBay Print Postage tool does include all four Flat Rate Priority boxes. Here’s how:
Go to My eBay > Account > Site Preferences > Selling Preferences > Shipping Preferences and check the box for “Pay for shipping and print US Postal Service Labels on eBay.” Then click Apply. The next time you elect to print postage for an item in Selling or Selling Manager, you will be directed through the eBay flow (as opposed to the PayPal flow). You can toggle back and forth between the two by checking and unchecking this box.
I do not have a box for “Pay for shipping and print US Postal Service Labels on eBay.” What's up with that?
I talked to the Shipping team folks today and they told me that not all sellers are included yet in the eBay label printing feature. They reminded me that as announced in April, they would be ramping up the program in increments and adding more sellers over time (with a goal of accessiblity to all sellers by the holidays).
Posted by abrestaurantsupply on Aug 1, 2009 9:12 AM
Insuring Shipped eBay Items
Hi Griff,
For years now I have been self-insuring my packages and buying Insurance thru a third party for purchases over $50. I have not had any complaints or problems so far, but have been wondering if it might be effecting my "Shipping Cost" star.
I currently use the option "Insurance Included" in my Return Policy and put the line "I will replace or refund any item lost or damaged in shipment" in all my listings.
Since eBay announced it's new Insurance policy, I have been reading several discussions and was wondering what You and eBay think the "Best Practice" would be for sellers who "Self-Insure"? The options in the SYI form don't seem to offer a suitable choice.
The first thing to understand is that insuring shipped parcels protects you, the business owner or seller, against the risk of loss or damage in transit. It does not protect the buyer. However, that doesn’t mean a seller shouldn’t take steps to lower their risk to liability. I provided a short summary of best practices in my response above to theferretsden.
Posted by di25535 on Aug 1, 2009 10:21 AM
Lowering The Chance of Low DSRs
Griff, I too am concerned about the target eBay has painted on seller's backs with the Top Seller criteria. As a seller with 100% feedback, high DSR's and a dedication to providing top quality and service to my customers, I'd appreciate hearing how eBay expects us to avoid 1's and 2's on our DSRs.
What specific actions can we as sellers take to guarantee that we are not badly rated?
Simple. Provide the best service you can for your customers. Keep their needs and satisfaction at the top of your job list. Make sure all your communications with your buyers is professional and polite (regardless of the situation). This is what more than a hundred thousand of sellers in the US alone have been doing with great success.
1/2 of 1% is a very high bar. That's as it should be, but I doubt many sellers will find it doable, when buyers learn that they can now destroy a seller with a 1 or 2 rating...something that they can't currently do.
Like I said, there are over a hundred thousand sellers in the US as of today, who have had no problem reaching that bar. Since the inception of DSRs, I have witnessed countless cases of supposed buyer abuse of ratings and contrary to the belief of some, the vast majority of buyers are not out to “destroy” sellers. Yes, there are edge cases of abuse and when we find them, we take action. However, when examined carefully, there is always a reason why a buyer leaves the ratings they do. Buyers rate a seller on the basis of the service they receive from that seller, including sometimes, the perception of that service. This is why it is so important that sellers put their buyer’s interests above all others. It’s not difficult to do and it should be automatic. For hundred thousand plus sellers in the US alone who do employ that simple business strategy, it works. It can work for any seller.
I can currently overcome the impact of a buyer that chooses to leave bad ratings by the sheer number of buyers that are happy and leave 4's or 5's. Any buyer that contacts me with a problem gets my immediate, best efforts at resolution.
BUT Buyers that simply leave low ratings leave sellers defenseless - we have no clue what went wrong... and with consistent 4's & 5's from the huge majority of buyers, how do we correct a problem when we don't know what it is???
So - to repeat my question
What specific actions can we as sellers take to guarantee that we are not badly rated?
Follow the lead of the one hundred thousand plus US sellers and provide the best customer service you can.
Posted by di25535 on Aug 1, 2009 10:35 AM
Payment Reminder Emails.
Sorry, I forgot to add this question to my last post.
If sellers receive a negative feedback or low DSR specifically because of the 48-hour non-payment dunning emails, will eBay remove them??
They are not “dunning emails.” They are reminders that the buyer has won the item. We will be publishing the text of these emails in the next week. Once sellers can see what the emails actually say, I believe they will be less anxious about them.
If not, will eBay provide an opt out for sellers that offer payment terms beyond 48 hours???
We are considering the suggestion proffered for an opt out feature.
Posted by career-closet-fashion on Aug 1, 2009 10:58 AM
Media Shipping
I listened intently to the Town Hall. I heard one seller ask....I sell CD's, I have a shipping cap, I ship media mail and I constantly get bad stars in shipping time. Ebay's answer....offer a faster method and that should take care of the problem & go on to explain the difference in your listing , they didn't even let the caller converse further, he was cut off, why is that? Is it because he would likely have had a comeback of.......... I already offer a faster method and the buyer always chooses the lowest cost then still dings my stars.........or I can't offer the faster shipping because eBay will force me to eat the additional cost with their caps.
I listened to the entire Town Hall recording. The caller was not “cut off.” When a caller to Town Hall has asked their question, we thank them for their call, keep them on the line (usually we turn down their line volume) and answer their question. We also keep the caller on in case we need to ask them for more details. If we do, we bring up their volume and ask them for more details.
A buyer will of course 99% of the time choose the cheapest method, just because you offer the faster method changes nothing, they choose the cheapest and ding sellers for the slower option they chose, if they chose the cheapest slowest and it in fact arrived in the estimated time, why are they still allowed to ding stars! That is a bad move on eBays part. I constantly hear the same old thing from eBay, feedback and stars are a matter of buyer opinion and we will not interfere with that opinion. What ever happened to the sellers opinion? A seller can often times even back up that opinion with facts, such as shipping date, delivery date, etc yet their opinion(facts) don't mean squat?
Do you have a rate of 1 or 2 DSRs for shipping costs and time high enough to prevent your from qualifying for Top Rated Seller? Then you have time to adjust your shipping practices to lower your rate of 1 or 2 DSRs. If not, then you need not worry.
eBay stars have created a monster and until they see that, no seller is safe from harm to his business.
The fact that there are over one hundred thousand sellers to date who qualify for Top Rated Seller contradicts your statement. In fact, DSRs have actually created a more trusted marketplace for buyers who are coming back to search and shop on eBay by providing an incentive for sellers to improve and increase the levels of quality for their customer service.
Posted by toneee on Aug 1, 2009 11:06 AM
Printing Labels on eBay
Griff ...
Went to prepare an International shipment today to Australia using a USPS Small FRB
The regular link took me to PayPal (which we know is useless for the SFRB) so I went to the help pages for the sequence needed to use the new eBay Shipping function (which we all know is supposed to support the SFRB option)
So far so good ...
After reading where to access the function I went there & clicked to use eBay Shipping ... and it took me to a page that told me to log in to PayPal to make the label
So my first question is simple ... What did I do wrong?
I am not sure you did anything wrong. If the box was available to you for changing from PayPal to eBay shipping, it may have been a technical issue. Feel free to send me details and screen shots, I will forward them to the shipping team for review.
The second one may not be as easy ...Why isn't the eBay Shipping option the default choice?
PayPal label printing was the default prior to the introduction of the feature (default by dint of being the only option). Changing that option to a new default would possibly confuse sellers who may not have been aware of the eBay option who might prefer to maintain the previous default.
Posted by lurch-deeann on Aug 1, 2009 12:44 PM
Minimum Standards for Sellers
Here's a question I tried to get a response to on the "Special Announcement Board," and never did. Here it is again for you to provide clarification, since they did not:
Minimum standards for all sellers:
"To ensure lower volume sellers are not penalized as a result of one or two transactions, it will take at least four instances of 1s or 2s before consequences based on low DSRs are enforced."
So interestingly, as this reads, what happened to me in June (four 1's left by a guy who was mad about a UPI being filed when he didn't pay and didn't respond to me), would potentially allow me to be suspended under minimum standards (at least 4 instances, of which I had four, since the guy left 1's on each category - unless "instances" means "transactions" - but it doesn't say "transactions").
No it would not result in your suspension, not if you opt in for autofile UPI. In the new UPI flow, if a seller opts for autofile, the non paying buyer cannot leave feedback once the UPI process automatically starts and would not be able to file if the dispute closes with either no response or a strike issued against the buyer.
The "to ensure lower volume sellers are not penalized as a result of one or two transactions" doesn't jive with "it will take at least four instances..." I had four instances from one transaction. Because the guy was mad that I filed a UPI.
Does "instances" really mean transactions? Or is it truly individual instances? If it's "transactions," will someone update the wording?
And if it is truly instances, the wording: "to ensure lower volume sellers are not penalized as a result of one or two transactions" seriously needs to be rethought, because it's not really correct, as there is not a safety net against one person.
It will be instances, as stated in the policy. However, in cases where a seller has dropped below the minimum standards, a human being will make the call as to the appropriate action. In a case where a seller has no previous record of low DSRs and receives more than the maximum allowed, a single buyer leaving four or even more 1’s or 2’s for a series of multiple purchases will not jeopardize that seller’s account status (cause suspension).
Additionally, keep in mind that I had about 15 transactions in June. That makes the percent of low DSRs somewhere around 7%. Definitely suspendable (or rather facing the ominous, yet vague, "consequences").
Not definitely suspendable but most likely actionable. However, the situation would be measured on its merits. Here again are the seller standards for April and the possible consequences (which are not at all vague or ominous):
New minimum standard for all sellers
What are the new standards for all eBay sellers?
Beginning in October, the current 4.3 minimum average DSR requirement will be replaced with new requirements based on a seller's incidence of DSR 1s and 2s on transactions with U.S. buyers:
- In October, all eBay sellers will be required to have 1s or 2s for item as described on no more than 3.00% of transactions, and on a maximum of 4.00% of transactions for communication, 4.00% for shipping time, and 4.00% for shipping and handling charges.
To ensure sellers—especially lower-volume sellers—are not penalized as the result of just one low rating, it will take at least four instances of low DSRs (1s or 2s) in one DSR for consequences to be applied.
- In April 2010, the standards will be stricter. All eBay sellers will be required to have 1s or 2s for item as described on no more than 1.00% of transactions, and no more than 2.00% of transactions for communication, 2.00% for on shipping time, and 2.00% on shipping and handling charges.
To ensure sellers—especially lower-volume sellers—are not penalized as the result of just one low rating, it will take at least four instances of low DSRs (1s or 2s) in one DSR for this requirement to apply.
Now let’s look again at the consequences:
What happens to sellers who do not meet the new standard?
Sellers will be lowered in search standing. They may be offered coaching and training on selling best practices. In more serious situations, other consequences may also apply including limits to further selling, loss of PowerSeller status and discounts, and in some cases account suspension.
The only absolute consequence is lowered search standing. Otherwise, a seller may be offered coaching or in more serious situations, other consequences mayapply.
Next topic: Top-Rated Sellers: I have a few comments and inquiries about this.
First off, Raised vs Standard Search. When originally implemented, "Raised" search was meant to reward sellers who provide good customer service (at least in theory and what was conveyed). Now, that's no longer the case. You need to (in theory) provide good customer service AND sell $3K worth of stuff on the site in a year. Why is this? Specifically, I am referring to the $3K part of this, so please don't avoid the issue by explaining why good customer service should be rewarded. The issue is the required sales level that will be implemented to attain "Raised" search.
Seller who do not qualify for Top Rated Seller will have a "neutral" search ranking. Keep in mind that relevance is still the most important factor but, all other things equal where two sellers are offering the same item, in a Best Match list of results, a Top Rated Seller will rank higher than a non Top Rated Seller.
Secondly, Top Rated Seller. I have been on the site for 14 years. I have recently received one neg from someone who was mad that I filed a UPI when they didn't pay after 10 days and wouldn't let me know what was going on. They seemed MIA. That's the *only* neg I have received in 14 years (or rather, one month shy). That's 1 neg in 167 months. Why is this kind of thing (positive impact on the site, and in my case, combined with longevity) never rewarded in a way that is publicly visible? Since I don't generate $3K a year, why is that I will soon be able to be viewed as a "Lesser-Rated Seller?" Why does eBay insist on continuing to send negative messages like this to people who not only have done nothing wrong, but have (and continue to) generally contribute to the site in a positive way by providing interesting stuff for auction/sale and good customer service?
We announced a change to the UPI process and negative feedback. If a seller opts for the auto file UPI process, their UPI buyers will not be able to leave negative feedback while the dispute is open. If the dispute is ruled in favor of the seller, the buyer will not be able to leave feedback after the dispute closes. This is a substantial change to the policy and would effectively prevent the scenario you describe above.
The Top Rated Seller program opens recognition and rewards to tens of thousands of small sellers who provide excellent customer service but who previously did not qualify for these rewards because of their small volume of sales. By lowering the entry level for PowerSeller from $12,000 to $3,000 a year with a volume requirement of only 100 transactions a year for qualification, we are shifting the focus from gross sales revenue to quality. I cannot think of a better way to recognize and show pride in all our quality sellers, including those that are low volume. As to the reason for requiring a volume threshold at all, we need to have a certain level of transactions to provide trusted data from ratings. After several months of examination and consideration, we settled on 100 transactions per year and $3,000 GMV. Yes, there are good sellers whose current selling activity does not meet these requirements. However, when broken down into monthly requirements, it nets out to 8.3 completed transactions and a GMV of $250 month. This is a reasonable threshold for the vast majority of sellers and for those that are not currently meeting these levels (and who sell regularly on the site), it should not be that difficult to attain.
"Old Business" - follow-up from last month:
My final bit on this. You indicated in July that the physical nature of the item was not the primary (and possibly, only) factor in determining search and browse from miscategorization (under the Pep pin example I gave). Accordingly, I think you may be in error in stating that the vintage golf record was technically in violation:
Pep pin - your comment: "The pin could be considered a prize or charm, a cereal premium or a pinback (I suppose) and thus would be absolutely acceptable in any of the three categories"
Golf record: vintage golf instruction LP, featuring vintage golf celebs and with great vintage golf graphics, under Sporting Goods/Golf/Vintage/Other
The golf record dealt with golf (so is under Sporting Goods/Golf), it is vintage (thus, "vintage") and a record is something other than balls or clubs and shafts. Keep in mind, one category up from vintage has categories for things such as novelties as well as books and videos, thus the "sporting goods" category allows for more than just traditional "sporting equipment." Since physical nature is not the primary ruling factor, and given that the item does in fact fit where it was placed, I do not think this was "technically a violation."
You are correct and I stand corrected. If the item was listed in Sporting Goods/Golf/Vintage/Other and it was indeed “vintage,” it would not be a violation, even if it were a recording.
BTW: I used to use two categories a lot. This waned to just about never as eBay began to unilaterally emphasize search over browse, and has shown no interest in at least equally pushing the importance of browsing, at least for certain types of items. If eBay would kick in on this effort and support it on their end, I'd likely go back to using two categories on cross-over items.
The effectiveness of the list-in-two-categories strategy is not dependant upon buyer browsing. In fact, most buyers do not browse categories, they keyword search, (especially in categories where the amount of inventory is high) and usually they limit their search to specific categories.
Posted by abrestaurantsupply on Aug 1, 2009 12:54 PM
Using the Combined Shipping Discount Feature
This whole problem with Shipping caps and dings on the Shipping stars brings up another problem I have.
Many of my items weigh 13oz or less so I give my buyers the option of First Class Mail or Priority Mail, When someone buys more than one item and the total weight is over 13oz, eBay takes the cost of First Class Mail and multiplies it by the number of items purchased and shows this outrageous shipping charge (sometimes as much as 26.88) during Checkout, when the Priority Mail option (which is 8.60) is hidden and not displayed during the Checkout process.
I am constantly giving refunds for excess shipping. I have sold nearly 5,000 items so far this year and only 3 buyers have been able to find and pay for Priority Mail during Checkout.
Please let the appropriate people know about this problem and I would appreciate it if you could start advocating to get this corrected. It is causing problems with many of my buyers.
You may be able to solve this issue yourself using the Combined Shipping Discounts feature. Go to My eBay > Account > Selling Preferences > Shipping Preferences and click the first “edit” link. Then follow the links and instructions for creating custom rules for Flat Rate Shipping and Calculated Shipping. (read through the steps carefully as there are many options.)
Posted by ozzie3 on Aug 1, 2009 1:35 PM
Media Shipping Question
OK Griff, is it accurate to say that if you list in Media, and you don't use a flat rate shipping, that you can charge what ever you wish, if it is your actual shipping cost?
No that is not accurate. Here is the text from the Maximum Shipping and Handling Costs page on eBay.
Limits on shipping and handling charges for select categories
Starting in October, limits on shipping and handling charges* will be in effect for select categories. These maximums apply to the first flat-rate shipping service within or into the U.S. Sellers are required to offer at least one shipping option within the maximum and may also offer other options above the maximums for expedited or international shipping. Sellers can still use the shipping calculator to charge actual costs at or below the maximums or if their listings are not standard -- e.g., if you're selling an unusual large/ or heavy item, or a bundle-you can also use the shipping calculator to charge actual costs. See FAQs for more details.
This means that a seller in media has to offer at least one shipping option where the cost falls at or below the maximum allowed. Calculated shipping as an only option would only be allowed for a standard media item if the maximum calculated cost shown to all US buyers is at or below the maximum.
Who, outside of the seller, can tell whether the shipping charge is the actual cost to the seller?
Moot point with a media item. See above.
As , not in the Media catergory, but in the electronics category, if I use PakMail , they charge a $20 pick up fee, plus a packaging and shipping charge.
There are no Shipping caps in the electronics category but if you are a seller who uses a third party service and you need to pass those costs on to the buyer, then specify them in the description.
My last transaction with them they wanted $250 to pick up , package, and ship, insured , a $100 audio amplifier!
It must have been some big, heavy audio amp and it must have been going quite a distance. I would probably not have utilized their services otherwise.
When I was shipping acrylic dragons, the packer shipper wanted $75 to package them, due to their fragileness.
That seems expensive. I would not have used the packer shipper for these items.
How can sellers compensate for these costs when selling on eBay?
First, the seller should locate and use the least expensive methods of packing and shipping appropriate for the item. For example, I pack and ship most everything I sell on eBay with the exception of extremely fragile, extremely heavy or extremely large items of value which I will give to the third party for packing and shipping. For the costs of these items shipped domestically, I absorb the shipping as a cost against the profit. For international shipping, I pass a reasonable portion of the cost on as shipping to the buyer. This is what I do. This works for me. It might not work for others. Every seller needs to find a shipping strategy that works for their business based on the items they sell and ship.
Would you suggest that they be sold pickup only, with the proviso that the buyer can have an agent for the carrier pickup the goods, and the buyer pay the agent directly , rather than the seller, and have the agent pay the seller, with the buyer paying with a credit card , or PayPal?
No I would not suggest local pickup only. Except for eBay Motors, I don’t recommend using eBay auction or fixed price format listings for local pickup only. There is a freight option in the Shipping Calculator for oversized or heavy items. I would recommend using that option. Or depending on the type of item, a local marketplace like Kajiji.
What effect would that have on buyer protection, and seller protection?
There would be no payment record on eBay so the buyer would not be protected by eBay or PayPal and the seller would not be covered by Seller Protection, even if the buyer uses PayPal to pay the shipper and the shipper used PayPal to pay the seller since in that case, the payment is not a part of the official transaction (it takes place outside of the transaction).
Posted by deltamaster on Aug 1, 2009 2:54 PM
Minimum Standards
In reference to the new Low DSR standards:
Recently one of our sellers agreed to cancel 27 transactions with a buyer because the buyer wanted out. The seller filed MUTUAL cancellation in order to not serve the seller up with UID strike since the seller agreed to cancel the transactions for the buyer.
The seller was later "Rewarded" with 27 negative feedback which no one at eBay seems to wish to address. I think this whole situation is preposterous BUT the point I wish to address is:
QUESTION 1: Under the new system would those 27 negs each count as individual instances?
Yes they would. (and I would advise caution on the part of anyone reaching a conclusion about any single feedback case or story. There is usually another side of the story.)
QUESTION 2: If the buyer left "1s or 2s" for any or all of those 27 negs would each of those count as separate instances?
Yes they would.
QUESTION 3: Would those separate instances then cause the seller to be sanctioned?
Depends on the details of the case. We intentionally did not spell out absolute consequences so that each case could be judged in context of the entire case and the seller and buyer’s past history with eBay. So I cannot say hypothetically what the sanction might be.
QUESTION 4: Since when is it acceptable for a buyer to not (refuse to) pay for an item (or group of items), the seller cut them a break and mutual cancel and then the buyer gets to DESTROY the seller in one fell swoop?
It would depend on the circumstances of the specific case but one buyer will not be able to “destroy” a seller.
QUESTION 5: Can anyone at eBay see that this is a huge loophole whereby someone (even a competitor) could quickly and easily shut down an otherwise excellent seller very easily and quickly?
If it can be proven that a buyer has used feedback with the deliberate intention to harm a competing seller’s business, we will take immediate and definitive action against that buyer. It would be foolish in the extreme for any seller to attempt this type of feedback abuse.
QUESTION 6: If that is the case then has anyone at eBay realized this and implemented any plan whereby a seller has some sort of process to appeal these decisions?
Please read the consequences paragraph that I posted from the Selling Standards page. Each case where a seller has dropped significantly below the minimum seller standards will be reviewed by a human being.
I also want to take a moment to thank you and whoever the powers that be for correcting the end of auction listing page. I see that the option to pay for items directly from the EOA listing page has returned.
Our pleasure.
Posted by digisbeads on Aug 1, 2009 2:57 PM
Changes to DSRs
With regard to the upcoming changes: What is the point of 3, 4, or 5 in DSRs? I mean, its great when repeat buyers leave feedback and 5 stars... but basically did eBay not just render 3 to 5 stars useless? You could have 297 transactions with 5 stars across the board and stellar feedback.... but three 1 or 2 and no negative feedback and be forced to pay higher fees, have lower standing in searches, or be sanctioned, suspended, or booted off eBay?
Basically eBay will really only be considering 1 or 2% of a seller's transactions to determine worthiness of a seller, if those ratings are 1 or 2 DSRs. The majority of transactions, the remaining 98%, will not be considered, even if they are stellar ratings? So, 98% of a seller's customers are deeply satisfied, yet their voice and perspective means nothing against a mere 2%? Especially when veracity of the 2% can never be challenged? All other aspects of the world, other than the eBay world, would consider a 98% an A+. rating. Can you see where this might be a bit perplexing to sellers?
What is the point of a negative feedback as of when the changes come into effect? I am sure eBay has the stats on the number of buyers who left a negative and also left 1's or 2's on DSRs. Basically, a seller can get nailed twice now. Yes, they always could, but now there are serious implications from a buyer, who may be unreasonable. I am not suggesting that all negatives are unjustified and as a buyer, I know a few sellers could stand to improve or leave. I understand the concept, but eBay now has swung a very wide brush that will have decent and honorable sellers penalized with it. Where is the balance in all this?
Most buyers who leave negative feedback do leave low DSRs. However, not all buyers who leave low DSRs also leave negative feedback. This is because these buyers may be happy with some aspects of the transaction and not happy with a particular aspect. And, many of these buyers are hesitant to make their dissatisfaction known publicly as they fear consequences from the seller for example, in repeated emails from the seller, etc. DSRs are anonymous for this very reason.
As for the balance, decent and honorable sellers who provide consistent positive buyer experiences will be rewarded, not penalized. In fact, up to now, many of the best sellers have been left out of recognition and rewards due to their low volume of sales. Top Rated Seller will provide an opportunity for these sellers to receive rewards in the way of ranking and discounts, that were previously unavailable to them.
With the system as it stands, and as it gets more stringent, will the veracity of the claims made by a buyer be considered before a seller is restricted or penalized? What recourse is there going to be for sellers with an established track record of being great performers, who get their business nailed by a couple of unreasonable buyers?
We have never made “veracity” a qualification for DSRs and we will not be doing so. If a seller drops out of eligibility, except for reported cases of deliberate abuse (for example, by a competing seller acting as a buyer, there will be no review. For cases where a seller drops below the minimum standards, each case will be judged on its own merits and will consider the past history of the seller.
I understand the need for some stringent guidelines I really do. I have encountered some rare sellers who have no business selling anything. Is there going to be at the very least, a review of a seller's established track record of decent and positive selling, before a three month time frame can eliminate or sanction them? As a customer (buyer) of eBay's product, I ask that there be one. If one has been established, please let us know.
When a seller’s stats drop below the minimum standard level, a human being will review the seller’s account prior to taking any action. We are not going to eliminate any seller automatically or without review of their past history.
What does "Sellers with excessively high rates of 1s and 2s or other low performance measures may be restricted from selling" mean? Specifically, what defines excessively high for eBay?
We intentionally do not set a definition of “excessively high” in order to allow room for consideration of every seller’s past history prior to considering any action or sanction to take. If you are a seller with an excellent past history and the drop in stats is due to recent or unusual circumstances, those will be taken into consideration. But you can be sure that those “rare sellers” that you have encountered who provided a low level of service would most likely be the seller’s who should be worried about their future on eBay, not otherwise good sellers who might have an occasional aberration in their ratings.
Is there going to be a way to allow buyers to retract their low DSRs? Or before they hit the final submit button, eBay have a few prompts or steps explaining the consequences before the stars are forever tacked against a seller? The reason I ask, is that I still have buyers who ask me if a "1" means the best or worst? Ouch... I was thankful they asked before they left the rating though.
Although a buyer that has never left a DSR rating might be unsure what a 1 or 5 means, I do not buy the claim made by some buyers that they are leaving incorrect DSRs (1’s or 2’s) because they are “unsure of what a 1 means” post leaving feedback or even during leaving feedback. Why? Take a look at what buyers actually see when they attempt to leave a 1 DSR:
Given the above, it would be next to impossible for any buyer to not see what each of the ratings mean or “confuse” a 1 with a 5.
Except for feedback revision, (which allows for the retraction of ratings and feedback), we are not going to allow for DSR revision.
Buyers are not obliged to know the consequences a low DSR might have for a seller (although many buyers might know this). Some buyers may care that a lower DSR might result in consequences for a seller, but buyers are not, as a group, required or obliged to care about the consequences a low rating might have a on a seller. I know this might sound harsh and that some sellers will completely disagree but it is the unavoidable reality of commerce. So I have to set realistic expectations here: Although we are always considering ways to improve the rating process for sellers and buyers, consideration will not include providing buyers with a list of consequences that might apply to a seller receiving a low DSR.
Thanks for answering the questions.
Posted by danscomics on Aug 1, 2009 9:50 PM
Opting Out of the Top Rated Seller Badge?
Dear Griff,
Please advise: Power Sellers can, currently, opt out of having the Power Seller emblem displayed on their listings; will the new, replacement category of "Top Sellers" (or whatever), also, have this option. If not, why not? Also, I second the notion that the eBays 2-day reminder to winning bidders is a bad (bad, bad) idea. This will lead to confusion & resentment among & from buyers.
Also, I realize all the changes are about putting more money in eBay's (and/or PayPal's) pocket - fine with me (you own it, you can do anything you please); but would it not be a reasonable request that when doing so you folks could make at least one of the changes actually work to promote sales on the site (so Sellers could have a little taste, as well)?
Regards
The changes are meant to improve and increase buying and selling on eBay. Our business (eBay’s business) doesn’t improve or increase unless eBay sellers’ businesses improve and increase. Buyers don’t pay fees directly to eBay. Buyers buy from you and then you pay eBay selling fees from those sales. If you don’t have sales, you don’t pay fees. If you don’t pay fees… well, I think you get the picture.
With the above in mind, it should be clear that every change we make is made with the goal of improving and increasing buying and selling on the site so that you can make more sales.
By increasing buyer trust in eBay’s marketplace, we are bringing more buyers on to the site. Not “will be bringing,” are bringing. We are already seeing the positive results of the improvements made to eBay’s marketplace since last August (when we announced the first round of major site changes). Top Rated Sellers will promote our best sellers (where “best” is defined not as “biggest sellers” but as “best customer service providers”). By featuring the top rated sellers on eBay we will bring even more trust to eBay. More trust brings more buyers. More buyers spend more money. More money spent benefits sellers. Hope this makes sense.
Posted by manny_velasco on Aug 1, 2009 10:19 PM
DSRs
A few more observations about the new Changes.
bburke says "We will count all DSRs - even all 5's. Can an individual buyer harm a seller, yes? But the example above - a buyer buys 30-40 items from a seller and leaves low DSRs for all would be such a blatant example of abuse that even we could identify it "
1.A single buyer can buy multiple items ( not to be confused with multiple quantity of the same item) from a Seller and leave DSR on each item. For each item all the DSR will count. So if a Buyer buys three items and leaves all 1s on all 4 DSR categories, they all count. A single buyer buying 1 or 2 items will not flag any checks for abuse, and will not be able to be lobbied to be removed with success.
Correct. A buyer leaving low DSRs for each transaction is not, by itself, abuse.
2.Upon the changes in October 2009. All Powersellers will NOT have RAISED Search Ratings. This applies to ALL levels of Powersellers Titanium, Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze...All powerseller will not long Qualify for raised search. The ONLY category that will have RAISED Search ratings will be TOP SELLERS. Regardless of Powerseller or not being a Powerseller Topsellers will get Raised Search. If a Top seller is also a Powerseller they will continue to have Raised Search. But being a Powerseller will have no effect or cause in any way for your search ratings to be raised.
This is not a change. It is in fact, the current status. We have never provided PowerSellers with raised search ranking on the sole basis of their PowerSeller status. Raised status has always been provided to all sellers who provide the best customer service, PowerSeller or not.
3. In the language used by Ebay communications the term "across all 4 DSRs" does not mean the Average of all 4 as many would take it, it means that each individual DSR must reach the requested level. If 3 of the 4 are above requirements and one is down, the Seller is effected the same way as if all 4 did no reach the requirements.
The At-a-Glance-Chart of Requirements clearly sets out the requirements for Top Rated Seller, PowerSeller and Minimum Standards.
3.It is the Negative DSR (ie 1s and 2s) percentage OR quantity of 2. Not both. If all DSRs have Negatives below the count of 2, no matter how many total, then there is no violation. Once the count is over 2, then the Percentage Counts.
For Minimum Standards, it is only percentage. (The count of 2 pertains to eligibility for Top Rated Seller). Here is the section of the Chart for Minimum Requirements for all sellers:
The header for the second column is “current,” the third column is for “October, 2009,” the fourth column is for “April, 2101.”
4.There have been Ebay employees answering questions in the July 27th forum, who are indicating that it will take a number of 4 or more before any ac
Griff
_________________
eBay
|
|
|
|
(3 of 4)
Re: Ask Griff - August 2009
Sep 10, 2009 01:14 PM
|
Hello all,
I do apologize for the long delay in finishing this month’s posts. I have been busier than I imagined I would be this August and haven’t had enough time to devote to this thread.
I’ve posted a big batch of responses below and will continue to work on the balance over the weekend. I will open a new September thread when these are complete.
Regards,
Griff
Posted by ranchonan on Aug 11, 2009 7:27 AM
Fixed Price, Previous Sales & Impressions
Can you offer some insight about the 'too many impressions - not enough sales' criteria for search placement?
1)Would it be better NOT to use the GTC option if we have a slow-selling item?
Possibly. It would depend on the item and the price and the needs of the seller. Nearly every type of item can benefit from a Fixed Price Good Until Cancelled format. If an item is slow selling because demand is very narrow, for example, a part that is very specialized, then the least expensive option for continuous exposure would be FB-GTC.
2) Does the Impressions Counter reset every time the GTC auto-relists or does it keep building impressions until we end it?
The impressions carry over as do the sales, with each auto relist. They only disappear if the seller allows the listing to expire (close + ~sixty days)
3) Should we now forget keyword strategy and concentrate on Item Specifics? I understand from your previous answers that they are BOTH used in search. Does one carry more weight? Does BM first look in Item Specifics and then pull relevant titles? Or titles first and then specifics?
They are both equally important. I would say the item specifics are more important for recalling the item into the list of results, and Titles more important for Best Match sort – that means a seller needs both to 1) appear in search and 2) have good placement in search.
4) During the buyer 'drill-down' process using the sidebar item specifics list: Every time the page reloads and our item is displayed in the list, does it count against our "impressions"?
No.
Posted by lehman-parker on Aug 11, 2009 7:44 AM
PowerSeller and Top Rated Seller Evaluation Periods
Griff, I have a question about the new powerseller requirements. I know the new process is that smaller sellers will be evaluated once a year, but I'm not clear on what that evaluation will impact.
Does it impact powerseller status? Top-rated status? Seller discounts? Or...?
If you don't meet the powerseller and top-rated requirements based on sales volume of GMV on 10/1/09, will you have to wait a full year before you can qualify?
Thanks...
Pat
Once fully in place, for all sellers, PowerSeller evaluation will take place on the 18th of each month while eBay Top Rated Seller evaluation will happen on the 20th of every month. The current Seller Dashboard will provide the dates of the most recent evaluation for sellers for meeting PowerSeller criteria. When the new Dashboard is live (end of Sept) it will also provide the date that eBay Top Rated Seller evaluation was made.
However, at the beginning of the program, we will start by inviting the new lower volume PowerSellers ($3k GMV and 100 transactions annually), staggering the invites through the first few weeks of October in order to not overwhelm Customer Support with 80k new Bronze PowerSellers all at once. These new PowerSellers who meet Top Rated Seller qualifications, will achieve eBay Top Rated Seller status upon the Oct 20th evaluation (as eTRS status first requires PS status.) This will be a manual process for us until April 2010 when the PowerSeller GMV criteria changes for ALL PowerSellers, not just those who qualify for eTRS as well.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 12, 2009 5:14 PM
International Sales and DSRs
Hi Griff,
After a brief hiatus, I'm back to asking questions and requesting clarification.
#1 International DSRs are now removed from the calculations. YES, I'm aware that many sellers were ecstatic about this change, but for people like myself and others who specialized in overseas sales, this now means that 50-75% of my customers' opinions are automatically removed. So any evaluations made based on my domestic sales will not be a true reflection of my business practices.
Since you claim the thresholds for suspension are "fluid," will cases like mine--where a high percentage of transactions are not being included--be eligible for a special review?
No, there will be no exceptions or special reviews. Only US sales will count towards either status. However, starting in April, for sellers who list and sell from international sites, those sales made will count towards inclusion in those sites (UK and DE) PowerSeller and Top Rated Seller programs.
#2 International transactions, DSRs and PS sales requirements.
There is some confusion about how international transactions are used to figure sales requirements, specifically the 100 sales per year and the $3000 annual requirement. I know the DSRs will not be included (regardless of how large a percentage of a seller's business) but will they also exclude any $ that would ordinarily count towards that $3000 minimum for TRS?
There is an interview with Todd Lutwak on eBay Ink that seems to indicate that international transactions are being removed entirely from any calculations--as if they don't exist. Can you verify if that is true or not, or is it only the DSRs that are invalidated? Do sellers lose the $ amount (towards that $3000 minimum) as well?
Todd is correct: Only domestic transactions – number of transactions and GMV from those transactions – will count towards qualifications in the US PowerSeller and Top Rated Seller program. DSRs earned by sales made outside of the US will not count towards US PowerSeller or Top Rated Seller status qualification. However, starting in April, items listed and sold on the UK and DE sites will qualify the US seller for those sites’ PowerSeller and Top Rated Seller programs.
Posted by puttingg on Aug 12, 2009 5:17 PM
Help Building an eBay Store
Griff I need help finding someone to help me build some good looking listings for my store. I have been selling for 6 years 100% and I am trying to build a store and build some nice looking listings with my logo and such. I need help (cheap help LOL) Where can I go to find someone. Thanks
I can suggestion two options: eBay Education Specialists and sellers offering web site and Store design services to eBay sellers on eBay in the Specialty Services category.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 12, 2009 5:26 PM
Top Rated Seller Suggestion
I realize that you (and eBay) feel that the volume threshold for Top Rated Seller status is easily achievable for most sellers. That you likely set those thresholds to avoid rewarding sellers such as myself that have--due to various policy and pricing changes--been forced to use eBay as one channel of many.
But I think you are doing a grave disservice to sellers who are currently struggling on this site. The Top Rated Seller status is a wonderful idea. I think it is awesome that you are lowering the volume requirements for Powerseller status.
But I think that using ANY volume requirements for determining raised search status is inherently bad. People like myself who currently enjoy raised search status because of high DSRs and ZERO instances of 1s or 2s ( I can honestly say I've only received 1 poor rating since the introduction of the DSRs) will be losing that status. It will be IMPOSSIBLE for low volume or low ASP sellers to receive any recognition for high customer service performance because they either don't sell enough units OR those units are low ASP. A bookseller whose average selling price is $3 per item will have to sell 1000 items to meet that $3000/year minimum.
I will reiterate my request to--at the very least--put that volume requirement on that Top Rated Seller information in the listings.
I honestly think that eBay is going in the wrong direction on this one. Top Rated Seller should be just that. Those with the top ratings. Use volume minimums for discounts if you must, but raised search status should surface the BEST sellers, regardless of volume.
Thank you for repeating your request. I have offered it to the rest of the team for their consideration. I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your request.
Posted by nalasgma on Aug 12, 2009 6:39 PM
Teacher Edition Textbook Policy Question
A recent thread on the Booksellers Board included an email regarding a change in position by Ebay about the sale of teacher's editions. The email rec'd by the seller included this statement
Effective July 9, teacher's editions are no longer being prohibited on
eBay.
could you confirm if there has been a change in Ebay's position or not.
I have been unable to locate any official statement to that effect on the site.
The policy that previously prohibited the sale of “teacher edition” textbooks has been changed (as of July 9th, 2009). Sellers may now list said editions on eBay. Text specifying the prohibition has been removed from the Help pages. No other announcement of this change will be forthcoming.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 12, 2009 7:34 PM
Change in Shipping “Caps” Policy
Griff, can you PLEASE clear this issue up?
Rich is saying there's been some miscommunication. That using the shipping calculator for exact shipping (even if it's Priority) is perfectly fine for standard items.
Is it or isn't it? I'm SO frustrated.
I'm equally frustrated by the fact that sometime between when the original announcement and now eBay and the shipping team has changed the rule book, changed the policy wording, and apparently failed to communicate those changes to those of us who actually read the policies when they're announced.
Yes or No: Seller uses calculator to ship a standard book via Priority Mail. Since Priority Mail's base rate is ABOVE the cap, is this allowed?
I realize it seems like we've been over and over this issue, but everyone from eBay that I speak with has a different answer.
Can sellers listing in shipping cap categories use the calculator to ship via any method they choose even if the item is standard size, shape and weight?
Sellers may now use the shipping calculator for standard media items in order to charge actual shipping costs. See the initial post in my last response post. Official announcement of the change is forthcoming in the next few days.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 12, 2009 7:52 PM
DSRs from Repeat Purchases
I'd also like to express my concern about the repeat purchases issue and the low DSR measures.
Can you explain eBay's reasoning on this issue?
A buyer purchases 4 different items. The shipment is squished beyond recognition in the mail. The buyer leaves 4 1s on all 4 stars.
vs.
4 DIFFERENT buyers receive damaged merchandise in the mail and leave 1s in all 4 DSR categories.
It seems to me that the first seller could have had a fluke. A single incident, a single transaction, that turned out badly. The second seller would be more likely to have a customer service/packaging issue.
Yet under the new system, the first seller will be considered just as "bad" as the second.
I'm just not understanding the logic. It seems like this change would encourage sellers to avoid multiple item orders because the buyer would be able to wreak significant damage to a seller with what is, essentially, a single transaction.
A repeat buyer to me is someone who RETURNS to purchase from a seller, not someone who buys multiple items in a single transaction.
Why didn't eBay simply count each TRANSACTION rather than each item?
We are. If a buyer purchases a quantity of items from a multi quantity fixed price listing, they can leave one and only one feedback and one and only one set of ratings for the purchases. A purchase of multiple quanitity from a single listing is considered a single transation.
If the buyer purchases separate items from the buyer (from separate listings), each is considered a separate transaction and each transaction would have its own feedback and ratings.
To the buyer, the separate transactions were just that: separate transactions. It could be possible that all of them were satisfactory, some of them were satisfactory and some were dissatisfactory or all were dissatisfactory. It could also be that they were mailed in one parcel. Doesn't matter. They are all considered separate transactions and as such, are eligible for a feedback and 4 ratings a piece.
I think though, that I get the gist of your question (Why allow mutliple transactions from the same seller to count?) If we disallowed DSRs from multiple purchases from the same seller, it would mean disallowing any DSR, regardless of score (we would not skew the balance by disallowing only low DSRs.) That would mean that for a buyer who made 10 purchases in 10 separate transactions from you and left all 5’s for all 10 transactions, only one would count towards your qualifications instead of all 10.
Posted by marsull_inla on Aug 13, 2009 8:16 AM
New Item Page Issue
Hi Griff,
I discovered a glitch that is pretty disturbing and has a very damaging impact on my profits.
I received a question about auction 260458989464 that concerned information that was shown and described in the auction. After some back and forth I realized the potential bidder was NOT seeing my entire description. This person was using Firefox. They wrote on 8/11-
You asked what I was seeing. I was seeing your listing, but it ENDED without much of any description, and definitely without the thumbnails. Just one image (above in the left corner). (user whistler99)
I then contacted a previous winner who had left me a soft positive suspecting the same thing had happened to them. Auction 360171413421 ran from July 17 to 27. This person did not tell me what browser they were using. They replied-
8/11 hi, no i did not see all that you have described, i only had one pic, and it looked lavendar, not wine, but i had read your description and new that actual color, and the description was very short & sweet, not to much explaination, i hope this helps, (user frugalflamingo)
SO apparently some members are seeing only partial descriptions/images.
I don't know how long this has been happening and I can't imagine how many people decided not to bid because ebay was not displaying my full auction info.
I am just livid at the thought of bids I was denied because of an ebay glitch.
Will ebay reimburse me for the fees on these auctions?
I asked our product team to review this and they determined there was nothing wrong on the Item Page end. In addition, we have seen zero change in the data for page views or bids/purchases from the time before the 100% roll out of the new View Item page to date.
If a seller has embedded images from another hosting service within their description, theses may cause a delay (not a block) in the expansion of the description area while the photos load. I have seen this happen, usually while using FireFox (and not IE). During this delay in expansion, a scroll bar is visible on the right hand side of the description area. From my own experience at home, at work and last week on the road, any delay (when there is one) is never more than 2 seconds and the page expands quickly after that. I did forward my observation and your post back to the team for their information.
We do not reimburse fees for claims such as those you have provided.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 13, 2009 9:36 AM
PowerSeller, Top Rated Seller and Raised Search Status
Hi Griff,
I have another question about your answer to a previous poster.
Upon the changes in October 2009. All Powersellers will NOT have RAISED Search Ratings. This applies to ALL levels of Powersellers Titanium, Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze...All powerseller will not long Qualify for raised search. The ONLY category that will have RAISED Search ratings will be TOP SELLERS. Regardless of Powerseller or not being a Powerseller Topsellers will get Raised Search. If a Top seller is also a Powerseller they will continue to have Raised Search. But being a Powerseller will have no effect or cause in any way for your search ratings to be raised.
[You}
This is not a change. It is in fact, the current status. We have never provided PowerSellers with raised search ranking on the sole basis of their PowerSeller status. Raised status has always been provided to all sellers who provide the best customer service, PowerSeller or not.
I must be completely wrong, then. My understanding was that Top Rated Sellers were being ADDED to the powerseller program. So it would be more accurate to say that ONLY powersellers who were also Top Rated Sellers were eligible for raised search status.
This IS a change, as it limits raised search status to TRS--who are by definition POWERSELLERS.
From the announcement:
Starting in October, a new eBay top-rated seller status will be added to the PowerSeller program to recognize and reward sellers providing great buyer experiences based on the new way to look at DSRs (very few 1s and 2s). eBay Top-rated sellers will receive the highest PowerSeller Final Value Fee discounts (20%), increased visibility in search results for Fixed Price listings, exclusive access to purchase Featured First and a prominent Top-rated seller badge on item pages. The Top-rated seller badge will be tested in search results pages this summer. The current PowerSeller icon will no longer be displayed on buyer-facing pages including item pages.
#
All sellers with 100 or more annual transactions and at least $3,000 annual sales who meet the requirements for Top-rated seller status will be invited into the PowerSeller program and can start receiving Top-rated seller benefits in October.
Won't all Top Rated Sellers in October BE powersellers by default?
And isn't that a change from the current method of receiving raised search status?
Unless I'm misreading the announcement, it seems to me that ONLY powersellers are eligible for raised search status--and only a portion of the powersellers who qualify for TRS.
Sellers who are NOT powersellers (per the new TRS eligibility) will not be able to qualify for raised status--something they are able to do now.
That is correct. My response was to the poster's inference that PowerSeller status is now (pre-launch) and has been a factor in Best Match specifically with regards to automatic Raised search status. It is not now and has never been. It will be after the launch of the program. Sorry if I wasn’t clear on this.
But keep in mind that the Best Match algorithm is not based on one single factor (i.e., Best Match) and Raised Status in overall search does not mean “always on top.” Where all else is equal between two listings, the one offered by a Top Rated Seller will gain ranking advantage. But item price, shipping cost and relevance are equally as important in the algorithm. Top Rated Seller status will not trump all other factors unless they are equal.
Posted by akjtemplates_previou.. on Aug 13, 2009 9:48 AM
Insurance Indication in Listings
I sell most of my items with free shipping/handling. Insurance has always been an option for the buyer. I do purchase tracking and print my labels through Ebay/Paypal. As purchasing insurance would drive the price of my items higher than my competition, I do not plan to insure my sold items in September when the insurance option change takes place. Will it be against Ebay rules if I add to my descriptions, saying I do not insure my packages but that buyers will be receiving a tracking number for delivery tracking? I think any buyer that wants insurance will contact me, and we can address the insurance issue then.
I checked and that wording would not be allowed. Keep in mind that eBay buyers are all “insured” per Buyer Protection. Any indication regarding insurance contradicts eBay Buyer Protection’s stated purpose: to provide free coverage for all items on eBay up to the payment price. I would advise sellers to simply leave or remove any reference to insurance and, if a buyer contacts you to inquire, give them the page to the eBay Buyer Protection policy and explain that their purchase is fully covered by eBay.
Posted by chopsueysisters on Aug 13, 2009 10:41 AM
Excluding Shipping to the US
from the July '09 announcement Link
Exclude ship-to Locations
Will I be able to utilize the exclude USA country even though I am in the US and list in the us. There are times when I'm gone that I have things running and need to do that. Tell me please
No, USA as an excludable country will not be an option.
Also for users of the SYI form, I do not see the controls where I can utilize this exclusion list. Can you post screen shots of where I'm supposed to be to do this.
When the larger list is provided in early October, it will appear on the SYI form in the same place the current “additional ship-to locations” checkbox list is displayed for International Shipping. To view the list if it is not viewable currently in your SYI form, you need to select an International Shipping option other than “no international shipping.” If the option for Intenational Shipping is not displaying, you need to add it as an option by clicking the “add/remove options” link on the top of the section for “Give buyers shipping details” section. In the pop up window, check the box for “show international services and options.”
Posted by lurch-deeann on Aug 13, 2009 1:23 PM
Miscellaneous Questions
Follow-ups:
No it would not result in your suspension, not if you opt in for autofile UPI. In the new UPI flow, if a seller opts for autofile, the non paying buyer cannot leave feedback once the UPI process automatically starts and would not be able to file if the dispute closes with either no response or a strike issued against the buyer.
Further, you stated: We announced a change to the UPI process and negative feedback. If a seller opts for the auto file UPI process, their UPI buyers will not be able to leave negative feedback while the dispute is open. If the dispute is ruled in favor of the seller, the buyer will not be able to leave feedback after the dispute closes. This is a substantial change to the policy and would effectively prevent the scenario you describe above.
First off, why can't I file a UPI manually and receive the same protection (not hypothetical - I don't understand this, and it is the first I've heard of it)?
You may be able to in the future. For now, in this first change to UPI, the feedback block is in place for autofile UPI only.
Secondly, this would NOT have helped in the scenario described. Not at all. He did pay after the UPI was filed. But was mad that it was filed. So no, in a situation like this, nothing would have helped.
(And this is why I will continue to champion a complete removal of leaving feedback for any UPI transaction, regardless of whether or not the buyer pays. In the meantime…)
The language we use in buyer-facing messaging during the UPI process is changing to remove the current heavy tone to one that is lighter and clearly from eBay, not the seller. This will help mitigate those situations where the buyer may be upset at the UPI reminder. And of course, communication is crucial. Let me share a personal case that just happened last month.
I buy a lot on eBay. Recently, I purchases several separate listings for Kodachrome film from various sellers. I paid for all of them or so I thought. One purchase got by me (my fault) and I forgot to pay for it. Two weeks later, I received a UPI notice. Alarmed, I went back to see how I could have missed paying for one of the purchases and could not find any email at all from the seller in My Messages, my Inbox, or in any of my filter folders. Nothing. The seller went from no communication to UPI. And I will confess; I was not happy. Still, I know my obligations so I immediately paid for the item and sent a note to the seller apologizing for my oversight. As it turned out, the buyer never made any attempt to communicate. They just went straight to filing a UPI. Of course, I didn’t leave negative feedback but for an instant, I understood first-hand how some buyers might react in anger when they receive a UPI alert. I also know that if the seller had communicated prior or even immediately after filing the report, I would have not reacted as strongly (internally) as I did and I imagine another buyer would have been less inclined to strike out with a negative once the seller made a professional inquiry regarding payment.
Here is the bottom line. If you have a buyer who has not paid, communicate. If you do attempt to communicate and the buyer is not responding, don’t assume they are ignoring you. If your feedback and DSRs are important to you, call the buyer on the phone (Soothing the waters and avoiding a negative is worth a few cents for long distance). If you reach them, be professional and polite and express concern about their transaction, and not your ratings. If you have had to file a UPI, state simply that the buyer was not responding and you had no other choice. If the buyer pays, thank them profusely for their business, offer them a chance to come back and shop again and do so with an expressed tone of concern only for him or her and not yourself.
A seller has more control over the outcome of a tricky transaction than one might imagine. Everything depends on how the seller conducts him or herself. Yes, there is no guarantee that adopting a polite, professional customer-centric demeanor will prevent an otherwise determined buyer from leaving you a negative. But you can and you should always give it your best shot.
It will be instances, as stated in the policy. However, in cases where a seller has dropped below the minimum standards, a human being will make the call as to the appropriate action. In a case where a seller has no previous record of low DSRs and receives more than the maximum allowed, a single buyer leaving four or even more 1’s or 2’s for a series of multiple purchases will not jeopardize that seller’s account status (cause suspension).
Bold added by me.
Well, I'm quite curious who these "human beings" will be. My interactions with most "human beings" at eBay over the last 5 years or so has been less than satisfactory. Will these be the same human beings who only give a partial answer to a question (or only answer one of 4 questions sent in)? Or even better - give an answer that has nothing to do with the question sent? Yes, those aren't hypothetical. They did happen. That's partly why I pretty much stopped ever trying to contact someone at eBay, with the rare exception of Live Help.
These cases will be assessed by trained, dedicated support reps. If you have any documentation of a less than satisfactory experience with an eBay customer support rep, you may feel free to forward it to me.
Now look at the bolded part. Is this to say that while the account may not be suspended, since you specified "suspended," does that mean other punitive action may well be taken against such a seller (not hypothetical)?
Yes, other actions are possible including restrictions on selling, required coaching, etc
Oh wait, you might have answered this already:
The only absolute consequence is lowered search standing. Otherwise, a seller may be offered coaching or in more serious situations, other consequences may apply.
Do you mean that EVEN lowered search standing (see below for why I worded it that way) to such a seller who has had no real track record of problems beyond a single buyer? And the other items may well apply to such a seller as well from one single transaction? Please clarify.
No, I mean as a single possible consequence of dropping below the Seller Performance standards thresholds, a seller will be lowered in search standing. In addition, they may be coached or they may be restricted. Or a combination of the above to be determined by the trained, dedicated rep handling the case and based on the specific details of the case including the seller’s past history, possible reasons for a dip below the thresholds, etc. In brief, this will be a more judicious process as opposed to the former process which is by and large, automatic and not reviewable.
And search standing is ALREADY going to be lowered if you don't sell 100 items/$3K a year. So you mean "EVEN lowered search standing" for those who do not achieve this revenue level. Coaching? Man, if "coaching" was to be "offered" to me for doing everything right, you're going to have one peeved 14 year vet of eBay (and 20+ year or so vet of selling stuff mail-order and at shows). That would be beyond offensive. And there it is - vague and ominous: "in more serious situations, other consequences may apply." Of course, that is not a comprehensive list given the wording "including." "Serious" is open to interpretation by a "human being." Thus, vague. Not clear where the lines are. Vague. And yes, that wording is a bit ominous.
The possible consequences are eBay related only; restricted selling, required coaching, possible suspension. And not ‘vague;’ more ‘not absolute’ since each case will be viewed on its own merits and not subject to “sentencing requirements.” So if you are a seller on eBay with a long history of good standing, a dip in Seller Performance standards might only merit a phone call to the seller to inquire about the seller’s current situation. The only automatic consequence would be lowered search status and that is editable based on the seller’s stated circumstances.
There are three search status standings; Raised, Standard and Lowered. The baseline status for all seller is “Standard.” Top Rated Sellers receive “raised” status. Sellers who fall in Seller Performance are subject to “Lowered” status.
The Top Rated Seller program opens recognition and rewards to tens of thousands of small sellers who provide excellent customer service but who previously did not qualify for these rewards because of their small volume of sales. By lowering the entry level for PowerSeller from $12,000 to $3,000 a year with a volume requirement of only 100 transactions a year for qualification, we are shifting the focus from gross sales revenue to quality.
Wrong. There is a quantity and gross sales revenue component to this. It's just less. But there it is. 100 items/$3K a year. That's not a shift of focus; it's simply lowering the quantity.
My statement was correct. By lowering the volume and GMV requirements, and raising the quality standards for ALL PowerSellers, we are most definitely shifting the focus from volume/GMV to quality. Consider: if a Gold or Titanium or Diamond Seller doesn’t maintain Top Rated Seller status, they are disadvantaged both in ranking and in discount whereas a small seller who previously did not even qualify for PowerSeller status can now gain advantage in discounts and ranking over even the biggest Diamond PowerSeller if that small seller is providing better quality service to his or her customers.
Yes, there are good sellers whose current selling activity does not meet these requirements.
Exactly. So you (eBay) will reduce their visibility in search and potentially send a message to buyers that they are to be less trusted. Because they're good sellers. But don't generate enough income on/for eBay.
Not necessarily. I have to remind everyone: Top Rated Seller is one factor out of many in Best Match. Relevance, price, and shipping cost play an important part in ranking. Just because a seller is not in Top Rated Seller doesn’t mean that seller is “lowered.” These sellers have, by default, “Standard” search status. Standard is not Lowered and it is entirely possible for a Standard seller’s items to appear towards the top of a search results list. And the reason for the extremely low baseline requirement of $3000 GMV and 100 transactions per year is because we need a baseline of transactional data in both number and dollars to insure an accurate assessment of the entire program. In the future, it is entirely possible that the volume and GMV requirements could be lowered even further (but there will always be some baseline requirement of GMV and transaction number). However, at this point, a seller will have to have 100 transactions a year and $3000 GMV per year to qualify.
That comes out to about 9 sales a month and $250 in GMV a month. This is an extremely low target. I have been coaching sellers – individually and in groups – for 13 years and I have not met a seller yet who is selling full or part time who cannot reach the 100/$3000 per year threshold, either by a combination of a slight increase in listings and sales or a branching out one or more new product lines.
Sure - tie financial incentives (FVF discounts) to a certain revenue level. But don't reduce visibility of good sellers. And you might want to consider a program to publicly note their great record (and where applicable, longetivity). Is this something you would advocate for?
We already have such a program in place. A buyer can and will still be able to check a seller’s feedback which clearly shows the seller’s history on eBay and their feedback.
I cannot think of a better way to recognize and show pride in all our quality sellers, including those that are low volume
No - not ALL of your quality sellers. Not the ones who only sell $2500 a year (and that's just an example). Nor the ones who sell $2000 a year. But those people aren't worth showing pride in or recognizing. Or at least that's the message being sent to a lot of people. Again - not talking about FVF discounts here...
I appreciate your concerns but I have to state here: the Top Rated Seller program is launching as announced. It is not subject to change or negotiation. We will monitor the program over time and consider adjustments as warranted. There will be sellers who are not happy with the program. I understand this. WE understand this. But I will continue to maintain that a threshold of an annual $3000 GMV and 100 transactions per year is entirely within the reach of any seller who sells full or even part time on eBay. If a seller wishes to benefit from Top Rated Seller, they will need to meet these requirements. As of now, 150,000 sellers in the US qualify. I am confident that by April, many thousands more will as well.
You and I have disagreed before on the importance of browsing and how, in many category areas, it can enhance both the buyer and seller "experience." Apparently you have *never* benefited from this, as you can not see the beneficial aspects to it. You just don't or won't or can't understand it. I will tell you, a vast amount of stuff I bought off of the site in the past was from browsing -- stuff I would have never thought to search for -- and I am FAR from the only one (plus, it's can be engaging to the user). Still got my 1960 boxed/sealed toy molotov cocktail. Never knew they made it until I saw it by... browsing. I can't search for something I don't even know exists.
I don’t recall ever disagreeing on the importance of browsing. I browse certain eBay categories every day. I appreciate and acknowledge, first-hand, the benefits and rewards of browsing. And in the coming year, we will be increasing the value of browsing on eBay (bigger photos, easier navigation, etc). However, most finding on the site is done by keyword search and not browsing.
Insurance:
I'm curious where eBay came up with the fact that offering insurance is NOT industry standard now. That is true for SOME categories, but certainly not all, and particularly not in the case of person-to-person trading. For instance, the leading person-to-person record sales site allows it. One of the earlier person-to-person antique/collectible sales sites (starts with an "r" and ends with a "lane") allows it - in fact, the buyer must pro-actively decline insurance. And I could go on. Sure, the former doesn't have it as a line-item, but neither did eBay at one time. But now, we won't even be able to mention it in ads. I have never required insurance. There are buyers who do like to choose it (and pay for it) in the antiques/vintage/collectible areas, however. It's always been that way, and still is now. Just shipped out something yesterday that the person wanted insurance on. I've had repeat customers in the past (most gone from eBay now) who have chosen it every time, and they implicitly trusted us and knew we'd take care of a problem should one ever arise, etc.
So how was this determined to be an "industry standard" for person-to-person sales sites? And further, an industry standard for ALL of the types of items sold here?
Any site comparable to eBay (this includes all major retailers) that offers any sort of guarantee or buyer protection, does not also charge said buyers for the guarantee or protection by including a line item on their invoices for insurance. To do so sends a completely contradictory message to your buyers. On eBay, your buyers are already ‘insured’ by eBay through Buyer Protection. Offering insurance to a buyer either as an option or as a requirement, is in effect, requiring a buyer to pay for what they already receive from eBay for free.
If a buyer requests that an item be insured, a seller should inform that buyer that they are covered by eBay Buyer Protection and point them to the policy. If the buyer insists on paying for insurance, then the seller is free to accept an additional payment (separate from the eBay invoice).
Sellers can (and should) insure their business against all possible risks, including the risks of damage to, or loss in transit of, shipped goods. A seller should explore all insurance options, to locate the lowest cost options which are usually not provided by a carrier. And a seller is allowed to pass the cost of insurance along to their buyers as additions to shipping, handling or the item price. There are many ways to calculate this additional charge based on the cost of insuring all packages, the potential rate of lost or damaged packages (based on the seller’s past history with shipment claims) and the cost of their insurance. But the reality on eBay is (and has been for some time) that sellers who insure their packages are insuring themselves or their business, and not buyers.
I won’t pull punches on this one: the option for adding insurance, as an option or requirement, as a line item on an eBay invoice is final. I would be misleading you to believe this was something that is negotiable or something for which I could advocate as a change. I cannot.
Did you get the question about why eBay now hides "Add this seller to favorites" from the last round of posts? I didn't see an answer to it.
The exclusion of the link was an oversight and it will be added back in the next iteration of the View Item Page.
Per the guidelines posted for each Ask Griff Thread, please limit each post to questions specific to one topic only. If you have more than one topic for which you have questions, use a separate post for each one. Thanks.
Posted by postcardsnstuff on Aug 13, 2009 2:02 PM
Search Status
Question: If I continue to give great top rated service, but do not reach the 3K volume of sales (I am happy with my sales #'s) , will I be demoted to neutral in search, from the raised search status I have now? Yes or no. I fear that I know your answer.
You would be at “Standard” search ranking. Here’s how this would work: If you are offering the same item as another seller (same price, same shipping, same relevance) then the Top Rated Seller’s item would be ranked over yours. If your price was lower and your shipping lower (or free) in comparison to the Top Rated Seller, then your item would be advantaged over the other seller, even if they are a Top Rated Seller.
Posted by etown99 on Aug 14, 2009 1:16 AM
Abuse Detection: Correction of Inaccurate Statements.
Question from previous post and your answer...
QUESTION 5: Can anyone at eBay see that this is a huge loophole whereby someone (even a competitor) could quickly and easily shut down an otherwise excellent seller very easily and quickly?
Griff - If it can be proven that a buyer has used feedback with the deliberate intention to harm a competing seller’s business, we will take immediate and definitive action against that buyer. It would be foolish in the extreme for any seller to attempt this type of feedback abuse.
........And now pasted from Carmen's post.
Just off the phone with T&S.
1st - The Pro-Active software has not been installed (could not give me a time frame for this) and no one has had any training (so also no time frame for this). It appears that it will be up to the software to catch this problem.
First, I must offer apologies on behalf of eBay. The information as provided to the seller, is totally incorrect and the rep who provided the information has been coached. The software used for searching for abuse of this nature is and has been place for quite a while now and is functioning as intended. Reps have been (and continue to be) trained in Salt Lake City.
2nd - As to the policy of "someone" reviewing a seller's case.... No eBay employee will be allowed to go into any DSR to see the details. So in this case - nothing can be done.
Also grossly incorrect. Trust and Safety can and routinely does view a seller’s DSR record. We have to have this ability else we could not determine possible abuse. I intentionally refuse to have access to this information myself but whenever I need to have this information checked for possible abuse, a rep in Trust and Safety can and does access the information to verify or refute a claim of abuse. One thing this is common: sellers more often than not incorrectly assume that certain buyer has left certain DSRs.
Again, our apologies. This rep was coached regarding the correct information.
3rd - T&S also allowed that though the new software will be pro-active, it will take quite a while to run, and it can be months before the SW gets to someone's account in order to be pro-active. That's after its installed and everyone has been trained.
Again, this is completely inaccurate information. The actual process is already in place. I cannot share much more as to the actual incident or why this rep was providing inaccurate information but we were able to track down the rep responsible for the inaccurate information and they have been coached (as has the entire customer support organization) so they know the actual process that is in place and how it works.
You responded to my question last month - after a buyer (seller/competitor) purchased from me and left a soft positive with 3 1's on my DSR that it might be "actionable."
The item in question ( & identical year/set/insert to what he had up at the time he purchased from me):
Communication - I emailed with Delivery Confirmation number within 24 hours
.
Shipping time - I sent out next day.
Shipping cost - I charge $1.95 to ship any amount of cards to U.S. and Canada - this buyer/competitor seller charges $3.00 for one card.
Because of these 3 undeserved 1's I'm at 0.60% (0.50% threshold)
I have no other 1's or 2's. I'm at 100% FB & 4.9 x 4 on DSR. And, I'm not a TRS, I'll be lowered in search, and I won't qualify for discounts.
So, Questions....
Ebay currently has nothing in place to combat less than ethical buyer/competitors from damaging excellent seller's reputations?
That is not correct. (see above).
I have no recourse to have these unjustified 1's taken off my DSR's, even with proof of communication, proof of DC, and posted shipping rates much lower than category average and 34% lower than this buyer/competitor charges?
Unless it can be proven that the ratings were left by a competitor with the sole intent of damaging your averages, that is correct. The above does not qualify as “abuse” if it the transaction itself was not initiated with the intent to leave a 1 or 2 in order to disadvantage a competitor or as retaliation for the seller leaving that buyer (with seller buyer roles reversed) a negative or low rating.
What qualifies as proof?
Without giving a blueprint to anyone who may want to engage in this activity, if the information on file for the buyer matches the information, in part or whole, of a competing seller, we will take a closer look and the process continues from there based on what is found.
Griff said - If it can be proven that a buyer has used feedback with the deliberate intention to harm a competing seller’s business, we will take immediate and definitive action against that buyer.
Why do you avoid stating "If it can be proven that a buyer has used feedback with the deliberate intention to harm a competing seller's business, we will take immediate action against the buyer, AND remove the damage the buyer has done to the seller's reputation and business?
Take two: If it can be proven that a buyer has used feedback with the deliberate intention to harm a competing seller's business, we will take immediate action against the buyer, AND remove the damage the buyer has done to the seller's reputation and business.
Posted by kingst on Aug 14, 2009 6:59 AM
Traffic Reporting Issue
Griff,
What has happened to the site traffic?
Nothing. See below.
Item views dropping by 80%, on one board you stated that eBay was aware of something and they would post back later that day. Now 10 days later, still nothing. This issue was on the system announcement board for a day then removed.
Is this a eBay problem or Google problem? According to the other boards I am not alone with this issue.My July 1st count was 600 views on July 31st 12.
This is a reporting tool issue and not an actual indication of traffic. From the System Announcement board:
***Updated: Reporting Issues with Stores Traffic***
September 03, 2009 | 04:50PM PST/PT
We are continuing to work on restoring accurate reporting for Stores traffic and expect to have it resolved in the next few weeks.
As noted previously, the problem is in the tracking and reporting system only and actual traffic continues to function appropriately.
Thank you for your patience and we apologize for any inconvenience.
Posted by brucel64 on Aug 14, 2009 10:18 AM
Why DSRs Are Anonymous
First, thank you for the change in how DSR is used and measured. I think it’s a step in the right direction. There are some concerns however with protecting sellers and in making the DSR a useful tool for sellers.
Anything that can potentially shut down a business should not be anonymous. That is, in my opinion, the biggest problem with this system.
By leaving anonymous stars the seller has no way to defend against malicious feedback (either from a customer or competitor), recover a dissatisfied customer or even learn from their mistakes.
Why not remove the anonymous aspect and let it be real, open, two-way communication? That will solve (or at least greatly reduce) the risk of malicious feedback. If will also turn the stars into a useful tool for improving seller practices. I'm just not a fan of "one-way communication"; it's kind of an oxymoron.
It would also, most importantly in my opinion, give sellers that chance to learn from mistakes and recover dissatisfied customers. It's better to recover than to just let them leave dissatisfied.
Having an opportunity to fix a problem has great value. Being told that SOMEONE was unhappy about SOMETHING is completely useless.
Since sellers can't leave negative feedback for buyers there's no reason for Stars to be anonymous.
Buyer’s can use DSRs to leave their assessment of a seller’s service quality in four areas; Communication, Description, Shipping Time, Shipping Cost. The rating data is provided to the seller in aggregate and is intended to be viewed in total to detect trends, up or down, so that the seller can make adjustments to their business practices accordingly.
DSRs are not intended as a re-contact channel for sellers to respond to a buyer’s left ratings to ask them why they left the rating they did. This is why they are (for the most part) anonymous. We learned the hard way with the old feedback system that allowing for negotiations on left feedback (aka, Feedback Withdrawal) resulted in a system that buyers did not trust. Buyers must trust that when they leave a DSR rating of their (not the seller’s) opinion on the four aspects of that seller’s service, that they do so without fear of the seller asking for an explanation of the low rating and in truth, the seller doesn’t have to know more than what is displayed in their rating history. If a seller receives a few 1 and 2 ratings for communications, then the seller should re-examine their communication practices (not frequent enough? Tone of emails not professional? Not enough information provided? Etc). If they receive more than a few 1 or 2 ratings for Shipping Cost, then they need to compare their costs to their competitors and consider making adjustments to their costs. And so on.
A buyer who leaves a low rating for a specific DSR is not necessarily “dissatisfied.” They may have been satisfied overall but not so satisfied with, say, your shipping cost or your communication. In those cases, your buyer is trying to give you their honest opinion of your service for that DSR. If a seller receives a single 1 out of hundreds of left ratings, then the seller should probably discount it and continue with business as usual. If however, the seller receives two or more low ratings for that DSR, then those buyers are trying to tell the seller something about their service levels which usually indicates an opportunity for improvement in that service area; one for which an improvement or change in the practice utilized by the seller could most likely result in a decrease in the rate of left low ratings.
As for your statement, “Being told that SOMEONE was unhappy about SOMETHING is completely useless” I can only say this: I have worked with hundreds of sellers in the last two years, helping them to use left ratings to reassess their business practices, and make changes where necessary and usually with marked improvements in their averages. They may not have known the “someone” but they definitely could determine the “something.” And that is what is most important. Again, if a seller has garnered more than a few 1 or 2 ratings for a specific DSR, then they should listen to these buyers (as a group) and use the rating data to re-examine their business practices. It can, and it does work.
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 14, 2009 2:38 PM
Product Boxes on top of Search Results Pages
Griff, I've now had 2 different people contact me and ask what the heck happened to the BOOKS search.
They were bewildered and unhappy with getting sucked into the catalog pages. They didn't WANT to search by condition. They wanted to search the way they search for everything else on the site.
They wanted what was familiar to them.
Ironically, one person simply gave up and went to Amazon. They got tired of trying to figure out what the heck eBay had done to search.
I'd like to repeat my request that the matching product areas not take the entire ABOVE THE FOLD area so that those who wish to use the regular search results will know that there are more 'normal' results if they scroll further down.
I spoke with the Finding teams about your concern. They informed me that there has been no negative impact whatsoever on click through to listings from search results that display the Product boxes on the top of the first page and that in fact, product boxes have been overwhelmingly well received by browsers in these categories. (The Product Boxes only take up the equivalent of three lines of listing titles. )
However, I have forwarded your email to them for their consideration. I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your suggestion.
Posted by raymondk239 on Aug 14, 2009 3:47 PM
Ending A Listing Early
I attempted to revise my item to get it in more categories.I now have the same item for bid with two seperate ending dates.How do i cancel the last entry
A seller can end an active listing (with limitations based on ending time) by going to My eBay and clicking the Selling > Active links. On the Active Listings page, locate the listing to end and look under the Actions column for the triangle arrow pointing down. Click it and select “End Listing.”
A seller can also find the instructions for ending a listing early by clicking the Help link on the top of any eBay page and entering the words “end listing” in the search box.
Posted by cehemise on Aug 14, 2009 5:19 PM
eChecks and PayPal
Hi Griff,
I have a question for you about receiving payments, specifically eChecks. I specify "no checks" on my listings and PayPal only, and whereas I know that PayPal does not allow us to opt out of eCheck payments on eBay transactions, I still have a question. Ahem....
Okay....The problem I have with this form of payment is that it can take up to ten days to receive the funds after payment has been initiated. I find that a frustrating turn of events. I am wondering if this issue is come to the forefront lately, and if so, is it being discussed?
I believe eChecks are the form of payment if one does not have a card also attached to their PayPal account, and if that is the case, then I follow the logic behind the time delay, but here's my question (yes, there is one in there): Do you think it will be possible in the future for sellers to opt out of the eCheck payment feature for our eBay auctions? This might be an impetus to buyers to alter PayPal accounts, but perhaps not. At any rate, there's the question. I am curious if anyone else is of a similar mindset as me. Thanks, so much.
There are no plans to allow for blocking payments made with eChecks. PayPal does message the buyer in an email directly after they submit payment with an eCheck, that their payment is pending, that the seller has not received payment and will not until the eCheck clears (in up to 15 days). The message also provides instructions on adding a second funding method to the buyer’s account for overriding this hold.
Posted by deltamaster on Aug 18, 2009 12:29 PM
Griff’s Status
> Hi all,
> I am behind in email and will take a few days to catch up here. Thanks for your patience.
> regards,
> Griff
Thanks for letting us know.
Some of us were worried about you and concerned that you had come to some harm.
I am personally glad that is not the case because even though we have disagreed on things and had our differences I still like you and would be very upset if something happened to you.
So in order to comply with the posting rules:
QUESTION:
Griff, since so many of us depend on you, appreciate you and care about your well being can you please make a short one line post when you lock this thread so that we know it was you and that you are still in good health... AND if the unforeseeable should occur and something does happen to you can you make sure someone comes here and lets us know?
After all... we... I should say I care about you ya'know!!
My bad. I will do so in the future. (It’s nice to know you care!)
I will posts responses to the remaining questions over the weekend. Thanks!
Griff
Griff
_________________
eBay
|
|
|
|
(4 of 4)
Re: Ask Griff - August 2009
Sep 10, 2009 01:15 PM
|
Posted by buriedbybooks on Aug 18, 2009 1:20 PM
Handling Time and Seller Protection
Hi again Griff. I must say I'm imagining reading quite a lot of things these days. I guess I must be, because I could have sworn that we were assured that shipping outside our stated handling time would not negate our seller protection.
And yet, according to the new UA:
How sellers are protected from losing a claim?
For "item not received" claims sellers are protected from losing a claim if they provide evidence of proof of delivery to eBay. Proof of delivery is tracking information from a shipping company that clearly displays:
1. the delivery status of the item as "delivered"
2. the date of delivery (which reflects the seller shipped within stated handling time)
3. the recipient's address, displaying at least the city/state or ZIP code (or the equivalent) of the address listed in either the eBay Order details page or the PayPal Transaction Details page
4. for items $250 USD (or local currency equivalent) or more, proof of the recipient's signature to confirm delivery is required
So I guess my question is this: Do we LOSE seller protection for INR claims if we don't ship within our stated handling time, even if every other indicator shows delivered ?
It sure seems like we do according to how that's written.
I asked this question of both the PayPal and eBay teams in charge of PayPal dispute resolution and eBay Resolutions. I also pointed out the reason for the question: Some sellers may have to delay shipping outside of their stated handling time due to receiving an eCheck. Both teams acknowledged that this is an issue and they are working together to refine the language of both policies to align them and to take eChecks into consideration. In the meantime, both team leaders assured me (and asked that I pass this assurance on to you) that a seller who is forced to ship an item beyond their stated handling time due to receiving a pending payment from a buyer, will not lose their PayPal Seller Protection eligibility nor will they forfeit any due protection in an eBay Resolution case.
Posted by lurch-deeann on Aug 18, 2009 1:59 PM
Handling Time and Seller Protection
Ask Griff - April 2009:
In response to my May 3, 2009 post:
lurch-deeann:
If I state a 3 day handling time from receipt of payment, but something comes up and I ship on day 4 from receipt of payment which is still well within the 7 day timeframe stated by the Seller Protection Policy, will those refunded funds come from me? That is, will this "policy" trump the Seller Protection Policy, or will the Seller Protection Policy be changing once it is ported over to eBay?
Griff:
If a seller ships on the 4th day instead of the promised 3rd, we will take that into account (of course!) We aren’t out to harm a seller. We are building a process that will rely on the verifiable information we can obtain regarding when an item was shipped and unlike today, there will be a human being (a trained rep) who can make proactive decisions based on that information.
Griff, is your prior reply to me still correct? Because I agree with Buried - the portion of the new UA they posted sure wouldn't seem to indicate that.
Yes, it is still correct (see above).
Posted by lurch-deeann on Aug 18, 2009 2:10 PM
Mobile eBay and Thumbnails
Oh - forgot this question. Oddly enough, it does not involve grilling you over policy issues!
Is there a way to turn off thumbnails in My eBay when accessing via a mobile phone? It would make the pages load a heckuva lot faster if there is, and I'd love to know how to do this. Can't seem to find anything on the site.
There isn’t a feature in eBay Mobile that provide toggling off thumbnails. However your mobile device application browser may have an option for not loading images.
Related note: I've recently been noticing a serious lag in logging in (to eBay Mobile) to access My eBay. Sometimes, it just times out. This has been pretty recent.
I will forward your observation to the head of the eBay Mobile team for his attention.
Posted by startsunder10 on Aug 18, 2009 9:49 PM
Not Leaving DSRs
If I forget to use DSR stars will the rating be the same? And if I have forgotten is there a place to go back in and give them? I hate it when I firget them.
If a buyer leaves a DSR blank, it has no effect whatsoever on the seller’s average. (A “no DSR left” is treated as a null value, not a zero. It isn’t entered into the calculation.)
If a buyer leaves a rating and feedback and forgot to leave a specific rating, the buyer cannot go back and leave it. Once a feedback is posted (along with the DSRs selected by the buyer), the rating and feedback option is closed. The only way a buyer could revisit the rating is if the buyer left a negative or neutral feedback and the seller sends a Feedback Revision request to the buyer.
Posted by startsunder10 on Aug 18, 2009 9:54 PM
Handling Charge Option Missing from Flat Rate Shipping
And how do I add handling charges to domestic shipping priority small flat rate box for jewelry?
The option to add it only shows up under international.
My goal is to have my shipping procedure routine all set up so it's a breeze.
I noticed this as well. I don’t know if the lack of a handling option for flat rate shipping is intentional or an oversight. I have inquired and will repost the answer once I have received it.
This finally catches up August. I will open a September thread today.
Thanks,
Griff
Griff
_________________
eBay
|
|
|
Original Post
