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:
Link
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
Must use Buy It Now and PayPal.
