And the last batch.
Posted by lindaspostcardsandmore on Feb 15, 2009 11:03 AM Buyer Not Receiving Emails Griff:
What is ebay doing to prevent low DSRs on communication from buyers who CANNOT be reached via email or via Ebay?
I am dealing with a fairly new buyer now. Bought one postcard and asked if I had others. I sent an email telling her I listed one other view for her and would hold the one she had purchased to see if she wanted the other one.
Two days went by and I had not heard from her. I sent a reminder that I had listed it directly through ebay. Still no response so I went ahead and mailed the first one afraid my shipping time DSR would get a hit. Later, I got the notice in my email that both of my prior emails had not reached her. They were bounced by her ISP.
Then, a day or so later she purchases the new one and wants an invoice. I send it and take the shipping off even though I had already mailed the other one and would have to pay myself.
I still have no way of knowing if she received the invoice (she paid it a day later) or if she received any of my messages.
Her first note at checkout was very friendly. I have a bad feeling that I'm going to get hit on every level on this one....for shipping time and for communication.
We cannot help it when buyers do not get our emails. What protection do we have?
You have the telephone. If a seller suspects that a buyer is not receiving her emails (and it can and does happen), the seller should step up the communication effort with a phone call to the buyer.
Posted byexclusively_red_tag on Feb 15, 2009 12:02 PM Location of Bidders Hi Griff,
Thanks for taking all these questions. These Q&A threads have been most informative and answered some questions I didn't even know I had!
I've got one question:
I understand the need for anonymity for winning bidders given the current climate of phishing emails, fraud, etc. However, may of us search eBay's completed items or use tools like terapeak to make inventory purchasing decisions (i.e. 5 of these widgets sell per week on eBay with an average price of $54, so I should buy 30 of them at $25 ea.) With the masking of winning bidder IDs, the winning bidder's country is also hidden. This is extremely problematic for many of us, and here's why: if there are 10 completed sales of an item and they range from $70 to $100, we have no idea if only U.S. buyers are willing to pay in the $70 range and if it is only the foreign buyers willing to pay more. We don't ship internationally, so this can make a huge difference in profitability. Are there any plans to allow the nationality of the winning bidder to be known?
Currently, there are no plans to display the country of a bidder in a bidding history. I will forward your suggestion to the appropriate team for their consideration.
Posted by 1st-oliveoyl on Feb 15, 2009 12:12 PM Changing Passwords and Live Help Hours Hi Griff!
Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions. And I noticed that several of us Sellers complained about the tiny weenie topic titles on the "new, improved" boards and that got fixed! Yeah!
Our pleasure! I just spent a stressful 2 hours trying to undo an Ebay whoopsie. I had to change my password twice! And then for quite a while, I could not sign in.
Can ebay please give us a warning that:
1) once changed, you can never, ever go back to that pw again
2) it takes at lease an hour for new pw to be effective
I knew about 1)... I didn't know it took an hour for a new password to take effect. I will forward your suggestion to the appropriate team for consideration. That would have saved me a lot of grief & aggravation.
And why is a pw that I used before suddenly not secure?
I am fairly certain the reason is security. If someone has managed to obtain a password, it is never again secure. If a member is allowed to reuse a password, they could be putting their account into jeopardy. Also, what are the hours of Live Help? It seems that whenever I need them lately, they are not here.
I thought Live Help is staffed 24/7 but I have inquired to be sure. I await your answers.
Posted byruthl416 on Feb 15, 2009 1:28 PM Griff's Email Address colbertlamour,
Please note that Griffs email address is NOT askgriff@....
It is....griff@ebay.com That could explain why you
did not get an answer.
Career Closet Fashion, perhaps you had the wrong addy too?
Thank you byruthl416.
Anyone wishing to email me should only use the email address griff@ebay.com and only their regular email. Do not send me email through eBay's My Messages system. I can not respond to those.
Posted byimplog on Feb 15, 2009 1:38 PM Seller Reporting Hub On May 16, 2008 on an eBayINK thread titled "Feedback on Feedback to Feedback", eBay's Feedback Experience Czar, Brian Burke, said that sellers would be protected from unscrupulous buyers with what he called a "seller reporting hub"
Burke is quoted below from eBayINK.
"Sellers will not have direct access to info on whether UPI reports have been made against buyers. However, there is a buyer requirement tool that will allow sellers to block buyers with a UPI track record of 2 or more items. We’ve also introduced a seller reporting hub.".
I can not find any referenece to this "seller reporting hub" anywhere on the eBay site map.
[Where EXACTLY is the "seller reporting hub" and why is there no prominent link under Seller Resources for the "seller reporting hub"?]
Seller Reporting Hub link:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/report_problem.html
It is also available on the page where one leaves feedback:
I have asked that it be made more prominent in other places.
Posted bybillslongbows on Feb 15, 2009 2:02 PM Search and Best Match Why can't Ebay use limited criteria on the Ending soonest sort - which would be much fairer to all sellers? Use the DSR - if two auctions end at the same time, list the seller with the better rating first. That would be much fairer to all. It would also encourage the megasellers to improve their customer service - which is pretty dismal for many of them. Yet those listing high volume sellers with lower DSRs still show up first in the BM search.
Thanks for the suggestion. I will forward it to Jeff King's team for their consideration...
On the other criteria you mention:
Shipping price criteria - does not belong in either search (By the way, I only ship for free - or use actual FC/PM amounts). Instead, why not concentrate on teaching the bidders to look at the total cost? Require that the seller either include a fixed total shipping cost or use the calculator in all listings, so Ebay will be able to determine the shipping cost on all listings. Then, display that total in all search results - and emphasize it.
That is in the works. Recent sales - does not belong in either search. This is one of the factors that ensures the small time seller is way down in the search results. Why should someone who is a mega seller get better placement - just because they had more recent sales? It could be argued that they will automatically obtain good visibility, so should be placed AFTER the smaller seller.
Relevance - even if the selection worked (which it doesn't), it is another criteria that does not belong in the searches. Not only does it bring up totally unrelated items, but almost all the matches are from the megasellers.
There are other problems with the current system. Allowing ANY sellers discounts on listing fees gives those sellers an advantage. With everything else identical, it means that they will always appear first in "lowest price first" searches. Giving diamond sellers free listings means that they can swamp the site with hundreds of identical listings for each variety of item - they have absolutely zero invested in the listings, so why not. Why would this be desire?
The same unfairness holds true for FVF discounts based on volume or total sales. How can anyone imagine this is going to help anyone but the megasellers?
Ebay has always done best with auction style listings. Why should fixed price listings be given any sort of advantage?
As I have said earlier, we view eBay as "format agnostic." (see a previous response on this topic). The site will NOT thrive as a non-warehousing Amazon clone. Put the fixed price listings in stores - where they belong. Then allow the buyers to search the stores for the items, if and only if they wish to do so.
Sure, the growth rate in gross sales slowed as the marketplace matured. Management should have been happy with that. The way it is now, the growth rate is negative. With the financial situation the way it is, Ebay should be growing again, the way that its competitors are. The lack of growth shows that something is fundamentally wrong with the existing policy.
Ebay used to be a fairly "level" playing field, funny we don't hear that phrase any more. I think the tilt may have begun when the "star system" was created, but it really started going downhill when certain groups were given special privileges, such as service reps. That slope is rapidly becoming closer and closer to a vertical cliff. As a buyer/seller on eBay for roughly 12 years, this bothers me greatly.
Ebay became a success because people could find uncommon or rare items that they could not find in any other way. That is becoming difficult to impossible as the site is being swamped with common imported garbage that I can buy at the local big box or dollar store. How is this good for eBay? How is it good for the seller or unusual uncommon items?
----
Bilbow (sometime a power buyer)
Thanks for your comments. I have forwarded them to the Search team for their consideration.
Posted by welovemoneyorders2 on Feb 15, 2009 2:08 PM Slow Page Load for Dial Up Users Griff, I'm one of the 19% of Americans that still have dialup. Since the changes to the pages, I can't even get a full page of listings to load, unless there are only a few items on it. Pages freeze up 1/2 way loaded. The other day I was trying to de research. In 15 minutes, 1 Ebay page only loaded 1/2 way. Meanwhile on The River's pages, I was able to load & view 20 that fully loaded in the same time. Not too good, in fact, downright horrible. Is anything going to be done to remedy this, or should we be satisfied 1 in 5 people with internet access can no longer use Ebay?
During the year, we will be maximizing pages for faster loading.
Posted by welovemoneyorders2 on Feb 15, 2009 2:13 PM Verifying Buyers PS I used to list exclusively with auctions, and have set some record prices in my category. However now I use buy it now almost exclusively, because I can demand immediate payment, as Ebay can't be bothered to VERIFY USERS! Tired of chasing money & doing UPIs on Ebay deadbeats. Will Ebay EVER require verified users????
I answered this one previously and the answer is "not likely." This is a real pain, and doing user info requests Is a waste, I've seen things even a stupid computer should be able to weed out, can't they at least make sure the zip matches the town? Or so that a phone # like 1234567890 will not be accepted?
Any seller can verify users by requiring all bidders/buyers to have a PayPal account. Since PayPal does verify the identity of a buyer (to the fullest extent possible online), requiring all bidders/buyers to have a PayPal account, in effect, limits your listings to only verified buyers.
Posted by applemorgan on Feb 15, 2009 3:46 PM Two eBays? My 1 Suggestion for the Suggestion Box:
Griff,
I'm from Atlanta GA, and I experienced first hand the days when Coca Cola changed from Old Coke to New Coke, it was a nightmare....or was it really just marketing genius, because when Old Coke was reintroduced as Coke Classic, it had more market share than ever!
I Suggest that ebay starts a sister company: It's Call "Ebay Classic", for us old timers that long for the Original days of Ebay, when life on ebay was easier, very simple for buyers and sellers to use, and most users were honest and easy to deal with, USPS Postal Money order were OK as payment, small dealers were the back bone of the site, it was affordable for any and all to access, and thus it went down smooth and was very refreshing every single time.
"Things Go Better with Classic Ebay"
That's My Suggestion,
Thanks,
applemorgan
Thank you for that suggestion. As I normally say, I will forward this to the appropriate team and I will do so. However, I feel it is my duty to be upfront here. There are no plans to split the site into two separate sites, now or in the future.
Posted by ooak_handcrafts on Feb 15, 2009 5:12 PM Seller's TOS and Negative Feedback If a buyer buys from a seller and didn't follow the TOS, can the seller cancel the sale ie refund payment) and NOT get a negative?
No. There are no mechanisms that block a buyer from leaving negatives in a situation like this one. In other words, will the negative be removed because the buyer was in error because either 1) they didn't read the listing and understand it OR 2) they read it and felt it didn't apply to "them" OR 3) they felt they could dictate their own terms of sale to the seller.
It would depend on the specifics of an individual case and what exactly the buyer has ignored or did. For reason 1. there would need to be more details. For reason 2. it would depend on what they have ignored. The seller would have the best cause for reason 3. if the buyer attempted to dictate different terms of sale with the threat of negative feedback.
Posted by shabbychicandpink on Feb 15, 2009 6:16 PM Recent Seller Event Does eBay think that the 200 sellers they met with in Long Beach is an accurate representation of the entire selling community on eBay?
There were not 200 sellers at the event (More like 30 to 40) but no matter, to a great extent, they were an accurate representation of the greater community of sellers. When I read the top ten concerns voiced to the team by this group of sellers (I didn't attend the event btw), I was amazed at how closely aligned their concerns were to what I hear and read here every day.
Posted by 1st-oliveoyl on Feb 15, 2009 6:27 PM Fees in One Place Another thing I just remembered!
PLEASE, PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE
Can Ebay get ALL the fees & costs together in one place?
Listing Fee, Final Value Fee, Paypal Fee, USPS cost
All on one page, along with the item number and title?
That would be HEAVEN!
Great suggestion! I will forward to the appropriate team for consideration.
Posted by implog on Feb 15, 2009 6:32 PM New Discussion Forum Feature Suggestion Griff -
Here's something that would make me excited AND delighted.
[Would you PLEASE ask the "enhanced" board creators to put a functioning "GO TO TOP" button at the bottom of each Discussion Forum page?]
As is, it's one hella scrollapalooza.
I've got blisters on my fingers!
(Tell them Bobal's Tips page probably has the code.)
I will do so right now!
Posted by 3goldibears on Feb 15, 2009 6:57 PM Various Questions Hello Griff. I have some questions and comments for you, and a request.
In a previous batch of Q&As you said:
In past responses, I have spoken about feedback and ratings and that we are revisiting the current system for improvements based on input from both buyers and sellers. As I have said earlier, it is too early for me to comment in detail but more should become available during the coming months.
And in the next Q&A response, you further stated:
I won't always be able to obtain everything that every seller wants and those changes that are agreed-upon do get placed "on the train" won't happen over night. I hope I didn't raise unrealistic expectations with this regard. Although I don't live in the past, I do sometimes long for the days when we were only 30 employees and the timeline from suggestion to execution was sometimes as little as a few hours. But this is a different place now and it takes a bit longer than it used to to get things done, so to speak.
While I understand that in a corporate environment it can sometimes take "a bit longer" for things to happen, is there no ability built in to prioritize the speed of handling things that should be done more quickly in order to slow the level of damage being done?
I fear that I may have set unrealistic expectations. Although you haven't mentioned specifics, it is safe to assume you refer to "applications" like DSRs, Feedback and Best Match. We need to be clear: although current programs like DSRs and Best Match are undergoing continuous monitoring and adjustment, it would be a mistake for anyone to believe that we are considering completely eliminating or stopping either. I mean at the very least it shouldn't be that hard to suspend the application of a dangerous program rather than continuing to pour the proverbial gasoline on the blazing fire while attempting to come up with a corporate consensus on the fact that the building is in imminent danger of collapse and total destruction, right?
Or is there possibly a goal behind these damages that has not yet been reached, at which time the brakes will finally be applied? My first question is in earnest, second one obviously rhetorical so I don't expect you to try to honestly answer it (if you were even so inclined). But it IS a bit of a cynical conclusion based on my observations of the total lack of response from the management to the thousands of hapless individuals who have been ruthlessly and without warning cut off at the knees, with their lives and livelihood destroyed and no recourse of appeal, heck not even given the courtesy of a decent explanation!
You have denied it (have you reconsidered, or are we still in the Spin-zone?), but we all know that all small volume sellers remain vulnerable to the same fate if we try to continue selling here. You have acknowledged that there are serious issues with the current sanctioning of sellers based on the flawed DSR system and claim that this system is under review.
No, that is not exactly what I said. I said that the way the threshold for restricting sellers has been presented (the 4.1 threshold) is hard to support logically because of the way DSRs are incremented. You can read exactly what I said in previous posts and in the interview I gave to AuctionBytes at the end of last year. Again, earlier you said in one of your responses:
And I remind everyone: when a buyer is suspended, all negative feedback they have ever left is deleted, removed, forever.
That is all well and good, but how does that help a seller who may have been restricted or suspended because of that feedback? After all, the worst damages were done long before T&S made the decision, and I honestly can't see how this should therefore be cause for that much celebration.
When a seller is restricted, it is because they have received an unacceptable number of low ratings, not because one or two buyers left low ratings. When a seller is suspended, it is because they have repeated delivered an unacceptably low level of service and a high level of bad buyer experiences. I have said this before: If you have discovered that you have been restricted or suspended unfairly, email me and I will work on your behalf. What recourse is available for a seller who received restrictions etc based on that now-removed information on his/her record? Not to mention those small-time powersellers who lost discounts? And though you've claimed it is so, how are we to know that the DSRs have been properly adjusted?
We don't restricted or suspend a seller on the basis of one left negative or one series of left DSRs. I have pretty much put myself out here for any seller to contact and in the last year, I have never seen even one seller whose selling was restricted or who was suspended on the basis of one or even two low ratings or feedback. But if you or any other seller has been restricted or suspended on the basis of only one or even just a few left ratings or feedback, email me. I cannot speculate or solve hypothetical situations. Speaking of those DSRs, I'm also going to bring this up here, even though someone else has asked. Since sellers can no longer leave negative feedback for buyers, I see no good reason why a seller's DSR details shouldn't be visible to him! The only rationales I can come up with are strongly negative, as are the conclusions we are drawing from this particular area which lacks ANY amount of transparency.
I have said many times in previous responses that the next version of the Seller Dashboard will provide much more granularity with regards to DSRS. Last question for now: Could we possibly have the time extended for the board log-in?
Thank you for the suggestion. I will forward it to Garnor for inclusion in the list of asks for the next upgrade of the discussion forums.
Posted by 3goldibears on Feb 15, 2009 7:06 PM Edit Post Feature? I suppose it's too much to also ask if they will ever provide an edit post function? I apologize in the meantime for that last monster paragraph above, naturally I didn't notice it until after I posted.
I will ask. Cannot promise it will happen but I will ask.
Posted by dvdguaranteed on Feb 15, 2009 8:12 PM Featured, Pre-Filled Information, Item Specifics Griff,
Considering the new "feature" which highlights sellers who list with the pre-filled listings -- where it highlights one seller on the page and lists the rest in kind of an index. (highlighted here: Link)
Issue #1: It is common for DVD sets when sellers have more than one volume of something (for instance, my current Popeye Volume 1 and 2 listing, where I am selling two separate items together. With the current set up, I am forced to chose one of the items to populate, or be left out of that part altogether (or have higher listing fees to leave it blank). In the past, I've had many successes listing a group of items like this. Now that ebay is making a push for us to use these pre-filled listings, will a feature be built in for us to include more than two items in a single listing?
I have sent this question to Mike Maffeo for a response. Issue #2 - My item Fire and Ice / Painting with Fire has Region 1 as the region for this item in the pre-filled information, when it is actually a Region 0 DVD. But that form to fill out to report changes or add a new listing asks for a "Reference URL" to show the mistake. I don't have a reference URL, all I have is the item in my hands which shows that it is NTSC Region 0 not Region 1 - so I have to state this in my listing -- that the package clearly states Region 0. As this taints credibility, I would rather the information just be correct in the pre-filled listing. Do you know if there are going to be any changes to this reporting system that might make it easier for sellers to report missing items or errors in that information?
I have also sent this question to Mike Maffeo for a response. Issue #3: Although I know there's going to be no real reply to this, because I know it's based on Best Match and it's mostly rhetorical (sorry!!!) ... when I was looking over all my listings with the new featured page, many times (most times) I found sellers with lower DSRs, lower feedback percentage, higher price and fewer sales as the highlight in the featured area, with my item buried near the end of the list. I found that to be rather frustrating and terribly irritating. Can you explain this maybe a little? I was showing my husband and he was surprised as well ... he said, isn't there someone you can write to about this? All I could do was sigh -- I know there is no way I can explain all the background for Best Match and everything that is going on... I know I am no big fish and am just here like so many others just trying to follow the rules and be successful. I just told him that Best Match is an unprovable-we-have-to-trust-the-programmers-which-is-hard-when there-are-so-many-bugs-all-the-time thing. I actually started taking screen shots and making notes of sellers' DSRs, feedback, previous purchases, and I got so frustrated with what I was finding, I had to stop. The more I saw, the worse I felt, so I just had to go back to my little shell and list some more and try to forget about it and just be the good little seller I am. (Wow. What an environment!!) I wonder how many sellers feel exactly the same way I do -- gotta say it creates a cognitive dissonance that is hard to explain to anyone, let alone to myself.
You didn't mention if your item or items were also set as Featured. Featured listings appear on the top of the page where the un-featured copy of the same item currently appears. But about Featured.. there is a discussion currently going on internally about Featured; specifically, whether we should continue offering the option. As you have pointed out, Featured listings can skew the whole intention of Best Match at least those appearing on the first page of a Best Match search sort, by putting items that are not necessarily the best deals from the best sellers at the top of the list. I don't know how this discussion will play out over time but it is an issue on the minds of many of us.
Posted by lurch-deeann on Feb 15, 2009 9:12 PM Hey Griff - I hope you remember me (we met in Sacramento - my wife and I predate even you on the site).
I have some comments and one core, all-important to me question. This will be long, and for that, I apologize. I wrote this a bit ago and finally decided to contribute it.
Comments (mostly) first: Somewhere, at some point - and this is all such a mess, I can't quite find it now - you mentioned that the eBay community is made from the buyers and sellers and not eBay. This is the way it should be. Yet, while 2008 was particularly ugly, eBay itself has been fostering dissension amongst its members in small ways for a number of years, which has been a component of where "we" have evolved to now. The first occurrence *I* can specifically recall was the release of My eBay 2.0. There were a group of folks who essentially opted-in/volunteered to beta test it. Lists of fixes were provided by myself and others, along with usability issues. What ultimately happened was a tiny percentage of fixes were implemented (some which actually broke other functions), and the product was officially released - no second pass at all with the beta testers, and much of what was provided by us was ignored. Well, of course people flooded with complaints about things that were broken which the beta "team" had long before reported. eBay's response? Statements along the lines of "well, there were beta testers - but we'll get to fixing these items" So people turned on the beta testers about how incompetent they were, which wasn't at all true. There have been a number of other ways in which eBay has proactively baited users to turn on each other, when they really shouldn't have been involved. Now I'm not saying this was some kind of conspiratorial plan, but it has been illustrative of how eBay has historically not truly looked at the big picture (or maybe that's small?) in their actions, policy setting, product roll-outs, etc. There seems - from the outside - to be little inter-departmental product management, and this has been shown over a number of years, not just the past one. I think what I'm saying is that for many (and for many who left long ago - who I personally know), eBay doesn't have just to engage in damage control for the last year, but ultimately for accrual/accumulation from the last 5-8 years. It's just the last year or so where it's really hit boiling point. I hope it's being viewed that way.
BTW: eBay has never really run a beta properly - thus, the product problems upon rollout. I know - we've done beta testing for fun and paid before (including for Microsoft). Any chance they might ever be done correctly? If you don't know what "correctly" means, feel free to email/message me, and I can send along the way they are supposed to work (initial selection of testers on a variety of qualifications with multiple passes, followed by a larger test group - and often followed by an even larger test group prior to release - where every bug reported over multiple passes is resolved - the multiple passes are to ensure fixes really are fixes AND that they haven't broken other functions). Usability issues are also addressed during this period. It really does seem that historically no one there knows how they are supposed to be done in order to ensure the fewest possible problems upon release. And it continues to look that way. Project management between departments also could be improved. Yeah - that's a general sweeping statement, but it's always seemed that there is a huge lack of oversight between departments with product releases.
Moving on… One of the problems is that you've lost a lot of people over the years. They may or may not still be somewhat active on the site, but you've still lost them. I was a huge supporter (after trying to keep AuctionWeb a secret initially - I think I told you about that - I know I told Bill). Heck, I was kicked off of a couple Usenet providers for pushing AuctionWeb auctions (and thus, the site itself) we had listed for spamming Usenet way back when that was the view. The key is the supporters vs those who see eBay as simply a tool for selling. The supporters (both buyers and sellers) will stick as supporters until you push them too far. Those who see it as a tool will be gone in the blink of an eye. This is something eBay seems to have lost track of some years ago. I thought my breaking point was the whole 2005 eBay Live invite where I wasn't going to go, but on being invited (presumably to mainly talk to the press), agreed to - only to find out, I still had to pay to go. However, later when we met Bill (and you) here in Sacramento, he did personally apologize when he heard about that, and it helped. That same night, Rachel (does she still work there, btw?) mentioned we would be good for the Voices program. It took about 6 months for someone to contact us. When they did and heard about our background, the response was that they weren't so interested in people who had been around since (literally) the beginning, because they had less to offer than newer users. In a phone conversation, Bill also apologized for that and said something about not understanding what they were talking about, but that really reinforced to me the short-sightedness that existed/exists within the eBay structure.
Moving on, more towards my ultimate question (although still thematically related):
I can see the wisdom in breaking eBay into two (or counting Motors, three) sections. The core problem for much of what eBay is, is - it's not fun anymore and hasn't been for quite some time. My buying has dropped off dramatically. Why? It's not fun anymore. This is something eBay has fostered in the pursuit of new or less-than-collectible (and to a certain extent, FP) listings. The whole item specifics thing. This works just fine with certain categories (and what used to be sub-cats within some top-level cats) such as shoes. However, with the introduction of it some time ago, eBay chose to begin to emphasize search over browse universally. This was furthered with the roll-out of My eBay 2.0. Remember how additional "Favorite Categories" were initially discussed and promised? And that didn't happen? And how that section also rolled out broken and was never fully fixed? Browse really benefits certain categories and definitely adds to the fun. So do auctions (again, definitely within certain categories). Over the years, I have bid on (and often won) a number of things from browsing that I would have never thought of searching for - this increases money for both sellers and eBay and items in our collection. Why has this essentially taken the back seat (rhetorical, to push the point - I think rhetorical, anyway)? In a lengthy phone chat with Bill a few years ago, I mentioned, off-handedly, that eBay was "just not fun anymore." This really struck him - he specifically stated that it did "strike him." But nothing really ever transpired from it. I think I recall something about the login box saying something about "back for more fun?" but I mean, really transpiring.
All of the specific questions posted here are fine and good - but more broadly, and a direct question:
Questions: Does eBay have any interest in making it "fun" again, and if so, what will be done to make that happen (I have ideas, but I'm sure no one cares what they are IF that is not part of the plan)?
"Fun" means different things to different people. I maintain that a lot of the fun of the early eBay came from the fact that eBay, the internet, and ecommerce in general was fun because it was new, it was exciting, it was the new thing. Today, nearly 14 years after Pierre launched the site, the internet, ecommerce and yes, eBay, are not so new anymore. That aspect of the initial fun would be impossible to recapture exactly as it was back then.
However, we think fun is still possible. In fact, we believe that for a site like eBay, "fun" for sellers is a result and not an end and depends entirely on success. Fun can only happen for a seller if he is selling more product faster and more efficiently and the lowest operating cost possible. Fun can only happen for a buyer when she is able to find, quickly and effectively, the item she seeks, or when she can easily browses a category using the latest available technology.
By the way, some have asked what it is that eBay does, what we see as our purpose and vision. It's simple: We connect buyers and sellers. If we are succeeding in this goal, then "fun" will be a result (along with success selling and buying). Will eBay again start to at least give equal "push" on browsing and the auction format publicly and its benefits to buyers (part of which is, it's fun to be involved in auctions).
We have separate initiatives for certain categories where the auction format is most popular (Antiques, Art, Pottery and Glass, Collectibles) that are exploring different approaches to Search and Browsing. But that being said, I repeat that overall, eBay is format agnostic. It is not about only auctions or only fixed price: each has its purpose and place and belongs on eBay. More questions: I have seen no concerted public effort on eBay's part (and it is possible I've missed it) to reclaim (not just add to - which eBay has always had) buyers from all of the changes made this year. With the looming, nebulous, supposed seller benefits in the works, what will be done to court the departed sellers who would auction/sell cool stuff to come back? And what will be publicly done to bring back some of the departed buyers of said goods? I've personally seen a steady decline over a few years (not just 2008) on the buyer side. And frankly, the seller side.
Without revealing too many details, I can say that for the last two years, we have been aggressively going after buyers who have either slowed or stopped buying on the site. This happens behind the scenes of course. For those buyers who stopped because of a bad experience, we do what we can to make it right so they will come back. Still, there is a purpose that drives all that we do here: and thats provide buyers with great deals.
Buyers shop for deals. For some buyers, a deal is a great price on a current item like an MP3 player or game console. For others, a deal is a great price on last years fashions. For some buyers, a deal is finding a rare antique or collectible to add to their collection. What all these buyers share in common is they are looking for deals. And buyers want to find those deals in a marketplace they can trust. That is our goal for buyers and for sellers: to make sure eBay is the site top of mind for any buyer when it comes to deals, and not just everyday deals, but deals that they want to share by talking about them with friends and family.
If we succeed (and we will), this will provide exactly what our sellers want: buyers who are looking for deals. Sellers don't come to sell on eBay because it is "fun." They sell here because they have access to the biggest buyer traffic at the most affordable costs. In order to make eBay even more compelling to sellers, we need to keep bringing more buyer traffic, reduce inefficiency in listing and listing management and keep the cost of selling affordable. A final question: What will eBay be doing to make me a staunch supporter again after the years of (not just 2008) changes? I don't mean a retreat to 1995 - of course things must move forward, but give me something… OK, that may be too broad and non-specific to answer. I won't hold it against ya if you don't.
I provided an overview above of what drives our recent, current and future strategies. In the next few months, we'll reveal more details of what exactly we are working on for the coming year but everything that is planned is meant to support the points I made above. And a couple of follow-ups:
Re: buyer feedback - I do disagree with you to a certain extent about negs being useless for buyers. If I saw feedback for a winning bidder stating that it took them awhile to pay, I could use that. I would be prepared to be much more patient. If I saw that they didn't pay for items, I knew that I would need to be more cognizant. This would really help me. Now, buyer feedback is pointless and meaningless. You might as well just get rid of it. It does nothing to guide me. If I don't have payment in 7-8 days, I'll just file a UID on someone who may well be in a pattern of paying at 14 days (which I'm actually ok with, if I know that's their pattern). That doesn't benefit them at all, but now the only info I have is that they are glorious. Really, it's pointless. Then again, I always thought the initial feedback system was doomed to fail. People (I think on DNF) laughed at me over that. But then again, I think long-term and look at what things are likely to evolve into. It was doomed from the start.
Re: going back to tamper-proof tape in the stated example/hypothetical query:
"It depends on the box. The tamper proof labels I use are not super adhesive to the point of destroying the underlining surface upon which they are placed. I might think twice about using it on paper of course, but on varnished wood or a sturdy painted surface, I would not hesitate to use one."
What you are describing are not tamper-proof by definition. Removing them would be tampering. And this does lessen the value, which you should know given your stated background in the antiques world.
Yes, tamper proof labels are not ideal for all merchandise, especially very fragile merchandise. But they can be a very effective, inexpensive preventative measure to discourage any buyer with intent to defraud. I don't quite understand your statement "removing them would be tampering." The whole point of the tamper proof label is that it is easy to remove but impossible to replace either on the original item or another item. The tamper proof label falls apart when one attempts to remove it. Plus, given the example, dolls tend to not be boxed in wood or sturdy painted surfaces, so you wouldn't actually do what you are recommending. And really, all a bidder/buyer would have to do these days is state that it arrived opened (or with no tamper-proof tape) and PayPal would very, very, very likely grant their claim.
Not necessarily. Not if the seller has made sure to show the box in close up to indicate that it was indeed closed and sealed. And if the surface of the box was not delicate (was glossy cardboard for example). And the point of a tamper proof label is to discourage a buyer from attempting a switch and fraudulent claim of SNAD. Despite rumors to the contrary, PayPal does not take the buyers side in 100% of all cases.
Posted by ozzie3 on Feb 15, 2009 9:42 PM Auctions The courts say that when the hammer falls in an auction the goods belong to the winning bidder!
subject of course to their paying for the goods. Does that hold true for eBay auction-style listings?
No. The goods don't belong to the buyer until they have paid for them, not when the "hammer falls." If so, then how can PayPal refuse to pay the seller for the goods that belong to the buyer, and to whom the buyer has sent the money?
You are talking about Payment holds. PayPay can and will hold funds for transactions where the seller has not yet established a proven history and track record of selling on eBay.
Posted 3goldibears on Feb 16, 2009 3:59 AM Buyer Demographics Considered? When the management "team" planned and implemented all these policies this past year that were supposed to attract more buyers to the site (presumably the plan was to attract both former customers and new ones) with the "improved and enhanced buyer experience", was any (serious) attention paid to actual buyer demographics?
Yes. Most particularly, did they take into consideration that a very large group of the buyers they were trying to attract were also sellers to which they had presented the cold shoulder (at best) or had shut their business down (at worst - and usually for very arbitrary reasons and with no chances to communicate or appeal)?
Yes. Like any business, we track and measure all aspects of the business including seller and buyer segments. That includes buyers who are also sellers. Dang, just remembered another one I'd wanted to ask. You stated that this job of "Seller Advocacy" was your idea and for which you had volunteered, and which you were mostly doing on your own personal time.
My question: WHY did you find it necessary to volunteer to initiate and implement this assignment?
Because I thought I could provide some benefit by returning to the forum to make myself available for questions. Nothing more, nothing less. I got my start on eBay by posting to the first discussion board in 1996. This seems like a logical extension of that intial effort.
Posted by nanartchik on Feb 16, 2009 4:31 AM Art Selling on eBay and Best Match I have been thinking back to my early eBay experiences, and trying to analyze where it all went wrong for my, and why I stopped selling.
Most recently, the advent of Best Match, DSR's and zero visibility for me, a small seller, killed eBay for me. It's just not cost-effective to list paintings that are never seen, and therefore never sell. I want to emphasize the fact that I paid the same amount in fees that everyone else pays, or more, for less functionality from eBay. Anyone who continues to try to make that work isn't facing reality. Without at least 100 FB, I don't get seen, but I can't get to 100 FB without selling...
I was perking along nicely before Best Match, and making slow but steady progress.
I also stopped buying, btw.
Is there any way to "level the playing field" again. That is a question, although I know the answer is probably "no."
With respect to the Antiques, Art, Collectibles categories, the answer is "yes," not "no." We are exploring better search options for those categories where the appeal is in rarity, or unique appeal (like art). Here's another question from one of my earliest experiences on eBay.
Early on, I was thrilled when "buyer" did a BIN on one of my paintings! The thrill evaporated quickly when I realized it was the classic "Nigerian Scam". This BIN stopped a running auction with a lot of hits. Up to that point, I had sold every piece of art I listed.
It took me and my husband less than 5 minutes with Mapquest to determine that the address supplied by the so-called "buyer" was bogus.
The scammer ultimately cost eBay money, too. (The one positive thing was that with the help of the Art & Artist's Board, i got all my fees back, even the enhanced listing fees - I used Featured Plus on everything back then.) However, the painting never sold, in its subsequent listings. I lost those potential buyers, but eBay made a pot of money from my subsequent, futile listing of the painting.
I've got some time on my hands and would love to verify users for eBay...You don't even have to pay me much...
So, my questions, summarized:
1. Why can't eBay at least check the contact info for new users?
We do to an extent. If a registrant enters obviously false information, we flag the attempt. However in order to verify the actual information (address and phone number) we need to ask the registrant for a credit card and new registrants who are registering to buy will not give that information (they are not required to provide it on any other ecommerce site as a requirement to register on the site.)
What sellers can do is require all buyers to have a PayPal account. Since PayPal does require new registrants to provide verifiable contact and financial information, they can, in effect, verify the contact information provided by the buyer to make sure it maps correctly (address, name, zip code, credit card number etc). 2. Why should I pay the same fees as everyone else for less service? If I am a small seller with 100% FB, shouldn't my advertising rate be lower, seeing that my visibility is almost, well...invisible? As I become more visible, shouldn't I pay more? I know this is complete backwards to the way eBay operates now.
See my comments above. We are exploring other search options for those categories where Best Match alone might not be as effective
Posted by leadsheetmusic on Feb 16, 2009 6:07 AM Listing On International Sites I'm in the United States, but I want to sell merchandise only to overseas buyers. Is there a way to list items so that the listings will not show up on the U.S. eBay site, but only on foreign eBay sites that I designate?
Yes there is. Go to the site on which you want to list (for example, if you want to list on the eBay Australia site, go to www.ebay.au) and click the Sell link on the top of that site's page. You will be asked to log in. Do so with your eBay.com User ID. Follow the steps from there. Your item will be listed on that international site. They won't show up automatically on the US site and will only show up in a search if the buyer selects the Search option for "worldwide" or if the search on eBay.com does not return many results.
Learn more here: http://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/international-site.html
Posted by low*profile on Feb 16, 2009 8:22 AM Help Navigating Pages IMPLOG and 3GOLDIBEARS
(with apologies for interrupting/intruding when it wasn't asked of me...but in the interest of helping my fellow boardies who are suffering from stiff arms and crippled fingers:
The HOME key and the END key on your keyboard jump to the top and bottom of the page, respectively.
These are normally located in the right section of the keyboard, above the arrow keys. I use Firefox, but I think those keyboard functions are universal and should work in any browser
Thanks for that tip low*profile!
Posted by sko74517 on Feb 16, 2009 8:26 AM Another International Question I had another international buyer this weekend, who was buying the item for a friend in the US. They wanted me to ship to a US address. As far as I can see, there is no way to send an invoice with US shipping to an international buyer from eBay. So I suggested they go to Paypal and register their friends address to their Paypal account. I, in turn, would invoice them directly through Paypal. eBay would get its fees and so would Paypal. They did and I got my payment, but Paypal made them put their countries name at the end of the US address!! When I tried to print a shipping label, I got the "sorry shipping is not available. we apologize for the inconvenience" thing. I suspect it's because this is not their address and because there are two countries listed on the country line! Well....duh!
As a result, I now have to take my chances...go to the post office, buy DC and insurance and ship this "gifted" item to the US address/name she provided.....an address that is recognized by the US postal service. If this were a high ticket item, I might be suspicious, but we're talking an $18 item here.
Why does Paypal make it so difficult? It is understandable to me why this woman would not want to pay over $20 Priority International to have an $18 item shipped to her and then turn around and ship it back to the USA! It is just as easy for me to ship it directly to her friend. But Paypal provides no sensible way for international buyers to do this. Why?
Good question (I had the exact same issue with a package to NYC this week. Very frustrating!) I have sent your post to a PayPal rep for their attention. If they send back a reason for this limitation, I will post it here in a future post.
Posted by spoonheart Feb 16, 2009 9:17 AM Ineffectual Griff! Unfortunately it is becoming increasingly obvious that you, Griff, can not affect any real change with the growing problems regarding eBay.
I have posted previously on this issue. Let me restate the expectations:
I am here to answer questions to the best of my ability.
I take suggestions and comments directly to the rest of the company.
I have repeatedly said that I cannot, unilaterally bring changes. I apologize if I led you or anyone else to believe otherwise.
But I can argue and campaign on your behalf. It takes time (I remind everyone I have been posting Ask Griff threads for just over a month. I started the first one on January 14th.)
Is there any chance we will actually hear directly from Mr. Donahoe or Ms. Norrington about all the changes to the site or will they continue to be silent?
Yes. Stay tuned. I am not able to say more at this point. Thank you for your patience.
Posted by deltamaster Feb 16, 2009 9:23 AM Final Value Fee Questions I understand why it is that "traditionally" auction houses and B&M consignment shops would charge "Graduated" fees for selling items. It is because it takes the same amount of labor to prepare all items for sale and since the less expensive items require the same amount of time it winds up costing the consignment folks more money in labor fees since the consignment facility is the one doing the work.
EBAY on the other hand does none of the work.
Uh. I will respectfully take issue with that statement. I can attest from 13 years of first hand, hands on experience that we, those of us who manage the site, work very hard on your behalf. EBAY merely provides the place to list and the sellers themselves do all the work and take most of the risk selling here.
And this "place to list" does not run itself or pay for itself. It takes an enormous amount of human and physical resources to bring you this "place to list." So, why should eBay even have a graduated fee structure?
It makes sense from an economic point of view. The more an item brings, the lower the amount of of the final value fee the seller pays. Why are fees higher on some categories and lower in others (for example the media categories have the highest fees, yet the items usually bring the lowest profit margin for the seller)?
The economics are different for different categories. We set Final Value Fees at a rate that is competitive with other marketplaces. EBAY's fee structure would make an IRS agent pull his hair out... Why can't eBay simplify it with a flat rate... across the board... fee percentage, such as 10% of the final sale price-period!??
Thank you for your suggestion. I have forwarded it to the pricing team for consideration Since eBay owns Paypal, why can eBay not provide some Paypal discounts for eBay sales?
Good question. I don't have an answer but it is a topic under discussion.
Posted by tev_022908 on Feb 16, 2009 9:27 AM eChecks Clearing Griff,
Payapl related question
Why does an e-check have to clear my bank before it can be claimed thru paypal?
Echecks must process through the exact same Account Clearing House (ACH) process used for paper checks. This process takes anywhere from 3 to 5 business days. I have an e-check pending payment right now, paypal says it won't clear MY BANK for yet another couple of days. Then the funds will be available thru paypal to use/obtain.
So you are the buyer, correct? As I mentioned above, eChecks have to clear through the same ACH process used for paper checks. But, a buyer can get around this in PayPal if they add a credit or debit card to their PayPal account. When a buyer's account has more than one funding method, PayPal will pony up the funds from its own pocket and "clear" the eCheck for the merchant or seller immediately. from paypal
Note: eChecks work like paper checks and take your bank several business days to process.
Why isn't this amount left in my bank once it clears?
I can understand CC payments being stored in my PP acconut by paypal, but why should cleared-thru-my-bank e-checks be bounced back to paypal???
Wait, now I am confused. Are you the seller or the buyer? If you are the buyer, see above. If you are the seller, note that received payments are never automatically transferred to your bank account (this is impossible due to legal restrictions). A PayPal account holder has to manually transfer funds from their PayPal account into a bank checking account. This can only happen with positive, cleared PayPal balances, not with pending payments.
Posted by hawgryders on Feb 16, 2009 9:51 AM PayMate? I seem to be way off theme here but I just have a simple question that I have not seen addressed here
[When Paymate comes on-line on the 26th will a seller be able to opt-out of Paypal or will it still be required along side Paymate ?]
A seller is required to offer at least one of the payment options on the list of approved payment options. That means a seller can offer PayMate (as of the 26th) and not PayPal.
Posted by deltamaster on Feb 16, 2009 10:12 AM Block Private Feedback Buyers --->>> Can eBay please set up a filter for sellers to block buyers that choose to make their feedback "Private"?
Thank you for the suggestion. I have forwarded it to the policy team for consideration.
Posted by welovemoneyorders2 on Feb 16, 2009 12:15 PM TV Advertising? Will Ebay ever spend any more on Advertising? I didn't see a single commercial for Ebay this year, to say nothing of those glossy brochures they used to send? Just what are they doing with our fees? They aren't spending them on fraud prevention, or advertising, so where are they going?
Yes, we will. There is an ad campaign in the works for the end of the year. Until then, we are focusing resources on Internet marketing and advertising and with loyalty and promotion campaigns. (Note: we decided, rightfully as it turned out, to forgo an extensive TV campaign this past holiday season and put the funds into the Cashback program. We decided it would make more sense to put that money back into our seller's pockets by giving it to buyers through the Cashback program to spend on eBay, which is exactly what happened.
Thanks everyone for your questions. That brings us up to date for the questions posted last weekend. I have now opened the thread for more questions.
Please review the posting guidelines for Ask Griff at the top of this thread! Thanks,
Griff
Jim Griffith
_______________
eBay Inc
Must use Buy It Now and PayPal.
