Posted by shawnee-stuff on Jan-28-09 01:28 PST Local Pickup Griff, thank you very much for finding and quoting the information about local pickup payment methods in the workshops. But I've gotta tell you... I am confused by your answer. John McDonald says that sellers can use the text "Contact me for payment methods for Pay on Pickup" in their listings. But the FAQ says - right after saying that sellers may use this exact text in their listings -"However, sellers are not allowed to request payment by prohibited payment methods." Correct, but add the following: "Within their item description or email invoices to buyers." So... if I am interpreting this correctly, I can ask buyers to contact me for payment methods for Pay on Pickup, but if they do, I CAN'T say that I accept anything other than approved electronic payments - unless, of course, the buyer brings it up. If a buyer emails or calls you asking how they can pay for a local pickup, you can provide them with a list of any of the payment options you provide for local pickup, including checks, money orders, or cash. If I have this right, here's the resulting conversation with the buyer: Buyer: What methods of payment do you accept if I pick up the item locally? Seller: I accept PayPal. Once a buyer contacts you for information about payment for local pickup, you can provide them with a list of any of the payment options you provide for local pickup, including checks, money orders, or cash. Most sellers accept cash on local pickup. What am I missing? What, exactly, is the point of allowing sellers to solicit this question in the first place if they can't specify any options except for the ones the buyer already knows about? See above If I have misunderstood what is actually allowed in the seller's response... fine. But if that is the case, the information in the FAQ needs to be corrected, because it is very misleading. I apologize if the information in the FAQ was confusing. Here it is in brief: 1. A seller cannot solicit or offer unapproved payment options in either their listing description or email sent to buyers. 2. A buyer may ask a seller to accept an unapproved payment option, usually via email. A seller is free to accept or decline said offers at their own discretion and without consequence. 3. For buyers that are offering a Local Pickup option, they may state the following, and only the following, in their description: "Contact me for payment methods for Pay on Pickup"

---

Posted by ted_200 on Jan-28-09 01:39 PST Shipping Insurance Griff, You really think it is OK for a crooked buyer, or a lazy buyer, or PayPal, to invalidate a seller's insurance? No, I don't. But see the next response... To collect on insurance, the item and all the packaging must be presented to the buyer's Post Office. Not necessarily. More in a moment But PayPal won't require this for a SNAD on a damaged insured item. They TELL the buyer to send it back to the seller, which invalidates the coverage! The outcome of a SNAD dispute is currently not dependant or contingent on the purchase and persual of an insurance claim. Scam buyers won't want to present a fraudulent claim to the Postal System, and they know they won't have to if they just file a SNAD and follow the PayPal guidelines. PayPal is encouraging scams, and voids insurance for cases where their may even be a legitimate shipping damage situation with honest buyers. Buyers may not have any "obligation" to present the item for the claim, but they shouldn't have any expectation of a refund if they won't. No other retailer anywhere will refund on a damaged insured item if the buyer won't present the item for an insurance claim. This is one of the reasons I won't sell anything of any real value here. Yes, this really happens, there are cases posted to the boards on a regular basis - it is not hypothetical. How can you possibly defend this? Having gone through this process as both a buyer and seller, I can tell you how I handle insurance claims as a seller: (this is not failsafe - a buyer with fraudulent intentions can get the best of you in this situation - but it does provide the most effective level of protection for the majority of situations). With a request for a refund for item damaged in transit, you have two options: Insurance or Buyer Return. And you are correct: a seller cannot use both. For an item lost in transit, the insurance will be your only option (and will come in very handy). Insurance claim option When I insure an item, I make myself the claim recipient, not the buyer. And I keep the reciepts. If a buyer receives an item that she claims was damaged in transit, I remind the buyer that I did insure the item, and ask the buyer to describe the damage, and if possible, to take a photo of the damage and send it to me. Keep in mind the buyer is not obliged to do so (neither you or eBay can force the buyer to oblige). I then refund the buyer's payment through PayPal using the proper option so that it is recorded as a refund. I then ask the buyer if they wouldn't mind holding on to the item at their location as USPS might want to inspect or claim the item as part of the insurance claim process but I remind them that they are not obliged to do so and that it is only a favor you ask of them to help you out. By reminding the buyer that they are not obliged to assist you (they aren't) you actually stand a better chance of them agreeing. And it seems in most cases, USPS will actually not attempt to inspect or claim the merchandise. Then file the claim with USPS. Submit any photos the buyer sent you along with a print out of the item listing page. And wait. Claim awards can take as much as six weeks to complete. If the claim is awarded, you have your reimbursement. If not, then you have a loss to deduct from your business. Return option Depending on the circumstances, a seller might want to forego the insurance claim and simply ask the buyer to send the item back for a refund. Circumstances might be that the item is salvegable, or you didn't purchase insurance for the item, etc. Remind the buyer to use a trackable method of delivery. Once the item is back in your hands, refund the buyer. Will either of these options protect you from a buyer attempting to defraud you (for example, switching out the item)? No, not currently. As I said earlier, we need to find a better way to protect sellers from this dispicable activity. Perhaps there could be some tie in with a SNAD claim and insurance. I don't know at this point. But as I said before, I am championing the cause for better seller protection against truly fraudulent buyers. ted_200, I in now way want to give the impression that either I or eBay condone bad buyer behavior. My comments about a buyer's obligation did not call out that a buyer should be honest and not fraudulent because I assumed this is understood to be a requirement of all members. My bad. And a buyer is obliged to read and understand a seller's TOS. So, in the interest of clarity, and the fact that many of you have made valid points about this topic (and that I am not always right), I'll increase the list of buyer obligations from one, to pay, to three:

1. Read a seller's description and TOS
2. Pay for the item per the terms of the seller's TOS
3. Don't defraud a seller.

These cover the obligations of a buyer prior, during and after the point of sale. While we are on the subject, I ran into Todd Lutwak an hour ago in between meetings and we had a very interesting and illuminating conversation about a subject that I believe many of you will find to be of interest. I am going to post a thread later today with a link to the subject to start a discussion on this topic. I hope you will take part (I won't offer any commentary, I promise! I just want to read your thoughts on this particular subject (Hint: It's about really difficult buyers and what to do with them. More later.)

---

Posted by implog on Jan-28-09 01:43 PST FTC Web site Griff Would you please make available to all eBay members the helpful link below and tack it at the top of all Discussion Boards. Thanks in advance. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/tech/tec07.shtm The FTC website, Internet Auctions A Guide for Buyers and Sellers has a lot of good information. However, instead of a separate, tacked thread, I will include it here as an FYI for anyone interested with this topic with the following note: This is an FTC guide. It is not a set of rules or regulations on how said sites are required to operate.

---

Posted by whataboutmoneyorders on Jan-28-09 03:33 PST TOS Question Hi Griff- My question was: [Don't buyers have a responsibility to abide by a seller's TOS if the TOS does not violate eBay policy?] Your response was: Of course. And it is assumed that by paying - within the time stated by the buyer and by the payment option(s) the seller has provided - the buyer has met their obligation. My comments about buyer obligations were in reference to the belief of some sellers that buyers have other obligations like, for example, to be polite, or to not ask too many questions or ask for special consideration or to leave only positive feedback and all 5 ratings. It is hoped they do. However, they are not obligated to do so. When I asked this question I was strictly speaking about the information contained within a seller's TOS, not about any "beliefs" that sellers may or may not have outside of the TOS. None of the examples you gave in your response applied to my question. So I hope you don't mind if I rephrase it. Not at all. I apologize if I didn't answer it to your satisfaction [Is it or is it not a buyer's responsibility to abide by ALL of a seller's terms of sale, including statements regarding aspects of the transaction OTHER THAN payment, as long as the seller's TOS does not violate eBay policy or the law?] Examples for clarification: no international bidders, return policy Yes, to the extent that the TOS does not violate or contradict eBay or PayPal policy. (See my comments above about buyer obligations. I lengthened the list to three). Note that you have tools to block international buyers. If you select the Buyer Requirement for blocking buyers who are registered in countries to which you won't ship and you specify those countries as "I won't ship" in the shipping section of the SYI form or you elect to provide no option for international shipping, then you are blocking international buyers. Thank you

---

Posted by pink_n_red_roses on Jan-28-09 04:12 PST Seller Advocate? Do you know the actual reason this buyer left the negatives and neutrals? Given the ratio, it appears that 10 of these sellers managed to "protect" themselves somehow. They recieved positive feedback. Are you asking eBay to "protect" you from anything that isn't a positive comment? If a buyer shows a real pattern of abuse, we take action. (And yes, we have already in several cases). You aren't going to like this answer, but I don't see a pattern of "abuse" and T&S won't either. I see a buyer who has had issues with nine out of ten transactions, five of them the buyer felt strong enough to leave negatives. And ten transactions for which she didn't have a problem. For reference, here's the thread: http://forums.ebay.com/db2/thread.jspa?threadID=520078942&start=0 griff, did you check the details of the negatives and the dates the buyer won the items? She lives in Canada and left several negs 3-6 days after winning the auctions. It is totally unreasonable for her to expect her items to arrive from the USA so soon. Sorry, I cannot make that call. The buyer also has left more positives than negatives so it doesn't indicate an intent to abuse the privilege of leaving feedback. Question: How can you call yourself a "seller's advocate" when you can't see what an abusive buyer this is? And that is the crux of the issue. I am passionate about advocating for you and all sellers but that doesn't mean there won't be times when we disagree. And on this one, based on the evidence provided, it would not be considered a pattern of abuse. If some of those sellers were allowed to leave negatives stating that she has very unrealistic shipping expectations, I bet she would have learned quickly to be a little more patient. Possibily. But you just said it yourself, "she has very unrealistic shipping expectations". Having those expectations doesn't invalidate her left feedback. Consider: What did the other sellers do that resulted in their receiving positive feedback? Sorry Griff, but a "Sellers Advocate" doesn't condone buyers like this. You are a "Buyers Advocate". A seller's advocate will never please all sellers, all the time, but that does not make him any less an advocate for sellers. I deeply regret you believe otherwise and hope you will at least rethink this particular case from a neutral perspective.

---

Posted by eelivss on Jan-28-09 04:36 PST Store Credit Im just a part timer. I had planed to start selling again this year,but! I sell yardsell type stuff "AS IS". I try to start my auctions at .99. I can not give free shipping and handling with this type auction. If I am forced to "accept returns"and have "free shipping" would it be possable for me to refund only store credit.This might keep the buyer happy ,keep me happy and if they do not want the credit they must not be to unhappy with purchase. I think store credit might solve a lot of problems. Thanks No seller is forced to provide free shipping. It is encouraged, not required. No seller is forced to "accept all returns." It is also encouraged, but not required (with the caveat that in some dispute cases, you may be required to refund a buyer's payment once they have shipped the item back to you.) Currently, there is no model for refunding credit in the form of Store credit or coupons. Many buyers who want to return an item want the cash, not credit but it is an idea worth pursing. I know a few occasions where one of my buyers would have gladly accepted credit. I will forward this as suggestion to the appropriate team.

---

Posted by whataboutmoneyorders on Jan-28-09 04:44 PST Seller Sentiment Griff, twice in your recent responses you make reference to whether something is "fair" or not. Do you think the changes that have been made to eBay over the past year are "fair" to eBay sellers? A few of the changes are not completely fair to sellers (I have already voiced my opinion on these). I am pushing for fixes to make things as equitable or fair as possible. Does eBay realize that what has been happening here since 2008 is FAR different than what happened in the late 1990s? Yes. This is a different time and environment Does eBay realize that in the past those who "vehemently disagreed with changes" were the minority, whereas now, they are becoming the majority? eBay acknowledges and understands that many sellers are under very difficult circumstances at the moment and is working to address those concerns .

---

Posted by shawnee-stuff on Jan-28-09 04:51 PST Local Pickup Griff, I apologize for returning to my earlier subject. But now that I understand eBay's policy with regard to what my listings can say about local pickup, I just revised all my current listings appropriately. While doing so, I discovered that on the SYI form, calculated shipping and local pickup are mutually exclusive. In the Shipping section of the SYI form, if you choose "Flat: same cost to all buyers" you also get a checkbox labeled "Buyers can pick up the item from you." But if you change the first drop-down to "Calculated: Cost varies by buyer location," or "Freight: Large Items over 150 pounds" this checkbox disappears. I've just concluded an hour-long (and, if I may so, absurd) conversation with Live Help, and they have confirmed that this is the case, and not a glitch suffered by my own computer. So it would appear that unless you are willing to offer flat-rate shipping to the United States, eBay thinks you should not ALSO offer local pickup. By itself, that's just silly. But the fact that the local pickup option does not exist when you select the Freight shipping option (where you could CERTAINLY be offering a large, heavy item - one that a local buyer would very likely wish to pick up themsleves) is completely ridiculous. The Live Help representative pointed out that I can still specify within the description that local pickup is available, which is true. But we all know buyers don't always read the fine print - and now that the Shipping Details section (where the information supplied by the local pickup checkbox is displayed) will be moved "above the fold" in the new listing pages, it's more important than ever that eBay give sellers every ability to properly "codfiy" their policies. Further... although I am not a member of the foil hat club that sees conspiracy in every move made by eBay, the statements you quoted earlier saying that there is only one approved way to phrase a seller's willingness to accept other types of payments for a local pickup would suggest to some people (perhaps even myself!) that bots might, in fact, eventually be used to facilitate enforcement of the accepted payments policy - something I have not believed up until now. We don't use bots to search out listing descriptions. We might use filters in the SYI form to alert a seller prior to listing that something about the description could be a policy violation. But bots post listing? No. Here's what I'm getting at: if a bot can search for the specific phrase "Contact me for payment methods for Pay on Pickup" as a way to identify a seller who is following policy exactly (and therefore could easily have a legitimate excuse for a larger than normal number of paper payments) couldn't a bot ALSO easily mistake a seller who simply wants to give the best possible shipping price to all their customers as one that shouldn't have a larger than usual number of paper payments... just because they can't check the local pickup box on the SYI form? There are no bots. My question: does eBay consider this characteristic of the SYI form an oversight that will be corrected, or is there some reason that it is set up this way? I don't know. I will have to inquire. If it is indeed an oversight, I'd appreciate it if you made sure that the people in charge of that area know about it. Will do If it's not, I'd like an explanation. The Live Help rep said that eBay "couldn't" have calculated shipping and local pickup on the SYI simultaneously. As an experienced programmer, I cannot accept this explanation. If this a deliberate feature, then it would have been for some policy reason, not a programming reason. Please understand, Griff... I don't have a dog in the paper payments argument. I've always offered them in addition to electronic payments, but only a tiny percentage of my customers have ever elected to use them. So if eBay doesn't want them around any more, it's just not that big a deal to me. However, I am ALWAYS interested in ANYTHING I can do to make my items attractive to the largest possible number of potential buyers. If that means figuring out the way that I can legally inform a potential local buyer (one who happens to hate PayPal) that they can pay with paper - or if it means making absolutely sure that a local person who doesn't want to pay for shipping (and therefore only bids on local items they can pick up) knows this is true about my listings - then that's what I'm all about. Understood.

---

Posted by etown99 on Jan-28-09 05:56 PST Ad Placement My question. Do you believe that Ebay sellers should continue to keep paying more and more for less and less? ________________ You answered: Absolutely not! No seller should be paying for a service that is not providing them value. However, your contention above, that Ad placement on eBay is driving a significant number of buyers off the site, is not what we are seeing. I had posed the same question to Matt Ackley on the store board after Ebay announced that they were going to offer adcommerce for Ebay sellers. I asked Matt what the sell through rate was of Ebay users (buyers) who clicked a Yahoo PPC ad, then purchased offsite. His reply? NO way of telling if the user purchased offsite. Ebay doesn't have those stats. My new questions. What are you seeing that Matt states is impossible to see? You stated that ad placement was driving a significant number of buyers off the site. I said, "that is not what we are seeing" There are no stats to prove your statement. That is what I meant. Sorry if it was unclear. (This is a topic on which I am not the ultimate expert). What does Ebay consider a significant number of buyers leaving Ebay? see above How can Ebay tell - when a user leaves their site - that the user purchased or didn't purchase offsite - after clicking offsite, from Ebay? We cannot. So any statements to the contrary are speculation . How can Ebay tell if that user who clicked offsite via a Ebay revenue driven identical matching PPC ad - pick a date - 1 day, 1 month later - re-purchased from the same offsite competitor Ebay introduced him to? Specifically if that user went directly to the site Ebay acquainted him with, without ever going through Ebay again? We cannot. So any statements are speculation . Other Ebay employees have stated that there is indeed a moral dilemma - link available - within Ebay among IT's employees pertaining to the harm these ads inflict on Ebay sellers. Why would an Ebay seller advocate have no qualms about driving billions - and IT is billions, of clicks offsite? I have no qualms with the concept of ads on eBay. I see them as potentially benefitial for the entire marketplace and that includes sellers btw. If a buyer cannot find the deal they seek on the site, then connecting them to another deal is better than letting them go away empty handed. If they find something appealing in one of the ad links, and it results in their returning to eBay to search again, then everyone benefits. My new question. Why would a user, who cannot find what he wants on Ebay, and leaves via a Yahoo sponsored identical PPC ad that matches his query, come BACK to Ebay to NOT find what he's looking for AGAIN? Because we believe that a buyer who starts their search on eBay, does not find the item they seek on eBay and does find it through one of the sponsored links, will be more likely to return to eBay to begin a search in the future. You may not believe this to be the case. However, we do. So, you believe the Ebay users mindset who clicked off Ebay is, "I didn't find IT last time on Ebay, I'll go back and not find IT again on Ebay?" But that is not the case. The buyer is just as likely, if not more so, to recall, I went to eBay to search for X and I eventually found it." It doesn't matter necessarily to the buyer where they ended up finding a deal on X, just that their last search path was eventually successful. That's why a buyer is likely to return to eBay to search the next time. New question: Is management's vision of the new Ebay to be a poor excuse of a mini comparison site instead of a destination for shoppers? Glad you asked that: Management's vision and eBay's purpose are one in the same: "We connect buyers and sellers." And with hundreds of millions of items available at any one time, in every category imaginable, I contend that eBay's value proposition for shoppers is stronger than ever and makes it a top destination for all shoppers. There is no comparable site where so many different sellers offer such a wide array of value and selection. And when a buyer cannot find what they seek on eBay, showing them other options furthers that vision of connecting buyers and sellers. I asked: I have purchased a minimum of over 1500 items on Ebay. Yet, I'm shown these five identical matching Yahoo PPC ads on every single page on every search query, urging me to leave Ebay. On my seller ID, where I have made very few purchases in the last year, I usually receive zero Yahoo sponsored PPC ads on my search queries. This is the ID where I should be being shown Yahoo PPC ads, (rarely purchase.) From my personal experience the exact opposite of Steve Hartman's announcement (above) is happening on Ebay. My question. Why is that? You answered: I don't know. Send me the details. (the keywords used, your User ID and even screen shots), I will provide them to Steve and provide a response if possible..... Send me the details in an email so I can forward it to the appropriate person for their review.

---

Posted by itsallgood4me2 on Jan-28-09 06:13 PST Monitoring Collectibles & Antiques Categories My question concerns something you said about possibly having a group of sellers basically police and report other sellers in the vintage & collectibles category. I've scanned through all replies & didn't really see this hashed out, but if it has been asked & answered, I apologize. Anyhow---since those are the categories I sell in myself, this possibility is of particular interest to me. Sorry if I sound cynical, but I wouldn't feel at all comfortable about my competitors having the power to get my listings yanked. After all, who would benefit the most from removing my auctions that were running concurrently with their own, similar items? One thing that worries me about this coming to pass is that in my own personal experience, a listing is pulled when a report of a violation is received, without any apparent effort on eBay's part to verify that it is indeed a violation. So, if this truly is what eBay is planning, don't you think it might be a case of setting a fox to guard the hen house? Rest easy. There are no plans to give a group of sellers the power to delete another seller's listings based on item authenticity or claims about the item. We might rely on a the recommendations of a group of trusted sellers to help recategorize items that are either posted in an inappropriate category or that are use inappropriate or incorrect item attributes.

---

Posted by low*profile on Jan-28-09 06:13 PST DSRs Griff - you said above...We have actually removed the majority of truly bad sellers (and yes, buyers) in the last two years through a program called Seller Non Performance ...this program has been very successful in increasing the quality of sellers on eBay. Now that the worst fires appear to be out, will eBay take any steps to refine the DSR system so that the "curve" reflecting the range of acceptable performance on the site conforms more naturally to the range of rating increments available? I have mentioned repeatedly in this thread that the entire rating system is currently under review for improvements. I cannot reveal more than that. It has all along concerned me that, as desperate sellers do more and more lobbying with their buyers 5's, and as buyer-sellers catch on and automatically leave 5's to "game" the system, that the acceptability "curve" eBay judges sellers by becomes more and more unnaturally tightened and skewed towards the top end of the range. Begging for 5's, and leaving automatic 5's when you buy, just exacerbates the situation. Not really. Buyers don't leave ratings under duress, that is, "begging" for ratings (never advised, btw) might convince a buyer who might have left fours previously to leave fives but there is no guarantee that "begging" actually results in a significant change from 4 to 5. Overall, buyers see the "curve" on the 1 to 5 scale, and assign ratings based on their experience. To the extent that, as a buyer, I early on quit leaving detailed seller ratings. For me at least, it's been a dilemma I can't resolve - damned if you do and damned if you don't. So I take the "first, do no harm" approach. So you don't leave any ratings at all? I don't see the logic. If you have a great experience with a seller, why not leave what you believe are appropriate ratings? Quite frankly, I almost always leave 5's because my buying experiences are all exceptional. I might have left one 4 in the time that I have been buying. (It was deserved). I don't see how leaving no ratings, is a "do no harm" approach but the choice of course, to leave no ratings is yours to make. Does eBay see this as a problem, or is the fact that the DSR system has been effective in removing irresponsible sellers been enough? (Would the fact that the threshold for restriction was lowered to 4.1 from 4.3 be an indication that they are looking at this issue?) It might be an indication. What DSRs have accomplished is pretty significant with regards to reducing the rate of bad buyer experiences complaints but more importantly, the incentive of discounts (for PowerSellers) has resulted in a definite increase in the overall level of customer service for all sellers. So the learnings: Rating systems are never perfect but they can work, or to be more precise, they can change crucial seller practices for the better when combined with the right mix of incentives and penalities. We continue to refine and retune the levers and the mix, but some sort of buyer input about transactions will always be a critical part of eBay.

---

Posted by dvdguaranteed on Jan-28-09 06:31 PST Immediate Payment Limitations 1) Griff, in a reply to a UPI issue, you said: "Did you not use Immediate Payment Required for the Buy It Now? It does provide a 100% solution to UPI for fixed price." It may be a 100% solution to UPI fixed price, but (as with every Ebay 100% solution) it causes other problems. I realize you said Ebay is still working on a UPI solution, so this is probably something that needs to be included in that discussion. I have lost sales for several international buyers who have asked to purchase my items because they are FP multiple item listings with purchase history that have immediate payment required. (Doesn’t happen a lot, but it does happen.) The country listing of allowable countries is poorly grouped, and this leaves out a lot of international buyers (you’ve already addressed this) if you want to exclude countries in Asia or Europe. Once there are purchases on a FP multi-item listing, we cannot make changes – so even when I add these exemplary buyers (I check feedback first) to my exceptions list, they still cannot purchase my item through Ebay because they can’t "Buy It Now" with no shipping listed for their country. This is a definite shortcoming and one that needs to be addressed, especially with the overwhelming popularity of the Fixed Price Multiple Quantity format. The edit ability is under consideration The system doesn't allow them to pay immediately as required, and tells them they need to contact the seller for an invoice. I can't invoice them, because they never purchased. I can't change the listing to not require immediate payment because there are already purchases. So ... short of offering to sell to them off Ebay, what is Ebay’s recommended option for this situation? Do I leave listings as Immediate Payment Required for the 100% UPI solution or do I leave it "open" so I can include those great feedback international buyers who want to buy? (I would love to have the option of opening it up for the buyer, and then applying the IPR again after the buyer purchases.) I don't have an answer. It is a definite shortcoming. I suppose you could keep a listing up and running that is not IPR for your international buyers or, if one contacts you, you could create one for their benefit, on the fly. But it is true, there is no elegant solution at this time. 2) I’m glad that the speed issue for the new pages has been addressed. I was a bit distressed to read your comment that said "Broadband is the standard" for the Internet. Being involved with web development for over 13 years and keeping up with Internet technologies because of my profession, I am 100% sure that is not the case, broadband access is definitely NOT the standard for today's Internet. What I meant by "standard" is that nearly everything developed today for the web is designed with broadband as the standard. This doesn't mean that in the US broadband is the most used access method. For those in rural areas, this is not true and the US in general, lags woefully behind the rest of the developed world in this regard. It seems you have backtracked on this a bit with other replies (unless I am just reading them wrong?), and I think that's a good thing. I'm not saying the upgrades / changes aren't going to be good after all the bugs and things are worked out (it's actually kind of exciting), but it's a bit of relief to know that Ebay understands its audience a little at times, because it doesn't always feel that way to me. I have the benefit of professional experience with web development that gives me more insight about the process, so I understand a lot of the tech issues that pop up are just the nature of the beast ... there's really no way around that; with the unlimited number of combinations of connections and platforms and even individual computer set-up available, there can be 8 million things that go wrong and there is really no way, short of being clairvoyant, that Ebay techies can forsee all of it (that's why windows - something that had millions of dollars spent on testing - STILL has regular updates). BUT, if I in my web development business ever had the lack of communication and support and the level of word-spin that Ebay has had during this process of changes, I wouldn't have any clients left to serve. Right now, I'm just thankful that Ebay is not my main source of income. My trust level is reeeeal low. I'm seeing some small changes that are slowly building that trust back up, but it's just seems crazy that it ever got to this point in the first place. All that said, thanks again for all your work with this – it's so nice to "talk" to a real person about real issues and not get canned replies – even if I don't agree with everything you say – at least you're saying it; something that cannot be said about most of Ebay's leadership. My pleasure (and look for more leadership appearances in the future). -Jennifer P.

---

Posted by low*profile on Jan-28-09 06:34 PST Local Pickup You can use the following and only the following text... "Contact me for payment methods to pay on pickup" or "Contact me for payment methods for pay on pickup" I am taking this literally, so to me, you're saying that the bots that screen listing content are programmed to recognize ONLY those two character strings as acceptable wording. There are no "bots" that pull listings after they have been listed. If so, how do sellers avoid pulled listings for variations on these statements that nevertheless convey the same info? How does eBay make sure all sellers are aware of the acceptable wording? Will it be included in payment options, so that the correct wording is ebay-generated? If a seller who offers local pickup uses this and only this text in their listing, they will be in compliance and their listing will not be pulled: "Contact me for payment methods for pay on pickup"

---

all*about*horses on Jan-28-09 06:43 PST Merchant Accounts Does Ebay have any plans to actually verify that a seller actually has a merchant account when they choose that option on the listing form? Last time I asked a seller how to pay who shows a merchant account as payment option, that seller promptly directed me to pay with a personal check and totally danced around my question about how to pay through their merchant account. Now I'm very gunshy of bidding on anything that shows the seller only accepts a merchant account based CC payment. I don't know if we check currently to verify that the seller actually is supplying a credit card option with their own merchant account. Certainly, if a buyer like you reports the above activity, we will take action against the seller. In the future, it would have to be verified since it would have to integrate into the consistent checkout flow that we have mentioned over the past months, that is coming sometime in the coming year.

---

Posted by jealynn123 on Jan-28-09 06:46 PST Feedback: Who Leaves It First? Could you comment once and for all about sellers posting feedback first for their buyers.... Feedback forum there is a poster posting CONTINUOUSLY about how sellers will be getting bad feedback and DSR'S if they don't post feedback first. It does happen. Some buyers are unhappy that the seller wouldn't leave them feedback first and they will leave a neutral or negative comment stating as much. I have almost 1200 feedback and no problems leaving feedback after my buyer has assured me that everything is okay with their purchase by leaving my feedback first. And you are putting yourself at greater risk of receiving a negative feedback by not leaving it first, then you would if you just left it first in the first place. This is a legacy practice that harkens back to the days when a seller could leave a buyer a negative. Some sellers would not leave it first so they could "retaliate" if a buyer did leave them a negative. Today, that is no longer the case. So although feedback is voluntary and there are no rules or requirements as to who should leave it first, the practical, realistic strategry for sellers should be, leave feedback for the buyer as soon as their payment clears. You don't have to do so. You are not required to by eBay. But knowing that there are some buyers who are prone to leaving a negative if the seller doesn't leave a positive, whether you think this is right or wrong, it only makes sense to just leave a positive after payment is received. Problem solved.

---

Posted by awgryders on Jan-28-09 07:07 PST FTC Website Griff, Straight Quote from the FTC website dealing with internet auction rules: Payment Options Successful bidders can choose among many options to pay for an item they have bought on an Internet auction — credit card, online payment service (which often accepts credit card payments), debit card, personal check, cashier’s check, money order, or escrow service. Sometimes, the seller limits the types of payment accepted and posts that information in the auction listing. Many sellers require receipt of a cashier’s check or money order before they send an item. Higher volume sellers often accept credit cards directly. To protect both buyers and sellers, some auction sites now prohibit the use of wire transfers as a method of payment. Since it appears there is no Government opposition to Non-Electronic payments why does eBay have the policy ?? First, the FTC website is a guide, not a list of rules or requirements. Second, the decision to allow or disallow certain activity on a website is the website owner's right to decide at their discretion. eBay has decided to disallow the solicitation or offering of unapproved payment methods (checks, money orders, cash, wire transfers) as payment offering on our site. To veiw more information, see the links I posted previously to the FAQ on this topic

---

next batch of question coming in a few hours.

Griff _________________ eBay

Still writing responses... In fairness to those who are only here in the afternoon, I will reopen the thread for questions from 1:00pm to 3:00pm Pacific, even if I have not finished answering the most recent batch.

regards,

Griff

Griff _________________ eBay

Posted by pleasedtameetcha Jan-28-09 10:33 PST Block for Local Pickup? Hi Griff, It would be so nice if we could get an optional bidder block for items that are local pickup only. This would be a block that would limit the bidders to a particular state or local mile radius. Any chance someone might consider that? Thanks so much. Actually, there is something in the works for local. It doesn't involve a "block" (though the suggestion is a good idea). The feature is on the drawing board (I cannot talk about it at this point). Stay tuned for more in the coming months.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 11:14 PST Accepted Payments Sellers may not solicit or offer unapproved payment methods either in their listing descriptions or in seller-initiated email or invoices to buyers. So, are you saying if a buyer emails me and asks "Do you take other payment options?" with out stating exactly what they had in mind, I, as the seller am allowed to e-mail them back and say "Yes. I take Money Orders and Checks" in response to their initial email, I would not be violating Ebay policy? (I should have gone to law school...) If the buyer initiates the conversation with a request, and they don't specify the exact method they would like to use, then asking them for clarification would not be a violation of policy.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 11:28 PST Free Shipping Yes. I look for items with free shipping all the time. I just bought a few this week. I was very happy with the price of the item (they were all great deals) and the shipping was free. Did the sellers add shipping to their item prices? I don't know. I don't care. All I know is the item prices were a deal for me and I didn't pay for shipping. You did pay for shipping on the other end. Buyers are not dumb and know the price is included somewhere. So, what is so great about two words of Free Shipping when you are paying for it one way or another? You are viewing it from the seller's perspective and not the buyer's. A buyer looks at the item price and decides whether that price is a good deal or not. A buyer might for a moment, wonder about the seller's cost, profit margin, etc but generally, since these are both, unknowable and an accepted as a part of business (buyers don't think sellers are in business to loose money on each item - they know there is some profit margin built in and do not resent this), buyers tend to decide to purchase if the price is a good deal for them. However... When it comes to shipping costs, buyers, when polled, clearly resent paying more than the actual cost of shipping. And all other things equal between two items except the ratio of item price and shipping (for example, $9.95 plus $5 shipping or $14.95 and Free Shipping), buyers will tend to favor the item with free shipping. Does this make sense? Not really. Both cost the same in the end. But buyers prefer and will actually agree to pay more for the item if the shipping is free. I actually tested this myself a while back with bottles of fragrance that were all the same price in total but some were priced with item price and shipping as separate costs and some were priced with both costs in the item price and free shipping. Guess which ones sold first? My price is not 108.+ instead of 99.98 but be happy, it says Free Shipping? Apparently, yes. See above. Maybe if you can take that Free Ship and use it like a card on everyone else's listings for it, it might be worth something, but as it is now, it's just two words. That is not what buyers are telling us. You got a deal on the listing yes, but you would have had the same deal if the seller had reduced the listing price and included shipping. That is correct. And yet, buyers will go for the higher price and free shipping Maybe Griff you would have had a better deal at a lower price if they didn't include Free Shipping because now, they are also compensating for the extra fees they are paying Ebay in Finals for Free Shipping. Surely you must know this. See above.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Jan-28-09 11:29 PST Media Sellers [Does eBay want media sellers to go elswhere?] Absolutely not. What benefit would that strategy be to the marketplace? To be even more candid, how would eliminating an entire category that does over a billion dollars in gross sales a year, benefit eBay? Media categories are a crucial part of the market.

---

journeyfan64 on Jan-28-09 11:31 PST Unpaid Item Dispute and Feedback Hello Griff Can you please help with a feedback problem I have on my selling ID. I had to open an UID on a buyer after 10 days from the end of auction. On the final day of the UID, they responded with "Buyer indicates that they will pay" They eventually pay and I mailed their item. They were able to leave me a NEG "What a jerk". I do not think that this feedback is fair. I asked several times for it to be removed since in no way did the buyer say they were Unhappy in the UID, they just checked the "Plan to Pay" button. By the way, this is my only NEG and I have 4.9 on all my DSR stars. Why am I a jerk. I sold an item, I sent an invoice. On the 6th day I sent a friendly reminder and on the 10th day I filed the UID. Notice they waited until the very last minute to respond. I sent a nice thank you with item and would just like to know how come I deserve to keep that NEG Feedback of "What a JerK" I am now always afraid to file UIDs for fear of another NEG Feedback. Oh, and I have emailed you several times for your help on this, the last time being a few days ago but you never responded. Thank you for your help. Sorry to hear about this. I agree. It is unfair of the buyer to leave a negative in this case. Unfortunately, under the current rating and feedback system, they can do so and since they paid eventually, the feedback itself is not subject to removal. And speaking for most sellers, I am certain they would not want to deal with this buyer in the future. In fact, I confess even I would be hesitant to deal with them myself (and I am usually willing to take a chance on any buyer). Finding a solution to this problem has proven to be a challenge in the past. Based on the input from many sellers here and in email sent to me, I think a good, if not perfect solution might be more Buyer Requirement options for blocking buyers. For example, a block for buyers who leave x or x% of negative feedback or bid retractions or INR or SNAD complaints. Perhaps giving more control to sellers on who can bid or buy from them would be a workable solution. (I am pretty sure most sellers would welcome more control). For now, although I cannot offer more in the way of redress, you should leave a reply to the buyer's comment to alert the rest of the world about the transaction experience from your perspective. http://pages.ebay.com/help/feedback/respond.html And keep in mind that the entire ratings and feedback system is currently under review for improvements. More in the coming months.

---

Posted by deltamaster on Jan-28-09 11:38 PST Buyer Verification By it's nature eBay requires everyone wishing to trade on the site to sign up for membership. Does this not create the atmosphere of membership in a "club" so to speak... Sort of like "Sams Club"? Why would it not be appropriate to enhance that ideal that this is a club and require accurate membership information? Requiring new buyers to provide more than contact information will not work. Online verification of information requires that the registrant provide either a credit card or bank account. Buyers will not participate if they are required to provide this information in order to shop and buy on eBay. Yes, doing so might provide better verification of the buyer's identity but it will not predict or prevent unwelcome buyer behavior. It will put a serious crimp on the flow of new buyers to eBay. For these two reasons, we do not require verification for new members until that member sets up a seller's account. If a seller wants to be sure that their buyer's have supplied valid contact information, she can use the Buyer Requirement for "Block buyers that do not have a PayPal account. " This is form of verification vetting since a buyer with a PayPal account would have had to provide verifiable financial information in order to open their PayPal account.

---

Posted by deltamaster on Jan-28-09 12:03 PST Return Policies Why would eBay expect that any of their sellers should not dictate their own return policies or "NO RETURN" policies and not help the seller enforce it? Under the current rules, a seller who accepts PayPal and has a "no returns" policy, is not exempt from paying a refund (upon return of the item) in a SNAD case where PayPal rules in favor of the buyer. If a seller is not able or willing to assume this risk, they can provide another payment option (merchant credit card for example).

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Jan-28-09 12:04 PST Shipping Terminology Griff, Delivered vs. shipping cost! "Handling time and cost. Sellers are required to let buyers know the number of days it typically takes to ship an item after receiving cleared payment. To add a handling cost to your shipping costs, enter an amount in the Handling cost field. This amount is not displayed to buyers." Ergo, shipping cost displayed by eBay is not "shipping cost", but is "shipping and handling cost". Buyer , not knowing this, thinks shipping cost is excessive as "shipping cost", according to eBay, is: "Actual Shipping cost: This is the actual cost paid to the carrier (i.e. postage) for shipping the item." So, the buyer will immediately think that the seller is overcharging the buyer by increasing the "shipping cost" above what it should be , when the buyer checks the cost of shipping on the charts. That, Griff, is why I think it should show "delivered cost" , which would consist of the bid and the shipping charge combined as one figure. ozzie3 always correct,never wrong, but humble in my greatness Thank you for providing the additional information. I will forward your suggestion to the shipping team for their consideration with the standard caveat.. ("I cannot guarantee that this will result in the adoption of your suggestion... etc")

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Jan-28-09 12:12 PST Diamond PowerSellers Is this statement correct, or erroneous? "Stephanie Tilenius, senior vice president and general manager for eBay North America says Diamond merchants pay no listing fees and commissions charged after items sell are negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Online electronics and general merchandise retailer Buy.com and off-price e-retailer SmartBargains.com are among the first members of the exclusive club...." It is correct. Does that not conflict with your previous statements? No, it doesn't conflict with my previous statements which were responses to the questions or comments asking or stating that Diamond PowerSellers are not required to adhere to the same standards or policies specifically with regards to DSR's and Feedback. ozzie3 always correct,never wrong, but humble in my greatness

---

ozzie3 on Jan-28-09 12:13 PST User Agreeement A further question: Does a Diamond Merchant sign the same type of user agreement that the individual member signs and agrees to? Yes. In order to register on eBay, every member checks the "Agree" boxes for the same User Agreement" ozzie3 always correct,never wrong, but humble in my greatness

Griff _________________ eBay

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 12:14 PST PayPal If a buyer does something to clearly change the value of an item, in this case, opening the box and removing the item, then you would have a right to refuse a return under the circumstances if the buyer files a SNAD claim. This one confused me. Yes, I can see why. It wasn't clear. Sorry. I will rephrase it. If a buyer does something to clearly change the value of the item, in this case, opening the box and removing the item, then, before the buyer sends the item back, the seller would be justified in refusing a return and a refund. The seller would have to specify in their listing something along the following: "This item may only be returned in its original condition, specifically, the item will not be accepted for a return if it the buyer has removed from its box. The recognized value of the item is dependant upon it remaining sealed in its original boxed and never having been removed. This is a standard practice for valuable, unboxed collectibles. I respectfully ask that you do not bid if this is not an acceptable condition." I would also use tamper proof tape or a label on a part of the box that would have to be opened in order to remove the item and take close up photos of the that part of the box showing the tape intact. When PayPal tells the buyer to return the item and seller refuses the return, PayPal see's that in the DC that the package was refused by seller. What's the outcome of that? That I don't know. It would be difficult I believe for the seller to open the parcel and then refuse to accept delivery of the package, wouldn't it? Are you saying PayPal won't refund anyway with a legitimate case (buyer damaged item) for the seller just because they refused the package? It is hoped that the information that the box has been opened would be divulged by the buyer before they ship the item back. The seller, before agreeing to take the item back could remind the buyer that if the tape is not intact, that item will not be returnable. Of course, a buyer could state that it is, and the seller could discover upon reciept of the box, that it isn't. My point, this is not a 100% risk free situation. What do you think PayPal procedure is on that. What are the steps PayPal takes before denying or issuing a refund when a package is returned and denied by the seller? I don't know. I will have to ask.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 12:26 PST New Discussion Forums Griff, to the best of your knowledge, do you know if the new boards will have a longer log in time? I don't know. I will ask tomorrow. Garnor is giving us a walk through of the final product prior to the upcoming release.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 12:39 PST Information On File w eBay If we can prove, by information on file, that there is a connection between a current account and previously suspended account, we will suspend the second and any subsequent accounts. Griff, what are the procedures in that? For security reasons, we don't reveal the details of how this actually works. What is to stop me from signing up with false contact info? Blatantly false info will flag the system. (again, I cannot discuss the details for security reasons) What is in place to catch someone from signing up again after suspension with a new ID? For instance, Using my next door neighbors address instead of my own and phone number. Again, I am unable to discuss this. What else besides details I put in my registration does Ebay do to catch false sign ups? I cannot reveal that information.

---

Posted by deltamaster on Jan-28-09 12:41 PST Buyer Block Can a block be available to a seller that forces the buyer to first ASQ the seller for permission to bid/buy if they chooses to make their feedback private? Possibly. It's not a bad suggestion. I will forward it to the appropriate team for consideration. I cannot promise that this will result in the adoption of your suggestion.

---

Posted by toystover on Jan-28-09 13:48 PST Deal Alerts Hello Griff, First of all, thanks very much for starting this thread and answering all our questions. I would like to know if there is a way to opt out of "deal alerts"? There are others, but this is one I just noticed ... Deal alert: No one has bid yet. Steal this deal! I feel it looks very tacky and would hate to have that put on any of my auctions. Have not seen it as an option on the SYI form, so I guess it's just the "(bad) luck of the draw"?! There is no opt out feature for this alert. It is displayed for all to see.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-28-09 13:52 PST Search Pagination Links What ever happened to the "change page/Next Page" bar that used to be at the top of the search listings pages? I don't recall ever seeing the page list at the top but Griff, can this be considered? Is it in the works? I would love that as a buyer. I do not know. I can ask but I cannot promise that it will result in the adoption of your request...

---

Posted by his_majesty_absurd on Jan-28-09 14:26 PST A Poster Echos Griff's Request [to anyone posting many posts over and over...] we all can see that you are very frustrated by the current state of ebay. So are many other posters, me included. Your posts come in such large number that they are dominating this thread making it almost into your private shouting spot. Freedom of speech cannot be limited, but - along with other posters (and Griff) who asked earlier to keep posting format to specific questions, i am becoming afraid that if there will be too much shouting, and things like "what is up with that, Griff?" , or "when Ebay will stop XXX" - Griff will not be able to focus on specific problems that actually might have a chance of being addressed by Griff and/or Ebay. Maybe what you can do- is start your own thread, and post some of the raw and emotional statements on there, maybe get some feedback from fellow posters, and then bring MOST IMPORTANT points to this thread - which would be more consistent with the way Griff is trying to manage it. Sometimes- less it more, and it is better NOT to drown your important points in the screams of the "frustration fest". You have to prioritize. Griff cannot solve all the world's problems in one sitting;; shouting and temper tantrums will only dilute possibility of resolutions. As Robert Redford said in "Legal Eagles" - "carefully chosen words are my weapon". Use your weapon responsibly. Please! Thank you his_majesty_absurd. I and many others appreciate the reminder! I am goint to limit the number of posts per session to no more than 50. If one person posts, say 10 posts, they have just used up 20% of the quota! Please take time to formulate your posts to contain succinct questions, no more than 3-5 per post and preferably, no more than one post per session. This will give others a chance to post their questions. Thank you.

---

Posted by career-closet-fashions on Jan-28-09 14:38 PST You say the buyers are not just a sellers customer but also "eBay's customer" and eBay wants those customers to be happy and come back and shop on their site so it would be best for us to take any and every return for any and every reason. So when will eBay start bearing some of the burden of refunds with the sellers? There are no plans to do so. As it is now eBay loses nothing when a buyer returns an item. Not one red cent. Uh, yes we do. We loose the FVF which we return to the seller Would a restocking fee be appropriate and considered within the realm of possibilities/acceptable in these instances? Would it be acceptable to allow returns without having to refund shipping costs? Possibly. I have stated previously that a return less some seller costs isn't unthinkable. This is not to say I am promising it will happen. But it is worth considering. I want to sell here and I want my customers to be happy and I want to be happy, heck I wouldn't even mind if eBay was happy but there needs to be a better solution than the seller losing their back side in all this. If eBay will pick up the return shipping and the buyer will pay a restock fee equal to the fees lost, I'll be glad to take all returns and eat the loss of my time etc. How about it what do you think? Workable? See above. I will take the suggestion back to my team for consideration (with the usual caveat: I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your suggestion or request).

---

Posted by aljimo on Jan-28-09 14:59 PST Tautology and Buyer Obligations Griff, your buyer responsibility stance seems tautological. I would respectfully disagree. My stance is realistic. There are some things that are in our purview and some that aren't Q: How then is a buyer obligated to pay for an item? A: Because eBay requires it. That is correct. This is within our purview. Q: Why is a buyer not obligated to cooperate with an insurance claim? A: Because eBay doesn't require it. And we don't require it because currently, we cannot require it. This is way outside our purview. We can request that the buyer return the item before the seller will refund the buyer's payment, but we cannot force a buyer to cooperate with a seller's requests regarding the merchandise in an insurance claim or dispute. There may be a way in the future to accomplish this but for now, we cannot go to the buyer's home and demand they cooperate with the seller on an insurance claim. Q: Why is a buyer obligated to provide accurate contact information? A: Because eBay requires it Q: Why is a buyer not obligated to comply with the seller's TOS? A: Because eBay doesn't require it. I said a buyer is required to follow a seller's TOS and that eBay will support that seller's TOS as long as it doesn't contradict eBay policy or buyer protection guidelines. You might want to go back and reread previous Q&A on this topic.

---

Posted by sko74517 on Jan-29-09 13:59 PST Vintage eBay, Why the Changes? A couple of follow ups and some new questions: My original question, your response, my followup: OQ:Is there any hope at all the eBay will consider starting an "eBay Vintage" or "eBay Classic" site (sort of like eBay Motors), that would be limited to items that are used/collectible/vintage/antique and where those searching for that type of item can do so without having to look at a bunch of new items? Griff: Extremely unlikely. Breaking traffic into two separate sites doesn't work. We could treat the categories differently (see previous posts and answers). But a totally separate site is not in the cards. F-up: eBay motors works and works extremely well from what I can see. Sales are high, sell through seems to be excellent and you know what you're going to get when you search there. Why not use this model for vintage items? Again, it would be extremely unlikely we would create a separate site for vintage items. Some different features for certain category would a more realistic possibility but I would be misleading you if I said there was even a chance that we would split the marketplace by category. This marketplace has been around since what......1994? It seems to have survived just fine since then and without all of this intervention. Why do you believe that it will fall apart now all of a sudden? Much of the discontent and decline in this market place appears to have occured in the past year.......since many of these changes were made. I realize that we are in the midst of a recession, but other on-line market places seem to be experiencing a greater level of growth than eBay has There is a perception among some that all of us here inside eBay woke up one day a year or so ago and said, "Hey, things are really great! Let's mix them up! " That is not the case. We do not make changes for changes sake. We made changes because they were crucial to the future success of the marketplace. I have commented on this many times in the past year. The marketplace and the internet were very different in 1995 when AuctionWeb launched from what we have today. Back then, and through the early years of the this century, the internet and buying online were new, exciting phenomenae. Buyers, fascinated with the new technology, were a lot more forgiving of ineffeciencies and costs in order to be a part of the thrill of the bright new thing, buying online. And, eBay was a much smaller business and community back then. And we were growing at a stupendous rate. They were heady days indeed. Then in 2007, we started to notice some concerning trends with buyers and their buying habits and we realized that the rest of ecommerce had started to evolve and we were falling behind, in part perhaps because of our initial, unheralded success. Thus the pace and depth of the changes in the last year. We don't always get everything absolutely right (eBay is managed, after all, by human beings) and we do adjust course as necessary. But we would never bring about such a level and pace of change without absolutely solid reasons. I wish I had kept the first email I got when those changes were made (maybe someone else did??). It never mentioned "raised FVF". What it said is "we listened to you!" and then went on to talk about reduced insertion fees. One had to go to the fees section on eBay to see the increases that were made in the FVF. The creator of that email should have been "precise in their language", because he was clearly not being totally honest in what he said. Do you think he was "precise" in that email? In hindsight, we could have worded that differently. Not that it wasn't obvious that we were moving the onus of fees from pre-sale (Insertion) to post-sale (Final Value Fee); we even talked about why this was better for the majority of sellers since it is easier to manage costs if they are more heavily weighted on sale success as opposed to listing. But yes, the wording could have been improved. New Questions: I read an article that was supposedly posted by a former staff person. A lot of this sounds conspiratorial and totally nuts to me, but I figured this would be a good place to ask them. If there is no truth to them, it would be good to get an unequivocal statement to that effect right away. I have seen the post in question. I seriously doubt it was written by an ex employee. It certainly is not factual. It is one long list of false, absurd and completely unfounded and untrue predictions and misinformation. It is, in two words, utter nonsense. I won't give it the legitimacy of page space here.

---

Posted by shabbychicandpink on Jan-29-09 14:03 PST Seller Needs and Wants Does what we (sellers) want, need, or ask for have any bearing on the decision making process? Yes, of course. but keep in mind that we have to manage and build for the entire marketplace. It is not always possible to please every single member of that marketplace. Is corporate aware that because of the changes over the last year, scores of sellers, who are also buyers have left eBay? Yes, we are aware that some members have decided to decrease or even stop altogether their buying and selling on eBay out of reaction to the changes of 2008. We suspected this would be an unfortunate consequence of the changes but it was, sadly unavoidable I suppose. However, when we accomplish our mission (and I convinced that we will), perhaps many of them will resume their previous levels of buying and selling activity.

---

Posted by low*profile on Jan-29-09 14:07 PST Ratings If you have a great experience with a seller, why not leave what you believe are appropriate ratings? I don't have GREAT (5) experiences. I choose sellers intelligently and pretty much always have a GOOD (4) experience - i.e., a routine, trouble-free transaction, for which eBay says the "appropriate" rating is 4. I tried earlier to differentiate between my (and others') ethical issues and "anxiety". And I understand that DSR's "work" to accomplish eBay's objectives. But I don't agree that the end justifies the means, so for the reasons I gave, I don't participate. Which is your right of course. Fortunately, you are in a very small minority

---

Posted by 2366jay on Jan-29-09 14:12 PST Store Fees Hi Griff, I heard roumors about store subscription fees going up in april, can you say if this is true. I cannot comment either way about fee changes (and I make it a mission to not know these things so I am not put in a compromising position with questions like this one). also, have you used your Texas beerbutt yet. Jay Shadetree Outdoors Yes! It made a fantastic chicken on the grill! Thanks!

---

Posted by lightfoot41 on Jan-29-09 14:17 PST Payment Policy Text in Listings May I include the following blurb in all of my listings: I sell in accordance with all eBay policies. I accept payments as directed by eBay policies. In a forum thread (http://forums.ebay.com/db2/thread.jspa?threadID=520075124&start=80), Jim Griffith, Dean of eBay Education and eBay University Instructor, wrote: "Sellers may not solicit or offer unapproved payment methods either in their listing descriptions or in seller-initiated email or invoices to buyers. That is the policy. It does not prevent buyers from asking a seller to accept an unapproved payment method. A [seller] (sic) is free in those cases, to accept or decline the buyer's offer." Once again, I sell in accordance with all eBay policies. Nice try. No. That would be a violation of the Accepted Payment policy and would result in the listing's deletion and a possible sanction against the seller.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-29-09 14:21 PST Shipping Costs: Separate or in Item Price? I am a buyer griff Me too. Big time in fact. This is only one of seven IDs I have. All used for buying and two used for selling. I don't see what your other buyers see. Since I was little, those commercials that would interupt my I dream of jeannie episodes, I noticed the shipping prices on tv commercials. Always wondered even then how much profit a company makes an S&H That is carried over to anything now I buy online.On and off of Ebay.I have trouble believing that buyers will stick with a higher list price over lower + ship and from their perpective, looks better when to me, it looks worse. I have tried your way. $99.98 + Priority Ship vs $108. The $99.98 wins out every time. If you tried it my way, then you have tested it and discovered that your way works for you. If it works for you, then continue to use it as a pricing strategy. To me, buyers look at the list price first thing, then scan over to the ship price second. First price, first impression.That gets buyer to click on my line for the listing and then to buy. The other goes on the relist. Right now, I can't really compare because things are very slow in my areas of selling. This was my experience as of...1, 2 months ago. Do you think it's good advice to let people experiment for themselves? Absolutely. I am a proponent of the hypothesis/test/adapt strategy of business. Apparently you are too because you tested both pricing models and you discovered that for your items, moving the cost of shipping to the item didn't work. Ask friends and neighbors and see what they think about perspective instead of relying on unseen others to relay that info? I wasn't relying on "unseen others" I was relying on our buyer data which shows an unmistakable buyer preference for free or reduced shipping, even for items where the shipping cost has been moved to the item price.

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-29-09 14:29 PST I think a good, if not perfect solution might be more Buyer Requirement options for blocking buyers. For example, a block for buyers who leave x or x% of negative feedback or bid retractions or INR or SNAD complaints. Perhaps giving more control to sellers on who can bid or buy from them would be a workable solution. (I am pretty sure most sellers would welcome more control). Griff, that's what we need.Anything in the works that you can talk about in that regard? Not at this time, but it is something I will pursue with the rest of the team.

---

Posted by whataboutmoneyorders on Jan-29-09 14:43 PST Seller Advocate Griff, you said: And that is the crux of the issue. I am passionate about advocating for you and all sellers but that doesn't mean there won't be times when we disagree. A seller's advocate will never please all sellers, all the time, but that does not make him any less an advocate for sellers [Do you believe that an advocate pleading the cause of a group should set aside their personal opinions when those opinions disagree with the majority of the group, and that the advocate should defer to what the majority of the group wants when deciding what to advocate FOR?] Yes, but tempered with reality. Members sometimes suggest, request, want or even demand things that I know are just not possible. It would be wrong for me to mislead sellers for example, that some of what they request would be possible. And I try to limit posting my own opinions to those times when someone specifically asks me what I think, as opposed to what eBay thinks (though admittedly, they are not usually far apart and only occasionally markedly different). I totally agree that no one can please everyone all of the time, and I also don't expect you to be a miracle worker Griff, especially when it comes to getting policies changed. But I would feel a lot more reassured and comfortable knowing that the seller advocate would be pleading for what the majority of the group wants, even if the advocate might not necessarily agree with it himself. That the position and stance of the group would be what's brought to the table, and represented. [Does that seem fair?] Yes, and it is exactly what I do.

---

Posted by beautifulbb2u on Jan-29-09 14:54 PST WWGD? GRIFF I HAVE A QUESTION I for one would be curious to know how you would solve this scenario: You are just a little old man trying to sell a couple things honestly. That's me alright. What would you do if you did actually get ONE negative feedback on your account? and they take out your DSRs with all 1's. It would give me pause, initially. More below. Due to your low selling volume, suddenly your 100% FB drops to 96% and your DSR's now hover just above 4's. Let's imagine just for once, you aren't you. A dream come true, (with the help of the right medication). No contacts at eBay. No phone numbers to call. No insider expertise. That I have any "insider expertise" is debatable, at least among some, and that often includes myself by the way. But continue... And no ME page telling everyone who you are at eBay. You know I have to do that, right? Full disclosure and all... You just have to be a regular non-descript little seller. There are no "regular non-descript little seller"s. Every seller is a star in my eyes. But I will go with it for now. What could you do to right the situation? I would like to know - step by step. First, I would stop and think; "Well, there it is. I finally ran into one of those impossible-to-please buyers everyone's always talking about." And, unless I thought there was something about that particular transaction that I could learn from and use to change a business practice, I would put it behind me with "Next." (I am a fervent believer of "Next.") If my DSRs hadn't dropped below the threshold, I would immediately list more items with the goal of more sales and more good ratings to mitigate the effects of this difficult customer's ratings. And if my ratings had dropped below the threshold? If I had other current listings, I would pour on the maximum charm and customer service to gain, I would hope, more great ratings to mitigate that one low rating. If I had no other current listings, I would wait till the rating-in-question rolled off my 30-day average and, if I absolutely had to sell more things in the meantime, I would try selling in other channels until I could list again on eBay. I know it's not always apparent here, but in real life, I am a lot more stoic than some might imagine. Contrary to popular belief, I did have a life before I stumbled upon eBay in 1996. Prior to eBay, I had been self-employed most of my working life. My partner and I ran an antiques business for 20 years (and yes, we had a B&M store for a while). I also had a career as a decorative artist in NYC during that time, for about 10 years working for the most demanding of clients imaginable: the rich and famous. I also worked as both a professional musician and photographer for a time in the 70's. And, except for few small breaks, I have always had some items for sale on eBay. I have had some experience with a variety of customers in a variety of business situations. Why do I bring this up? My past experience informs much of my current perspective on customer service. I don't just make it up as I go along. Thank you, beautifulbb2u for allowing me the opportunity to divulge and divert a bit. I trust my mini indulgence hasn't offended anyone.

---

And with that, we are caught up. I will re-open the thread tomorrow morning for more questions. Thank you all who posted your questions here. If you cannot wait til tomorrow or if you are unable to be here while the thread is open, feel free to email your question to me at griff@ebay.com using your regular email client (not My Messages please!)Put Ask Griff Q&A in the subject line and be sure to read the question guidelines posted previously. I will include the most recent bunch of email questions and my responses tomorrow. regards, Griff Jim Griffith _______________ eBay Inc

Griff _________________ eBay

Posted by spoonheart on Jan-30-09 09:44 PST Hidden Email Question Redux I didn't see the answer to my question so I will ask a third time... Is eBay US going to go to a system like Germany's where all the e-mail is handled through eBay and the members can not and will not be able to see each others e-mail addresses? I answered this question previously in the batch posted @ Jan-27-09 08:35 PST 20 of 66

---

Posted by 71ace on Jan-30-09 09:47 PST Paperless Payments As a seller, I am really disappointed in the "upgrades" eBay has recently made with the paperless payment along with pushing the use of PayPal. I now realize, however, that eBay owns PayPal so the paperless push is more clear. I do not care for PayPal thanks to a recent buyer dispute and do not want to use PayPal for my auctions - I would prefer to take checks or money orders. Will you consider bringing this very useful payment option back? We won't be rolling back this payment policy change. I also do not understand why eBay and PayPal will not honor my auction terms. I state that I do not accept returns that all sales are final. The buyer's bid agrees to these terms, however a careless buyer who does not ask questions or want to fully commit to the sale can complain and nearly always get refunded, PayPal just helps themselves to my funds while forcing me to accept returns and totally trumping my auction terms. Will eBay and PayPal honor my auction terms? See my previous responses to this popular question.

---

Posted by purse*couture on Jan-30-09 09:49 PST WWGD (not WWED) Griff, You replied to this question posed by beautifulbb2u with this: Posted by beautifulbb2u on Jan-29-09 14:54 PST What could you do to right the situation? I would like to know - step by step. First, I would stop and think; "Well, there it is. I finally ran into one of those impossible-to-please buyers everyone's always talking about." And, unless I thought there was something about that particular transaction that I could learn from and use to change a business practice, I would put it behind me with "Next." (I am a fervent believer of "Next.") If my DSRs hadn't dropped below the threshold, I would immediately list more items with the goal of more sales and more good ratings to mitigate the effects of this difficult customer's ratings. And if my ratings had dropped below the threshold? If I had other current listings, I would pour on the maximum charm and customer service to gain, I would hope, more great ratings to mitigate that one low rating. If I had no other current listings, I would wait till the rating-in-question rolled off my 30-day average and, if I absolutely had to sell more things in the meantime, I would try selling in other channels until I could list again on eBay. "I would try selling in other channels until I could list again on eBay" Are you therefore encouraging sellers on eBay to list elsewhere? No. This was a response to a hypothetical question ("Griff, if you were not you and X happened...) Does eBay management also feel this way? The question was directed to me as a "civilian seller." It was hypothetical. There is not even a remote chance that I will find myself in the proposed situation, however, it is was a good question and deserved a response." Let'd set some clear guidelines regarding my perspective and eBay's perspective before this turns into a long game of "gotchya Griff!" Some questions are directly at me and not eBay. For example, if someone asks, "Griff, what is your opinion?" I will answer with "I believe..." or "It is my opinion..." So, when I say "I", it means me, my opinion, my belief, my personal selling, what I would do, etc (Yes, I am allowed to have a personal opinion which I may choose to share when asked or when I believe appropriate.) When someone asks about eBay ("Griff, what does eBay think...?") I will answer with "eBay believes..." or "We believe...." When I say "we," or "eBay," I am speaking on behalf of eBay. When my opinion differs from eBay's official position (and it does sometimes) you will know it if I am asked and if supplying my own opinion is appropriate to the question or comment it is meant to address.

---

Posted by doggiesarecool on Jan-30-09 10:10 PST Search Ranking Concern HI Griff & Everybody - Griff,I am still having a problem listing. My DSR's for 12 months are:4.94/4.89/4.86/4.78 (even tho I charge exact postage,with postage showing on label). I have no 30 day DSR's.I am showing 100% feedback,and show no policy violations. My search is standard.Ebay tells me this at the end - "Thank you for providing buyers with a positive shopping experience". My problem with listing, is that I cannot see spending any money on listing fee's, if my listings are going to be buried at least 2/3 down the list. To me this would be paying for something (the listing fee's), only to be punished, but yet Ebay thanks me for providing buyers with a positive shopping experience. Are you assuming that your listings would be "buried at least 2/3 down the list?" "Standard" ranking is not a bad thing. It depends on more than just your ranking status as determined by your ratings averages (which are actually excellent btw). If you list in the auction format, then your item will be combined in a Best Match sort rank by one major factor: Time Ending Soonest. This is the standard ranking for all auction format listings in a Best Match sort. It also depends on how many items are returned on a search for your item using keywords. If there is one page of items, then yours will be on the first page of course. If there are 30 pages, then your will be, like all other seller's listings in the auction format, sorted by Ending Soonest and will share with every other matching auction format listing, time at the top towards the ending time for the listing (Time Ending Soonest being the hand's down most popular sort order for buyers looking for auctions). If you listing is in a Fixed Price format, then your item still has a good if not better chance of showing on the first or first pages of a title keywords search return list. The most important factors in a Fixed Price Best Match sort are (in no specific order) Previous Sales, Feedback and DSR ratings, Shipping cost and of course, relevancy. From a business standpoint, this would be bad on my part, to pay for something, knowing I am not going to receive it (the listings not being seen). But your items can and will be seen and can be found. Even without Best Match, your items would show up towards the first page in different sorts: ending soonest, newly listed, highest cost, lowest cost, etc. You have been in business for your self, can you give me any valid reason, for me to spend my money under these circumstances? I can't think of one reason to spend my money here, knowing I am not going to get what I had paid for. Because your assumption is not correct. Unless you are selling items at fixed price at an uncompetitive price with higher than average shipping and your seller account has a record of customer complaints and your DSRs are low, then your items will be seen and found. Have you tested this to see either way? If not, you might want to consider doing so

---

itsallgood4me2 on Jan-30-09 10:17 PST More Buyer Requirements! I think a good, if not perfect solution might be more Buyer Requirement options for blocking buyers. For example, a block for buyers who leave x or x% of negative feedback or bid retractions or INR or SNAD complaints. Perhaps giving more control to sellers on who can bid or buy from them would be a workable solution. (I am pretty sure most sellers would welcome more control). You replied that there is nothing in the works but that you'd pursue it with the rest of the team. Will you pursue it soon, please? I will do better than that. I will pursue it now, immediately. It is a pet project of mine (more control to sellers through expanded Buyer Requirements. Again, the standard disclaimer: I cannot promise that this willl blah blah blah...but, I am feeling pretty confident on this one. It's an ideal solution to a lot of seller issues. More in the coming weeks. I will keep you up to date with progress. Thanks Griff, and have a great weekend!! Thanks! You too!

---

Posted by low*profile on Jan-30-09 10:24 PST Sending Suggestions for Site Content Improvements Griff, re your remarks in the previous group of answers about how the fees announcements should have been better worded - I think this is a serious problem with eBay - not just in announcements, but in many of the help pages, responses to inquiries, input instructions, etc. Sometimes eBay wording appears to have been intentionally written so as to be ambiguous or confusing. (BTW, my post re not using DSR's boils down to eBay wording. Were the DSR explanation/usage guidelines analyzed and deliberate, or are they just "good enough"?) I have several times submitted complaints/suggestions about artless or confusing wording but since this doesn't require an answer, don't know if they're seen by anyone whose specific job it is to worry about clear, concise, accurate site content Does eBay employ writers/specialists to edit and refine site content, or does each functional group compose/issue its own announcements/documentation? If no specialized group exists, could I suggest that one SHOULD exist? A dedicated content group does exsist here of course. They are in the middle of a daunting task: refining and editing all site content, especially our Help pages (which, I don't know if you have noticed, have actually improved greatly in the last year). If you have a suggestion for them, send it along to me and I will forward it to them for consideration. (I have found a few places where things could be tweaked and have sent it along to them so they are used to getting suggestions from me.)

---

Posted by billslongbows on Jan-30-09 10:44 PST Ads on eBay >> As a seller , how does ebay placing links to alternate web sites on my listing page help me make a sale and now placing ebay competitors listing on my page help me? > I don't know if it is supposed to benefit you directly. How can it benefit us at all? The diamond sellers are just using ebay as cheap advertising - to pull buyers away from ebay. When they find the items are cheaper there, they won't come back. There used to be an option to opt-out of co-advertising. If that has been removed, what is the chance of reinstating it? That way, if a seller wants his items on other listings, he has to allow listings on his pages as well. With regards to placing ads on a seller's item page. Currently, the test is on closed item pages, not live. In any final release, sellers will be able to opt out of having other seller's items appear on their closed listing pages. By opting out, that seller's ads will not appear on other seller's closed listing pages. Is eBay making an increased effort to close out the shilling rings? There still seems to be a lot of it going on. There are many reports on the T&S group about such rings being reported, with no action being taken by eBay. The ones I have reviewed were obvious, such as 10 new IDs registered on the same day and all of them buying 20 identical items from the same 20 sellers. Some of the IDs have built up hundreds of feedback entries this way, often for buying such things as a "rubber band" or similar nonsense item. There are thousands of such auctions. Just have one of your T&S people put a word in the search string, such as "clip" and sort on lowest S&H first. A lot of these could be found and eliminated by a bot - such as the ones listed for a few cents with free shipping. We have the most sophisticated, proprietary shill detection software imaginable. It detects verifiable account connections, and patterns of buying and selling. If the software detects possible shills and we can, upon closer examination, determine that the activity is verifable, we take action. If the activity cannot be verified, we take no action. Is eBay going to start listing the combined price plus shipping in the feedback? All feedback should include that amount, as well as the item title - and it should remain viewable forever, not disappear after 90 days (or whatever it is now). I don't believe there are plans to list the combined price of an item in feedback but it's an excellent suggestion which I will forward to the team in charge.

---

Posted by sko74517 on Jan-30-09 10:48 PST Fees, Advertising, Rare Items, & My eBay Fees: Is there any possibility that eBay will get rid of all listing fees? Having a higher FVF actually makes more sense to me than having listing fees, for all the obvious reasons. If the answer is "yes" or "maybe", will you please suggest that they not go nuts to try and make up the difference!! LOL! Yes, lower to no listing fees are always a possibility. Some might even assume that we are heading in that direction from past fee changes. However, I could not possibly comment on that assumption (this is not an announcement). Advertising: Since Yahoo and others can apparently provide links that take eBay buyers off eBay, will there ever be an opportunity for eBay sellers to advertise their items on other sites they sell on? Sellers can contact Yahoo and inquire about entry into the PPC with eBay program. Rare Items: In one of your previous posts, you suggested that the seller place a tamper proof label on the box of a rare sealed item, in such way that opening the box would destroy the label. As an antique seller, don't you realize that placing such a label on a rare box would also lower the value? 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. My eBay: You stated that eBay monitors the useage of a product like My eBay around the clock to determine impact on the business. You stated that so far, the usage data doesn't indicate a significant impact. Isn't it possible that in the case of My eBay, continued use of the product is not so much an indicator that it works, but simply that we're all just stuck with the bugger? Data is data. It shows useage, but not sentiment. If the new version was actually unusable for whatever reason, we would know it instantaneously. For the record, I started using it last summer and now prefer it to the old version. There are few things about it I don't like that much but overall, I am happy with it. Thanks Griff I appreciate your patience! You're welcome!

---

Posted by billslongbows on Jan-30-09 10:54 PST New Thread In February? Will you be starting a new thread in February? This one is getting awfully long. Yes, and I cannot wait!

---

Posted by hightides_beach_shop on Jan-30-09 11:17 PST More on Final Value Fees and Seller Costs As it is now eBay loses nothing when a buyer returns an item. Not one red cent. Uh, yes we do. We loose the FVF which we return to the seller That's not money out of Ebays pocket beyond what a seller puts in, such as shipping. In other words, Ebay doesn't lose a cent beyond the finals and does not pay out more beyond that amount do they Griff? Yes of course, but a lost FVF is a lost FVF. And you agree sellers lose extra money in initial ship cost beyond the item price which is refunded? I do. Do you agree sellers have more to lose in refunds then Ebay? On the transaction? Of course. List price $45.00, ship $4.90 (possible insurance). Returned for any reason. Seller loses the ship cost which has to come from their pocket. However, when we accomplish our mission (and I convinced that we will), perhaps many of them will resume their previous levels of buying and selling activity. One of the reasons I'm hanging in here. Part dare devil and part of my hoping this has a reasonable ending. Ask friends and neighbors and see what they think about perspective instead of relying on unseen others to relay that info? I wasn't relying on "unseen others" I was relying on our buyer data which shows an unmistakable buyer preference for free or reduced shipping, even for items where the shipping cost has been moved to the item price. But I can't see that information. Therefor, unseen. Can I? No, at least not at this time. I think a good, if not perfect solution might be more Buyer Requirement options for blocking buyers. For example, a block for buyers who leave x or x% of negative feedback or bid retractions or INR or SNAD complaints. Perhaps giving more control to sellers on who can bid or buy from them would be a workable solution. (I am pretty sure most sellers would welcome more control). In regards to the above statement and your reply but it is something I will pursue with the rest of the team. Thank you tons. I have no more questions at this time Griff Thank you for filling us in on what you could and your personal insite to many of the on going situations here. This means a lot to many people that finally, someone came in to try to help clear things up. Hope you plan to stick around. Your welcome and I plan on sticking around

---

Posted by mygift2u on Jan-30-09 11:22 PST When? However, when we accomplish our mission (and I convinced that we will), perhaps many of them will resume their previous levels of buying and selling activity. From this statement, I read there are more changes in the works. The state-of-the-art eBay will not bring them back. Can you disclose a timeframe whereby we will start seeing some things (changes) that will actually bring back the sellers that left. Or keep the ones that are thinking about leaving? Yes. There will be information in about three to four weeks.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Jan-30-09 11:32 PST International Media Sellers Griff, why are international media sellers considered acceptable collateral damage after being URGED to list on international sites via ebay's International Best Practices? (for your information, Griff: ) http://pages.ebay.com/sell/international.html List on eBay sites in multiple countries. While international buyers often come to the U.S. site to buy, they are also often browsing other eBay sites for the item. Listing in all your main trading markets gives you greater exposure and more bidding activity. Your eBay ID works on all eBay sites, and PayPal allows you to list in 17 currencies. When selling across borders, be aware of country regulations and restrictions. This is information for US sellers who want to list on International sites, not international sellers based outside of the US who want to list on eBay.com On the August Discussion Board, we were told we had "call out" a non-standard item in the description area in order to be 'safe' from having the listing pulled for excessive shipping when using the calculator. Is that still the case or has that changed? It is still good advice and still applicable. If a seller needs to use the calculator for a media item, they should specify the size and weight of the item to indicate clearly to the buyer and to eBay if necessary, that it is non standard.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Jan-30-09 11:40 PST Free Shipping Required? re: 'eBay does not require Free Shipping' In the DVDs category, the maximum will be set to zero and sellers will be required to offer free delivery as their first domestic postage option. http://pages.ebay.co.uk/help/sell/maximumPP_FAQ.html#dvd Ebay.com may not currently require FREE shipping, but it is incorrect to state that 'ebay' does not require free shipping. Clearly, they do. Given the history of 'testing' policy and products in international markets 'first' before applying them to eBay North America, can you see why sellers are worried about this issue? Sure. Let me repeat: There are no plans to require free shipping in media categories for eBay.com

---

Posted by jay_cor on Jan-30-09 11:41 PST Buyer Threats In response to accepting returns for buyers remorse because the buyer found a cheaper item, you said: "Well, actually, this is not a valid reason for a return on eBay. If a buyer admits to a seller that they want to return the item because they bought it cheaper somewhere else or from another eBay seller, we won't support them in a claim. ("I found it cheaper somewhere else" is not a valid reason in a PayPal or eBay dispute)". Okay, then, I would like you to explain how exactly that was allowed to happen to me. I sold an item to a buyer that she saw in a store after the fact that was half the price she paid for mine. She immediately emailed me and demanded that I pay her the difference in prices. I refused, telling her I would give her a full refund (less shipping) if she returned the item to me. She refused to return the item because I would not pay for shipping. She threatened to file a false SNAD with PayPal, until I explained to her that PayPal would still require her to pay for return shipping. At that point, she threatened negative feedback. I immediately contacted eBay's Trust and Safety Department about this, provided them with the emails, and was told there was nothing they could do. Since eBay wouldn't help me at all, and fearing negative feedback, I gave in and refunded the difference in prices to the buyer. Two days later, she left me a nice big negative anyways. I once again contacted Trust and Safety about the negative feedback and asked for it to be removed. What was I told in return? I was told that I should have paid for return shipping in the first place to avoid the negative. They said they would not remove the feedback and that I should leave appropriate feedback in return. Thank goodness this was before sellers were no longer allowed to leave negative feedback, otherwise, I wouldn't have even had the opportunity to do that. Ah. This happened before the changes. That's why T&S told you that they wouldn't be able to remove any negative feedback this buyer might leave, because before we made the change, buyers could leave negative feedback in these cases and it would not be removed. Today, this is not the case. So, Griff, my question to you is, had the buyer went ahead and filed the SNAD would eBay/PayPal have found in my favor, and, if they did find in my favor, would eBay still have allowed the buyer to leave me negative feedback because of this? Back then, prior to the changes to Feedback? Yes. Today? No.

---

Posted by jay_cor on Jan-30-09 11:46 PST Unfair SNAD claims This was your response to a poster stating that buyers should be held accountable for buyers remorse because it costs the seller money: "This will be a point on which we may never agree. I don't believe that buyers are accountable for anything but paying. If a buyer of mine is, for whatever reason, unhappy with their purchase (buyer remorse), I want them to send it back for a refund. I don't sell to make buyers unhappy and I don't make their lack of satisfaction conditional. An unhappy buyer is an unhappy buyer." Please explain to me how this is fair. I once sold an expensive Halloween costume to a buyer that needed it for a party. Ten days after receiving the costume (after the party), the buyer informed me that she would be sending it back for a full refund. I immediately refused, stating that the auction clearly states I do not accept returns on costumes due to the time-sensitive nature of the item. The buyer admitted multiple times that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the costume, she just did not need it anymore. After I refused to let her return the costume, I did not hear from her for two months until PayPal informed me that the buyer had gone straight to her credit card and filed a chargeback. She fraudulently claimed SNAD and PayPal immediately took the money from my account. PayPal promised to help me fight this, and for two months I gathered every bit of evidence I could proving the buyer was lying and the chargeback was unwarranted. In all, I had faxed PayPal 16 pages of evidence, including multiple emails where the buyer stated their was nothing wrong with the costume, and, best of all, proof that the buyer had worn the costume to the party. Final result? PayPal told me there was nothing they could do for me because it was filed as a SNAD. After I had spent two months gathering undeniable proof that the SNAD was false, they said they would only get involved if the chargeback had been filed because of INR or Unauthorized Purchase. The buyer got all her money back and she got to keep the costume. Furious, I filed a report against PayPal with the BBB and submitted to them the 16 pages of evidence I had submitted to PayPal showing how I was getting taken advantage of by both the buyer and PayPal. End result? PayPal called the very next day offering an apology and a "courtesy" credit to my account for the cost of the costume. I was happy to have my money back, but still furious I had to jump through so many hoops to get it. I should not have had to go through that in the first place. Sorry Griff, but that is not the cost of doing business, especially when you are a small seller. Maybe diamond sellers and other big box eBay sellers can write something like that off, but small sellers cannot. For all the comments coming from eBay denying that they are trying to weed out small sellers, they sure do give advice that is to the contrary. Another thing, I noticed you like to say you've never heard about things like this happening before or that if they do happen it is very rarely. I hate to break it to you, but only a small percentage of eBay users come to these boards. Just because somebody has not personally contacted you about a problem like this does not mean it doesn't happen. Ebay needs to drop the "buyers can do no wrong" attitude and see these transactions for what they really are. When did this happen? This past Holloween? If so, send me all the details. Not just so I can get you redress, but so I can put together exactly what happened and determine if this is a good case study for what we need to change. Send everything, including emails from the buyer, to me at griff@ebay.com using your regular email, not My Messages!

---

Posted by peach*pizzazz 75.168.47.155 on Jan-30-09 11:58 PST Email Question Griff, I'm still waiting for a response to my email I sent you twice now. Are you sending it to griff@ebay.com using your regular email and not My Messages? I am caught up with all email as of this morning. I cannot deduce your email address from your User ID.

---

Posted by snappyauctions14 on Jan-30-09 11:58 PST Response to Suggestions Hi Griff: ...if eBay can really see how their forced return/automatic SNAD refund policy (via compelling use of Pay Pal) is hurting sellers - especially those who are not dealing on inventory/retail type items, and if eBay is genuinely concerned about all their sellers being successful, what, besides (to paraphrase) 'we'll look into it' does the poor seller have to look forward to exactly? I don't have anything to provide at this time. I said, I will bring this up in our next team meeting. I will do so. Put a better way - you are doing your best to answer what you can - and forward 'up the chain' those issues for which you can't answer. Not just for this one example set, but many others. And that's the real question set here: What plans are in place to offer actual feedback to members for those suggestions that you can't? Simply restating the policy that caused the question in the first place is not resolution for it - just like having only a 'seller's perspective' (service/goods provider) type reply to a buyer (a customer) is not considered good business practice by you as you have stated repeatedly. When I know that there is news I can announce about a new change or feature that may have been connected to a proffered suggestion, I will bring it. Before that time, it would be inappropriate to provide more information. We also do not recontact members who have sent in suggestions with a status or progress report on their suggestion. It's only been about 3 weeks since I started taking questions. I ask for your patience. Thanks To close the loop, you answered the above question group (from that poster) with words to the effect that - I'll suggest it but can't promise anything. Exactly when and how will these be followed up? See above Who (since you can't) will answer them specifically and when? See above What is the timeframe for this? We cannot promise a time frame for suggestion processing. I apologize if this is unacceptable to you but it is the reality. Thanks as always for your continued support and attention. You are welcome

---

Posted by gcs220 on Jan-30-09 12:04 PST eBay's Mission Griff, what is eBay's path? What is eBay's mission? Specifically, what is the vision for eBay to which all these changes are leading? Draw us a picture (in words) of what eBay will look like, of what it will be. I cannot draw that picture for you, not now. But I can give a short answer as to mission and path by stating what we do: We connect buyers and sellers. It is as simple as that. This drives everything we do. I see eBay as a an advertising portal, a classified ads site, with links to everywhere and anywhere. I stated as much last May on eBayInkBlog, and my post was removed. Can you honestly draw me a different picture? I cannot see into the future, but eBay's vision is to be the best marketplace for connecting buyers and sellers.

---

Posted by thebeesknees on Jan-30-09 12:17 PST Sellers are eBay's Customers! I will also ask again, my two-part question: How does eBay expect their paying cusotmer (us sellers) to maintain a sound (or even loose resemblance) of a business plan if you will not acknowledge us as such? We have never stated that sellers are not our customers. Of course you are our customers. As for your business plans, I understand exactly what you are saying and I agree with you. You need to know what we are planning for you and you want to provide input into the planning process. Something is in the works. (I hinted as much in a previous response). You are all about implementing the 3-phase disruptive innovation model and if you truly see this as a worthwhile direction/plan, then why are your sellers not included in the process, at least at the discussion level. See above And no, Griff coming here answering questions does make for a meaningful dialog between the customer (us sellers) and the eBay D.I. team. Heck, even Griff acknowledges there are things he does not know or is not privy to release. Forgive me if I am wrong but I believe you meant to say "..coming here answering questions does not make for a meaningful dialog..." and if that is the case, and you actually believe this is a wasted exercise, then I tell you this: People here are watching this thread. I have forwarded every post that I said I would forward. The thread and the posts have sparked discussions and will yield results. Let me again set your expectations though, I cannot promise that everything every single poster has requested will be created or changed. I cannot promise you when any changes might be coming. But I assure you, I am not here to waste your or my time.

---

Posted by mygift2u on Jan-30-09 12:19 PST Seller Dashboard Issue Griff THANK YOU for this thread. ========================= I believe there is either some manipulation or glitch(s) going on regarding my DSR's. I know others are reporting similar glitches. Since the day that eBay "flip-flopped" the two lines we see, my DSR's have been substantially lower on my Dashboard than they have ever been and lower than I believe they should be. I believe the glitch has more to do with eBay changing the display in the Dashboard than with my true ratings. I hope someone is looking into this. Most of us are aware that there was an earlier Dashboard glitch that was causing displayed DSR's to be incorrect. I was very vocal about that glitch and eventually I saw an article on Auctionbytes where eBay finally admitted they were having some problems. I believe there is a new glitch. It may not be an across the board problem but I have seen enough posts to know it is not just me. If you believe that there is something amiss with the display of DSRs in your Seller Dashboard, send the information to me and I will forward it to the team in charge. Thanks

---

---

If you have an account or feature issue or bug, please send it to me via email. You will get a quicker response and faster resolution. This thread is for questions, not for bug or feature or site issues or problems. Reporting them here is not the most effecient means towards a resolution. Thanks.

---

---

Posted by guitar_parts_for_you on Jan-30-09 12:46 PST UPI Process Needs Streamlining and Shortening Hi Griff, Re Non Paying Bidders: Now that eBay is mostly electronic payment only, should not the process be shortened? In other words, we have to wait a week before we can file UID, the wait 8 more days to file for the refund. Back in the day we were told this was to give the buyer a chance to get a money order or check to us. Since they now would have had to have our permission to do a check or money order would it not make sense to shorten the process. In other words, allow the seller to file the UID 3 days after the end of the auction. 2 days after a BIN. Then 3 days after the UID is filed the seller is granted a refund, unless of course the buyer pays. This would shorten the whole process to under a weeks time. Of course while still allow sellers that want to give their buyer more time the ability to do so. Will This question has been asked previously. My response was "yes, it should be shortened and we are looking at this as an enhancement at the moment.

---

---

Please, before posting your question, read the entire thread of past questions and answers first. I will soon stop responding to all, not just a few, duplicate questions. If you post a question and it is not included in a response post, it was either previously asked or it was rhetorical. Thanks.

---

---

Posted by guitar_parts_for_you on Jan-30-09 12:48 PST Diamond PowerSellers Hi Griff, Re Diamond Power Sellers. One Problem I and other PS have with this is that they never had to "Pay their dues". I start selling on eBay today. best scenario is that I would get Powerseller status in about a month / month and a half. To do that I would have to sell at lest 300 items or $3,000 in sales by the end of the month. About 3/4's of the way through the next moth I receive my status. I can't call eBay and say, I can sell $25,000 a month in sales, just look at my web page. I need to sign up and be given all the privileges of a Platinum Power Seller. Without ever having sold 1 item on the site. Why are the Diamond PS given the benefits, before they even sell one item on the site? And shouldn't they have to reach that sales volume on eBay first, then be offered Diamond status? It seems that ever other PS status has to take a certain amount of work to get there. Diamond just takes a few phone calls. Sellers can attain Diamond PowerSeller status either by reaching it with previous sales on eBay or through a contract with eBay. Diamond PowerSellers actually have stricter standards to which they must adhere, stricter than other levels of PowerSeller. And to make it worse there is one in particular item 280302004393 will give you their name, that is doing poorly as far as customer service goes with a 98.2% pos feedback, nor does it seem they are even doing Titanium level sales. Yet they were given Diamond status??? I not against the program, just believe that eBay should make them show that they can do what they say they can do first, before they are given the keys. Just as we would never discuss your account status publicly, we would never discuss the specifics of any seller's account status on eBay. However, as a general statement, PowerSeller status for any level of PowerSeller is not removed immediately. Except for serious or egregious violations of policy, PowerSeller status is guaged and determined on a 30 day basis.

---

Posted by crlrmr78 on Jan-30-09 12:53 PST My eBay Hi Griff! I read this thread everymorning with my coffee. Learning a lot. Glad to hear it! Question#1. I noticed the little line over the watcher number has disappeared. Will that ever come back as a # of views? That would be handy. It's pain to go to the Active page all the time to get that info. You mean the hit counter on the actual listing page? I have been asking for that myself. I don't know why it was never included. I will ask the My eBay team... when they have a moment. Question#2. I buy a lot on another ID. The favorite sellers page no longer has the Favorite Sellers Top Picks link. I use that every day as I'm a repeat buyer of my favorite sellers (30 of them). The new page has cells that need to be opened one at a time and they don't stay locked open when you revisit the page. Any chance that might change? Like an Open All button or something like that? Thanks! :D Excellent suggestion. I will forward this as well to the My eBay team. Thanks!

---

The Ask Griff thread is now in Response Mode (locked). I will post more responses later tonight to catch up with all the posted questions. The thread will reopen for Question Mode on Sunday morning, February 1st. Thanks to all who have particpated. Your input does matter. Regards, Griff Jim Griffith _______________ eBay Inc

Griff _________________ eBay

UPDATE:

Due to the Discussion Forums platform upgrade on Tuesday, I am delaying posting of a new thread for February until after the upgrade is complete (probably on Wednesday or Thursday).

In the meantime, feel free to email your questions to griff@ebay.com

regards,

Griff

Griff _________________ eBay