Thanks for your posts. I will lock the thread now to catch up.

One word: Any posts that mention or even allude to deleted posts will themselves be deleted.

Regards,

Griff

Griff _________________ eBay

Here are the last posts from the last few weeks. The thread is open for another batch. If I haven’t answered your post and the original is still posted here, then I am still waiting for input needed to compose a response. I received a few emails about my suggestion to add chocolate bars to a parcel as a little extra to make the customer happy. (I add extras to most every item I ship, in the past that included chocolate bars as well as other items). The emails expressed outrage and disbelief that I would suggest sending food in the mail. What if the buyer had an allergy to chocolate, or what if the package was left out in 110 degree heat, etc All excellent points. I should have not used the chocolate bar example. So I retract the suggestion. Don’t send chocolate bars if you believe the above will be a concern to your buyers. However, my point still stands. If your DSRs are lagging and you want to raise them, as a part of an overall customer service strategy, try adding something extra to the parcel to delight your customer. Something unexpected, but a clear token of your appreciation of their business. I actually haven’t sent chocolate in a while but I have sent hard candy, or with my fragrance purchases, extra samples and always along with a handwritten short thank you note.

---

Posted by the1234gorecordsstor on Sep 11, 2009 10:46 AM Titles with Obscenities Why does ebay continue to pull music listings with "profane" titles? I'm specifically asking about listings for the band F**ked Up. These are instantly pulled from search when they go up despite ebay having specific rules allowing for such things. I had Trust and Safety take a look at your listings that had been pulled and they determined that it wasn’t the titles, it was the words in your sub titles that were causing the filters to pull them down. I trust that T&S has explained this to you. If not, feel free to email me with your user id and I will make sure they do.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 11, 2009 10:46 AM A Suggestion for Vacation Mode Griff, as a follow up to bookelph's question (since I already know your answer to this one) Why can't/won't eBay prevent ordering when vacation settings are activated? Other sites have this capability. Since eBay can't/won't provide this functionality and your solution (having someone else handle eBay sales while away) isn't practical for most people, can we at the very least have something that triggers an interstitial page that alerts buyers that the seller's settings are active and that there may be a delay when ordering? Something obvious during the checkout flow? An excellent suggestion. I spoke to Kristina Klausen and she told me that a similar feature (which would block checkout for a seller who is on “vacation mode”) has been discussed and is “on the radar screen” for future consideration.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 11, 2009 10:52 AM Unpaid Item and Negative Feedback in Seller Update II There is some confusion about when a buyer can leave negative feedback for an unpaid item and when such feedback can be removed under the new SR2 rules. The announcement said that those who use the auto-file will result in feedback being blocked upon filing. That block can be removed the following ways: buyers may still be able to leave Feedback under these conditions: * Before Unpaid Item Assistant opens the case * If the buyer pays after the case is opened * If the buyer successfully appeals after the case is closed * After the case closes if no unpaid item has been recorded on the buyer's account My questions refer to the two bolded criteria above. Is there a time limit to a buyer's ability to pay and have their feedback privileges restored? Once the case is closed, buyers will be unable to pay. Unlike today, checkout will no longer be available. Consequently, the time limit is as long as the case is open. Buyer pays 2 weeks after dispute closes, for example. Are the 'freebie' strike removals considered a successful appeal? At a technical level, yes. When the strike is removed, the ability to leave FB will be restored. However, from a Feedback perspective, no. We will not allow NFB to remain unless there was a legitimate reason for the unpaid item (item was out of stock, seller changed the terms of the sale, etc.). Customer Support will continue to manually remove these when necessary. And my last question: It looks like they've changed the UID protection to exclude anything filed manually and removed the block that prevented buyers from leaving feedback if a dispute closed without a response. Why? Two part answer: 1. Why is this limited to use of the Unpaid Item Assistant? eBay has two challenges with regard to unpaid items. The first is that eBay cannot verify non-payment. That is, with a number of available payment methods available, eBay cannot always determine whether or not payment has been made. The second is that oftentimes significant communication can take place between buyers and sellers which can result in an unpaid item not necessarily being indicative of buyer fault (seller stockout, for example). Since eBay has visibility into payment with the Unpaid Item Assistant, the first of these challenges has been met, giving us more confidence in knowing what actually transpired. With manual cases, this is not the case. 2. What happened to FB Removal for non-response? We will still block/remove FB for non-response to the unpaid item case. Since the communication has been moved, we will leverage member-to-member communication rather than communication within the dispute console.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 11, 2009 10:57 AM Unpaid Item Time Frame for AutoFile UPI Whoops. I forgot my follow up comment. Many, MANY buyers are going to be extremely angry when they discover that the time frame for payment procrastination has been shortened to 4 days. There are buyers out there who will leave negative feedback for a seller because they had the audacity to file a UID. These are buyers that paid for their items but are angry that an eBay UID was filed. Given the fact that even the auto-file does not protect against these buyers (they've paid after all) do sellers have any recourse to have these negatives removed? No. And will eBay reconsider removing the feedback block when a buyer pays, given the fact that it is often the process itself that angers the buyer? No. If a seller believes that this is too big a risk, they can either extend the UPI Assistant payment window to 16 days or file them manually. However, given the changes in the messaging that a buyer will receive with any filed UPI, we don’t believe that this will be an issue. Feedback should be blocked the instant a UID is opened--manually or automatically, and should not be restored to buyers unless they can prove through appeal that they have paid PRIOR to the UID being filed. No secret, I totally agree. And, with time, I believe we will get there. But it will take time.

---

Posted by buyalot! on Sep 11, 2009 12:11 PM Feedback Abuse Griff, Revisiting the issue of competitor DSR abuse, since it appears eBay still isn't getting this right. I disagree. See below G: Unless it can be proven that the ratings were left by a competitor with the sole intent of damaging your averages, that is correct. The above does not qualify as “abuse” if it the transaction itself was not initiated with the intent to leave a 1 or 2 in order to disadvantage a competitor or as retaliation for the seller leaving that buyer (with seller buyer roles reversed) a negative or low rating. It is impossible to prove a buyer's intent in leaving low DSR's. In etown99's scenario, the low DSRs were clearly left by a competing seller of the same product and could not have reflected the seller's performance. But reading between the lines, it seems the DSRs were not removed because of a lack of proof of the buyer's intent - proof that is impossible for anyone but the buyer who left the DSR's to have. [Since the proof required for eBay to remove competitor abusive feedback is impossible to obtain, unless the buyer admits the abuse, isn't it still wrong to say that a seller is protected from such abuse?] Proof is actually possible to determine. I have just witnessed one case last week where it was proved that a seller had purchased another seller’s items with the sole intent to leave that seller low ratings. What did it take? In this case, two transactions with two different sellers. I am not going to give away the methodology used for this case since it wouldn’t be prudent to give the information to any seller who might be thinking of engaging in this activity but in general, it involved the details of the transaction and the past history of the affected seller. After watching this case from start to finish, I am more confident than ever that any seller attempting to use ratings as a strategy for disadvantaging a competing seller on eBay will be suspended from eBay.

---

Posted by mygift2u on Sep 11, 2009 12:20 PM Free Shipping Search Sort? Hi Griff 1) Currently, when a Buyer is viewing other items from Seller's ebay Store, the buyer currently has the option to sort items several different ways: Time: ending soonest Time: newly listed Price + Shipping: lowest first Price + Shipping: highest first Pricei: highest first Distance: nearest first Payment: PayPal first Best Match I would like to make a Suggestion that "Free Shipping" be added to the sort option. I believe a buyer who makes a purchase from one Seller might want to easily see what other items the seller has Free Shipping on. I believe this additional sort feature would help facilitate multiple sales from buyers. I will forward your suggestion to the Finding and Buyer Teams for their consideration. ============= 2) Does having a PREMIUM Level Store from a Basic Level Store give Sellers an advantage in Search? No, it does not. I though that used to be a benefit of a Premium Store but I do not see that mentioned in reasons to upgrade: Key Benefits By upgrading to a Premium Store you will receive the following valuable benefits: 24/7 access to toll-free customer support Free Selling Manager Pro 10 custom pages and eBay header reduction Advanced Traffic Reports data (see exactly what your buyers are doing in your Store) Without any Search advantage in Core search, I am not seeing enough resason for any seller to upgrade for the cost involved. The decision to upgrade is one a seller has to make for herself however, I would suggestion knowing the full roster of features and benefits before making a decision: For example, the Stores Fees and Subscriptions page lays them all out for comparison between the three levels of Stores. ============== 3) I am noticing Sellers miscategorizing their items so they can list using the " Multi-FP with variables" on their listings. I reported one instance of this and ebay did nothing about it. This gives an unfair advantage to some sellers who are gaming the system. By listing an item in Home and Garden (a toy item) and giving several differnent toy names in the drop down box they are using the system in a way it is not currently intended. They are doing this in the Home & Garden Category. Home > Buy > Home & Garden > Inside the Home > Search results for "beanie" You will quickly see many sellers listing in this category and you will see the "More Options" icon next to the listings. So my question is, when will ebay open that feature to all categories? What are they doing to stop sellers from gaming this system? Or is it ok for anyone to list that way now?? We will be adding a Multi Variation to more categories, as appropriate, on an incremental basis, over the next year or so. These listings you pointed out are indeed in violation and have been removed. Thanks.

---

Posted by sea*dreams on Sep 11, 2009 2:17 PM Feedback Left for Not Leaving Feedback. Is this allowed? Hi Griff In your July session someone asked you: Posted by floor_essence on Jul 10, 2009 10:43 AM Who Leaves Feedback First A buyer contacted me and wanted me to leave feedback. I did not respond because I was waiting for them to receive the item. He/she then threatened negative feedback for not leaving them positive feedback. Does Ebay allow this? Yes. But wait a second. Isn't feedback voluntary? And not part of the terms of the sale? So isn't a buyer demanding feedback at the threat of negative feedback a form of feedback extortion? Yes, that would be feedback extortion. I misread the question and I apologize if my response was not entirely accurate. eBay allows a buyer to leave a negative for the reason, “Didn’t leave me a feedback first” and would only consider it extortion if the buyer first emailed the seller and made a threat to leave negative unless a feedback was left for the buyer first. Also, I noticed today someone posted a situation on the Feedback Board where they received a neutral feedback from a buyer saying : Why don't you leave feedback after my payment? The seller was encouraged to report this as feedback abuse but reported back that he was told by a manager in Seller Experience that the feedback doesn't qualify for removal and that a seller SHOULD leave feedback for buyers once they've paid. The rep was correct all around. Your first example would be considered feedback extortion and the second wouldn’t. The first has email or message proof of intent. The second does not. So if a buyer leaves a negative or neutral feedback that states something along the lines of “Didn’t leave me feedback first!” without any evidence that the buyer contacted the seller and attempted to extort the positive with a threat of a negative, it doesn’t fall under feedback extortion. Now if that's true I've got to say 2 things 1.I thought feedback was 100% voluntary. How did should enter into it as if to say well seller, you earned that bad feedback! tsk tsk it's your own fault. Bad seller. Smarten up! If you don't leave feedback upon payment, bad feedback is your well-deserved punishment Given the current rule regarding this issue, (and the fact that it is good customer service), I strongly suggest leaving all paying buyers a positive feedback. 2.I thought eBay said it was going to remove feedback about feedback as qualifying under the terms of its feedback abuse policy. Since feedback isn't part of the TOS/transaction, feedback complaining about a seller not leaving feedback is about something outside the transaction. Feedback about stuff outside the txn is in the list of qualifying criteria. Leaving feedback is voluntary. A buyer may leave a negative or neutral for any reason, including; “seller didn’t leave me a feedback first.” Unless the feedback was made after a messaged threat of a negative unless a positive was posted first, the feedback does not qualify as extortion. (In order for there to be extortion, an attempt to extort has to be made.) So what's the low down? Is it still the same old same old? Buyers can continue to write stuff like that, damage a seller's reputation, and who knows what havoc they wreak on the DSRs while they're in there over something voluntary and not part of the terms of sale? I seriously thought this abusive behavior had been addressed by eBay policy this year and was going to be stopped if sellers reported it. It is, when the activity is actual, provable extortion. That is why I strongly (and I mean strongly) recommend leaving paying buyers a positive first to pre-empt and avoid any possible situation like this one. Although a few buyers don’t care either way, most buyers DO care about receiving a positive once they have paid. Some buyers consider this issue to be very important. A seller chooses to ignore these potential buyer wishes at their own risk.

---

Posted by rabiyah on Sep 11, 2009 9:25 PM Unpaid Item Assistant Question Hi, I have some questions about the new auto-file UPI disputes that will be happening at some point. When enabled, the Unpaid Item Assistant allows you to automatically open a case if your buyer doesn't pay after a specified period of time. You can choose to set that time as 4, 16, 24 or 32 days after the listing closes. Does this mean that those times listed are the only time-frames that I can choose? There is a huge difference between 4 and 16 days. Why are there not more options for time-frames, especially one keeping the current 7 day that buyers are use to? The time frames were chosen based on surveyed seller input. We heard from many sellers that they wanted as much as two weeks time to allow for their buyers to finish purchasing items (including possibly winning auctions) so they could be added together for one payment. The input varied from one to three weeks. We settled on something in between. If I choose not to opt in, what would be different about the manual filing system than it is today? I'm actually not sure if currently buyers are allowed to leave negatives if they never respond, but would they still not be able to do so with the new system if I am not opted in? The manual process for UPI doesn’t change dramatically but there are some definite improvements. A seller can start the process in 4 days instead of 7 and close a soon as 8 days post the close of the item listing. There will be fewer pages to the process, making it easier to file. And the messaging to buyer is changing as well. They will be clearer, more neutral in tone and clearly from eBay (and not the seller). The first is a gentle, non accusatory reminder. However, with the manual process, the feedback ability currently in place (buyers can leave feedback up to the close of the case. If the dispute closes in favor of the seller, the buyer is blocked from leaving feedback and if the buyer has already left feedback, it can be manually removed). You can read more here Today I had two people contact me saying they wanted to buy several store items and then wait another five days for my auctions to close before paying for everything. I'm happy to wait. If I had opted into this auto-file system would those buyers on day four get some kind of payment demand from e-bay? What I read said I could only "turn off" for specific transactions after the case had been filed. Would I need to warn buyers that this would be coming and hope they understand and don't rate me poorly or decide not to bid/buy any more? A seller who opts in to the Unpaid Item Assistant (aka UPI Autofile), has options. You can read them here. NOTE: if a seller opts in for Unpaid Item Assistant on an item by item basis, they can only turn it off for that item once a claim has autofiled. Keep in mind that the first email from eBay is not a demand, only a gentle reminder (and from eBay, not the seller). In cases like this, the seller only needs to alert the buyer that they may receive a end of listing reminder from eBay. If you don’t have many or any regular UPIs but you do have regular buyers who like to purchase over time, then you might want to consider using the next time increment (16 days).

---

Posted by king-collect on Sep 12, 2009 12:14 AM Digital Downloadable Goods on eBay: A Future? Hi Griff! You indicated earlier that eBay got rid of non-physical product because of concerns about 'feedback manipulation'. This is true. Q #1: Wouldn't a sensible workaround be to disallow feedback on non-physical product, or to not count such product toward feedback totals? Yes, that would be one solution. Q #2: Could it be that there was a reason why non-physical product generally received higher satisfaction ratings than physical product? For instance, is it possible that buyers liked it better? They got the product instantly, didn't have to pay postage, and didn't have to worry about the product cluttering up the garage. Yes, it could be the reason (not all feedback for DDG sales was positive though). Q #3: Is it possible that eBay will revisit this issue and start allowing non-physical product to be sold on eBay at some point in the future? I sure hope so (I push for it). There was and is a definite legitimate market for digital goods (after all, this IS the internet, the very realm of digital goods, no?). And there was definite illegitimate abuse of the category of DDG. There isn’t anything on the immediate horizon for opening auction and Fixed price formats back up for DDG (currently ,they can only be listed as Classified format listings) but that could change in the future.

---

Posted by king-collect on Sep 12, 2009 12:36 AM PayPal Postage Printing Suggestions for Improvements Hi Griff! I recently had a couple of problems with Paypal postage. These were instances where I was printing postage through Paypal for non-eBay transactions. Incident # 1: I shipped a flat rate priority envelope to an APO. The package was returned to me by the post office because it did not have a customs form. Yet, Paypal did not generate a customs form or even mention that one was necessary. Incident #2: A buyer had a really, really, really long address. It was a college student and their address included the name of the university, the street address of the university, the name of the building, the building number, a suite number and a room number. Paypal only allowed 2 lines for this address, and only 40 characters per line. The address was rejected several times. I tried truncating it, abbreviating it and eventually I chopped off everything but the street address of the university. Paypal would not let me proceed. I kept getting an error message saying that something was wrong with the address, but it wouldn't tell me what was wrong or suggest how it could be fixed. Eventually I just wrote the address on the envelope by hand and waited in line at the post office to ship it manually. If you could kick these suggestions to someone at Paypal, I'd appreciate it: * If an APO / FPO / IPO needs a customs form, please allow Paypal to generate one. * It would be useful if additional lines could be added to the address of a Paypal package, and if the character length could be overridden somehow. * If there is a problem with a Paypal address, it would be useful if there was some indication what the problem actually is - the street the zip code, some abbreviation, the city name, a misplaced punctuation mark, etc. I have forwarded your entire post to the folks at PayPal for their consideration (and for the record, they are all needed changes. I have been faced with the address situation and it is extremely frustrating. I ended up on Click and Ship and printed out the postage from there.)

---

Posted by king-collect on Sep 12, 2009 1:11 AM Alphabetical Search Sort Request Hi Griff! I would like the ability to sort eBay searches alphabetically. That’s a first! I will forward your request to Finding but I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your request.

---

By the way, I want to take a moment to thank everyone who asks the very detailed questions like tev_022908 and buriedbybooks, etc. These are incredibly valuable to all of us here at eBay. By posting edge case questions and yes, even those that are like splitting hairs, you provide opportunities for us to refine and augment our FAQ’s and Help pages (even if said input takes, uh, a while to wind up in the on site Help text).

---

Posted by wearitsatvintage on Sep 12, 2009 4:02 AM Reported Violations Not Removed Hi again Griff, easy question this time: I am curious if ebay has completely given up on enforcing reported blatant listing violations? ex. - I reported a sellers auction 3 times for having their website name in HUGE colorful letters at the bottom of their description. There website has items being sold off ebay. I reported for fee avoidance & inproper links & credits. This, as you know is a blatant listing violation (or so I thought). The seller is not a diamond or even a powerseller. Ebay did not pull the auction, nor was the text ever changed. The auction ran its full course without consequence. Actually, it seems that whenever I report something for any type of blatant violation nothing gets done. Heck, I would love to use ebay to advertise my website for off ebay sales. So, to clarify - is it ok to now list your website on your auctions or has ebay just stopped enforcing any violations? (other than vero). No it is not. I would not recommend any seller do so on the basis of a listing in violation that was not removed in time before the item ended. Oh, the item has fallen (not pulled, closed normally) off my watch list waiting for your Sept. thread but I think I could probably find the seller again or at least many other instances of reported items not being enforced. This time, send it to me (Only send me reports of violations after you have reported it twice to Trust and Safety.) Send to griff@ebay.com using your regular email, not My Messages. (I cannot use My Messages for facilitating eBay member reports or other issues. )

---

Posted by coin.blizz on Sep 12, 2009 6:53 AM Pre Sales and Shipping Time DSRs Since PRE-sales are allowed on ebay, with a shipping time of 30 days, what can be done to help the seller on low SHIPPING TIME DSRs due to PRE-sales? That is the only thing keeping me out of the TOP SELLERS, and I'm sure its because so many buyers do not read the listings. I state it in LARGE RED LETTERS clearly explaining the PRE-sale and when it will be shipped, several times in the listing & send email reminders but still always have people asking why I haven't shipped the item. If ebay is going to allow 30 days to ship, then can ebay do something to distinguish PRE-SALE items from non-PRE-sale items, and have the SHIPPING TIME rating turned off? That (turning of the shipping time DSR for presale sellers) wouldn’t be possible and selling presale items will always be a challenge on eBay with that regard. And since you are already sending out email reminders, the only other thing I can think of is to vary your product line with items that aren’t presale. (I assume you are sending a reminder of the delay in shipping in your invoices as well, correct?)

---

Posted by tribblekitty on Sep 12, 2009 7:31 AM Local Pickup Questions In the past when sellers have asked what they can / cannot do regarding accepting payments for "Local Pick up" items, you have made comments that went from "take a picture of the buyer with the item" (which is unacceptable to PPal as proof & will surely #!$$ off the buyer). Or you suggested adding something like “Contact me for payment methods to pay on pickup.” to your listing description. This evidently can be considered "encouraging off eBay sales" as I had very similar verbiage & got a nastygram & had X days to remove it from my store listings. This was only a few months ago. At least the gave me time to remove, without just ending my listings, but still a real PITA. Even if eBay now "officially allows" the "Contact me..." line (can you assure what exact statement is allowed?), since we have to offer PayPal or other elec payments, buyer can certainly use the electronic payment method anyway. I don’t know exactly what your listings stated but the policy is pretty clear on what a seller may state for payment for local pickup. Here is the Accepted Policy Page. Here is the specific policy statement: “…Sellers who offer payment upon pickup may include the following statement in their listings: “Contact me for payment methods to pay on pickup.”…” I realize that for heavy or extremely fragile high $ "local pick up only items" eBay is not longer a viable option as a selling venue for many of us. Too bad, but that's the way it is... But for higher $ smaller items where I was previously willing to ship and/or offer local pick-up to get the widest audience, I am still trying to find a viable way to do it here. (ex: when selling higher $ trains, at least probably 50% of my buyers would choose local pick up, some even driving quite a distance, as they evidently are willing to bid a bit higher when they have the ability to check out the merchandise condition on pickup.) Please advise if the following would be acceptable (or not)... I Iist item as available for shipping or local pick up, I check off both PPal & Moneybookers as payment options. In listing, boldy clearly state, that "PayPal or MB is accepted for items shipped", and "MB ONLY is accepted for local pick up (please contact me if you have any questions regarding local pick up payment policy) . Now I could be wrong, but my guess is that most local buyer's are going to ask abt. other options vs using MB which they are unlikely not familiar/comfortable with. But unfortunately once I check off "PPal" as an accepted option, a local buyer could use it anyway. However, would I not be within my rights to refuse/refund the PPal payment in this case because buyer did have another electronic payment method (MB) available to them? OR would this be another one of those deals where although a seller technically followed the rules, the buyer could still leave a neg for "seller won't accept PPal" or could report the seller for NPS if we refuse their PPal payment? Thank you for any additional clarification including what exact verbiage that is definitely 100% allowed. I imagine the "electronic payment mandatory local pick-up" change may not be a big deal to some sellers. But in the vintage/antique/collectibles category, or even for the casual seller selling no longer needed furniture, and other household items, I can assure you, it is a big deal. If a seller offers a payment method in his listings, he is obliged to accept that payment method from all buyers. So if that seller offers PayPal and Moneybookers and also Local Pickup, then per the policy, the seller has to accept both forms of payment from all buyers regardless of delivery method. The seller who also offers local pickup as an option can state the following, and only the following “Contact me for payment methods to pay on pickup.” And trust that the buyer who wishes to pick up the item via local pickup will contact the seller prior to payment. It’s not a perfect solution but it is the only one available at this time. PayPal is still exploring the option of allowing for some sort of seller protection for local pickup but I haven’t received and updates on this. I will inquire.

---

That finally catches us up (except for tev_022908's Seller Dashboard question for which I am still awaiting confirmation of my response as accurate. I will post it in the next batch of responses.) The thread is now open. regards, Griff

Griff _________________ eBay

And, to expand on the question above, regarding the TSR calculation, what about GTC listings?

What about sales from items listed before October 1?
Since we had to be "TOP" for anywhere from 90 days to a year to earn the rating, shouldn't the discount apply to all our sales for the October period?

Or are we going to have a complex, 2-tier system for the Top Sellers?
Some sales qualify, since they were listed after October 1str, but others don't if they were listed prior - but sold in October?

So the lookback period is only 30 days for the reward, but up to a year for the punishment of a 1 or 2 DSR?

Please explain why this is fair.

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts....

---

Posted by tev_022908 on Sep 12, 2009 3:34 AM Seller Dashboard Update From my dashboard... Your buyer satisfaction rating (updated 09/06/09) eBay calculated your rating based on performance data received during the 4-week period leading up to the last updated date. Is this section of my seller's dashboard going to change to reflect the new 1 year satisfaction rating? Sorry 1 more, Why is the updated Date (updated 09/06/09) always at least one week behind all the other sections updated dates? This (Buyer Satisfaction) page was replaced by the new Seller Dashboard on 9/28. The reason for the date being a week behind is that unlike the other data (which is pulled directly from site) this data comes from a process that runs weekly. The new performance page will show a seller’s full low DSR history and all.

---

Posted by n.s.sherlock on Sep 21, 2009 5:58 PM Listings Offering Merchandise For Rent Here is a question we are discussing on the Trust & Safety board: Is there a policy that specifically prohibits the rental of items on eBay. Someone is renting wedding centerpieces. When someone wins the item, the seller mails the items to the winner. Later, after the wedding, the winner must mail them back. Some say "report it", they aren't selling anything. So, is such a listing allowable, or are they prohibited? I had to check with Trust and Safety and they say, “not allowed” for fixed price or auction format. They are allowed for Classified Format. Members could report an auction or fixed price format listing offering merchandise for rent under Listing policy violations > No Item.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 21, 2009 6:05 PM Local Pickup and Payment If a seller offers a payment method in his listings, he is obliged to accept that payment method from all buyers. So if that seller offers PayPal and Moneybookers and also Local Pickup, then per the policy, the seller has to accept both forms of payment from all buyers regardless of delivery method. Griff, that is directly contradicting what you've told us repeatedly about this issue. I thought we had beat this subject to death. Your summary was that for Local Pickup items, a seller had to offer an online payment method but weren't required to accept it. Here's a more straight forward question: Seller offers Paypal in the listing and includes the allowed 'contact me for payment methods for Pay on Pickup' Buyer skips contacting seller and pays via Paypal Seller refunds and demands cash only for local pick up. You had previously said this was perfectly fine. Are you changing the rules now? No, I am not changing the rules. I am re-stating the policy, as written. My penultimate post on the topic is from the June Ask Griff thread: We have provided some exemptions to this policy based on certain categories (items that are normally shipped by freight if at all). We may expand this list in the future. We may also find workable ways to simply the existing policy. As you know I have stated previously that this is obviously not the most elegant of solutions and if it were my choice to make, I would probably eliminate the ability to list an item on eBay.com with Local Pickup Only (and move that option to a new classified format which is where Local Pickup Only really belongs. This is a very real possibility in the future) In my opinion, that would be the best solution. Asking a seller to state “contact me for local pickup only payment instructions” is definitely not an ideal solution as well. I acknowledge that this inelegant solution does have loopholes when it comes to seller protection. That’s why we will back up a seller who lists Local Pickup Only and ends up with a buyer who insists on using electronic payments for a local pick up. But for the reasons stated above, the current policy is and will remain, in place until there is a better solution. I will add the following edits to the above: … I acknowledge that this inelegant solution does have loopholes when it comes to seller protection. That’s why we will, on a case by case basis, back up a seller who lists Local Pickup Only and ends up with a buyer who insists on using electronic payments for a local pick up. This may include removal of any negative feedback left for the transaction. I have submitted a request for revisiting this issue with the stake holders in order to find a more consistent solution. In the meantime, status hasn’t changed from June, 2009.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 21, 2009 6:15 PM Free Shipping Industry Standard Since we're now going with the corporate talking points regarding 'industry standards' and 'buyer driven' perhaps we could have some data to back up those claims? Please? I'd like a list of 10 (or even 5) MAJOR online retailers who offer free shipping on a per item basis Sure. Here are some… to name a few… Amazon Buy.com BH Photo & Video Best Buy ToysRUs L.L. Bean Blue Nile WSHome (William Sonoma Home) Overstock Bed Bath and Beyond Nieman Marcus Dunham's Sports Without: a minimum order amount OR a paid membership. I'm not really seeing a plethora of sites that offer 'discounted' shipping either. I do the majority of my shopping online. I pay a shipping fee for nearly everything. Free Shipping qualifications like minimum purchase requirements or even site membership do not lessen the impact free shipping has on buyer decisions. I can shop for a few items on, say, Nordstroms, and easily reach the $200 minimum required for free shipping. Whether or not the site requires minimums or memberships is not important. The cumulative effect: buyers see and are increasingly coming to expect, some form of “free shipping” from ecommerce web sites, eBay included. Let’s clarify another point. “Industry Standard” doesn’t mean that every business offers it for 100% of their merchandise or offers it on a per item basis (though more and more do). “Industry Standard” means that nearly all online retail sites utilize “free shipping” in some form or other as a service to their customers and as a competitive differentiator and marketing strategy. For anyone to argue otherwise would be to ignore the reality of ecommerce today. eBay does not mandate free shipping and except for media categories in the UK, there are no current plans to do so. And, on eBay, there are some categories where “free shipping” is definitely not the norm or reflective of an ecommerce-wide industry standard (Furniture, Antiques, Business and Industrial, etc). Shoppers in those categories are not as expecting of free shipping as they most definitely are in categories like Books, Media, Clothing and Electronics. On eBay, it is left to the seller to decide whether or not to offer free shipping and we would expect any seller to experiment and test prior to committing to a wider Free Shipping policy based on their own sales results. But make no mistake: For most online purchases, and especially in appropriate categories, buyers online expect at the least, discounted and at best, free shipping and free shipping as a marketing strategy does attract buyers. Shipping cost is a top of the list factor for buyers comparing deals across marketplaces and on eBay, within the marketplace. If your competitor on or off eBay, is offering the same deals as you, but also offers free shipping, and you are not doing so, you will not be able to compete. We will continue to encourage sellers to adopt free shipping and we will continue to promote those that do. I'd say the industry standard is actually these two things: Free shipping with a minimum purchase (most commonly $50 with a few sites at $25) OR a flat shipping fee regardless of order size. The latter being the most prevalent! See my comments above. In the end, to the buyer, Free Shipping is… free shipping, whether it is qualified by minimum requirements or even if a membership is required. and as for 'buyer driven' How does eBay decide what changes are 'buyer driven?' By surveying buyers and watching their activity both on and off eBay. Because STR is--by itself--not sufficient proof that buyers are driving these changes. And we would most strongly disagree. Sales and sell through are very important data points for gauging customer sentiment, and that includes their sentiments around Free Shipping. It is actually very easy to compare items with and without free shipping and determine the effect Free Shipping has on sell through rates. For most categories, (not all) it is significant. eBay has for quite some time surfaced free shipping listings. Which means that listings with free shipping are being seen by more buyers. Which means the STR is likely higher compared to those listings with fair but separate shipping charges who end their 30 day cycle back on page 9. It's self-fulfilling and not independently verifiable. Personally, I think that buyers would respond MORE favorably to sellers who follow what I consider industry standards of offering free shipping with minimum order amounts. Free shipping is detrimental to multiple item sales. It drives down order size when offered on a per item basis. It makes FAR more sense to create and promote tools for sellers to offer free shipping on the basis of minimum order amounts. On this point, we have some agreement. Any feature or tool that provides more choices to the buyer is a good thing, including providing for free shipping for more transactions where free shipping is not currently available (where a seller can only offer it for multiple purchases or for minimum dollar amounts for example). In cases like these, providing a free shipping option will drive more sales. Once the shopping cart feature is launched across eBay, such a tool will be a possibility.

---

Posted by lehman-parker on Sep 21, 2009 6:51 PM Googlebase Update Hi Griff, Would it be possible for you to share what eBay is doing, and will be doing, to meet Google's new requirements for feeds to Google Base? Now that manual uploading is being phased out by Google, feeds from eBay will be even more important than in the past. My own manual account was retired by Google on 9/14. Prior to that date, I had been doing manual feeds for two or three months with great success. As soon as I was no longer able to do uploads, my hits, watchers, and sales started nose-diving. Some of the new Google requirements seem so restrictive that I can't imagine eBay being able to meet them, but I'm certainly hoping that won't be the case. The issues I'm aware of are these... We're aware of the changes Google is making in regards to Google Base / Google Product Search. Although eBay is already submitting millions of items every day to Google Base, we know that submitting items to Google Base will get even more important in the future. We're working closely with Google to ensure a successful submission of our sellers items. 1. Currently, a condition attribute is required on all listings, but not all eBay categories have an eBay-provided item specific for condition. As far as I know, a user-defined conditon IS isn't what Google Base is looking for, but I could be wrong about that. What do sellers need to do to ensure we meet Google's requirement for a condition attribute? What is eBay doing? Google accepts three different conditions: new, used and refurbished. Although we’re working on a mapping of eBay-specific and user-defined conditions to the Google-supported conditions, choosing one of the three Google-supported conditions as a user-defined condition will ensure a proper mapping and a successful submission to Google. 2. As of early December, eBay will need to submit a single feed to Google with individual sellers included as subaccounts. Is eBay working on setting this up? Since the Google policy changes have been announced we’re working with Google to ensure a smooth transition from the current setup to Multi Client Accounts. 3. Google has announced that feeds will fail if a seller's titles or descriptions include statements about price-oriented promotions, such as "Free shipping" or "lowest price guaranteed." Will eBay require sellers to remove these kinds of statements prior to the December deadline? We’re currently working on a solution for this. As the announcement has been published just recently we’re not sure yet, whether we will be able to remove statements regarding price-oriented promotions in the process of submitting the items or whether items with these statements will be excluded from the Google Base submission. As we know how important a submission to Google Base is for our sellers we’re preferring the option to remove the statements in the process of the submission. 4. Google says feeds will fail if there are "duplicate offers within the same account, or between separate accounts that you control". I assume this means that if a seller has more than one listing that's identical, the feed will fail. Since many eBay sellers do sell duplicate items, it sounds like their feeds will fail. Would eBay considering banning duplicate listings so feeds won't fail? Feeds won’t fail due to duplicate listings. Items will be filtered for duplicates either on the eBay- or on the Google-side. 5. Google says that "We do not allow links to an email address or a file (ex. an image, audio, video, or document file) that requires an additional program or application to open or run." Many sellers have links that open up an email client, and my understanding is that flash applications require additional programs to run. Will eBay put in place new policies in these areas? The mentioned statement concerns the format of the submitted target link of a single Google Base listing. The target link of submitted items will be a matching item page on eBay. 6. Google says "We do not allow links to content or landing pages that... require the acceptance of cookies to render." Am I misunderstanding, or doesn't eBay require the acceptance of cookies on all pages? Although eBay uses cookies, the acceptance is only required in “My eBay”. 7. Google says "All items posted must be available for purchase if applicable. Do not include products, vehicles, or similar items that are out of stock or otherwise not available for purchase." Google also says "You must own the content you submit, or you exclusively must be submitting on behalf of the content owner." It sounds like Google might disqualify back-ordered and drop-shipped items. If that's true, what would... or could... eBay do about this? We will work with Google to figure out a reasonable way to deal with this policy. Of course items sold on eBay have to be delivered within a reasonable amount of time. As stated in the eBay Seller Guidelines “Sellers cannot fail to deliver an item for which payment was accepted”. 8. Google also says "Do not include promotional or boilerplate text in your items' titles or descriptions. All text should directly describe the product you are submitting. Text relating to shipping or store policies should not be included." It's possible Google is only referring to items submitted directly to Google from individual sellers. But if this will apply to eBay listings as well, it sounds like an insurmountable obstacle. Any thoughts on this? Please see the answer for question 3. 9. Most importantly, Google says that if too many subaccounts fail, the entire feed for all sellers will fail. Since it seems like some or all of the requirements listed above will cause many sellers' listings to fail, will any kinds of workarounds be possible? Has Google indicated any willingness to allow any exceptions to these policies for eBay listings? We’re working closely with Google to ensure a successful submission of eBay items. We will make sure that in the case of failing subaccounts other subaccounts won’t be affected. Thanks for any info and perspective you can provide!

---

Posted by pink_n_red_roses on Sep 21, 2009 7:07 PM A Negative for Not Leaving A Positive Leaving feedback is voluntary. A buyer may leave a negative or neutral for any reason, including; “seller didn’t leave me a feedback first.” Unless the feedback was made after a messaged threat of a negative unless a positive was posted first, the feedback does not qualify as extortion. (In order for there to be extortion, an attempt to extort has to be made.) Leaving feedback is voluntary. - Please finish this sentance, griff. Apparently, leaving feedback is voluntary only for Buyers. It is no longer voluntary for sellers since Ebay will not back up a seller who receives a STUPID negative about not leaving feedback. As the Seller's advocate, I would think that you would have a seller's back a little better than that. I am. It takes time. I have to work within the framework provided. I continue to push for an exemption for these cases. In the meantime, the policy, as I stated, stands. Buyers may leave a negative feedback with the reason, “seller didn’t leave me a positive first.” Given this unavoidable reality, the most practical strategy for sellers remains: Leave a positive for a paying buyer. However, as I mentioned at the top of this response, if a buyer emails a seller and threatens to leave a negative if the seller doesn’t leave a positive, then it could be Feedback Extortion, depending on the verifiability of the email as well as other factors best not revealed. I have seen negatives removed for this reason.

---

Posted by rabiyah on Sep 21, 2009 7:19 PM Free Shipping Questions and Suggestions I came here to suggest something similar to the above. I have a few suggestions that might encourage sellers to offer free shipping. As it stands now, I think many sellers are reluctant to offer "free shipping" because they know they will need to incorporate the shipping and packaging charges into the item price and will therefore be charged e-bays final value fees for shipping, which now we are not. Since e-bay is encouraging sellers to have "free shipping" because that is what the customers want, not as a way to increase profits, how about a small final value fee discount for offering free shipping? We did run a limited promotion providing fee discounts for free shipping and we may offer a similar promotion in the future (although there are no immediate plans to do so) Since "free shipping" actually discourages buyers to keep shopping with the seller for combined shipping (and actually overcharges them if they do since item prices will have to have shipping costs worked in) how about creating a system where a seller can offer free shipping for purchases over a certain dollar amount, or a flat rate regardless of quantity? It could be something sellers could offer all the time, or as a promotion in "markdown manager". There could even be some kind of symbol (like the gift icons) to alert buyers to the promo without using title space or subtitle. It has been suggested before (see a previous post in this thread) and is under consideration for a new feature in a future launch of the Shipping Calculator. As an on-line shopper I know that these type of promotions encourage me to buy more, while "free shipping" alone means nothing because I know item prices are inflated. Yours is not the majority sentiment. Buyers have shown us that given two items with the same total value – one for price $X plus $Y shipping and one for price ($X + $Y) and free shipping , they will tend to favor the one with the free shipping, even if it means the price is higher. Why? Not sure exactly but the data is pretty clear: buyers will tend to favor an item with free or very low shipping over an identical item with a higher shipping cost. Also, for auction style listings, I see many sellers offering "free shipping with buy it now". Maybe there is a way to have this done officially so that the buyer can truly buy-it-now and pay without having to rely on the word of the seller to remove the charges from to invoice after the fact. That would also benefit from a recognizable icon to alert buyers to the offer instead of title space. I've actually seem many sellers do it the wrong way, by posting the listing as free shipping to get the attention and then trying to add shipping later if it is won by bidding. Creating this option for sellers would eliminate that problem. A very good suggestion. I’ve submitted it for consideration. I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your suggestion. Thanks for listening. My pleasure.

---

Posted by rabiyah on Sep 21, 2009 7:31 PM Editing Listings for Mention of Insurance I know it's a little late for this question, but do we need to remove any reference to optional insurance from the description of our listings by Sept 122nd? If a seller wants to qualify for Top Rated Seller, they need to remove any text that refers to optional or required insurance from their listing descriptions immediately. All sellers need to start removing any references to optional or required insurance as well. You can read more in the FAQ for Shipping Insurance. I read a hypothetical question in the July update asking something like "Do I need to revise my listings?" And the answer was "no", but I don't know if they were taking text into account. See above. I know e-bay will automatically remove the actual option from the listing and invoice, I'm only concerned about the text. I was waiting for the "find and replace" feature in the bulk editor to remove it. I just want to know what will happen to any GTC listings that attempt to re-list between Sept 22nd and whenever I am able to bulk edit the text. I might end up finding out one way or another before you answer, just posting this in case it's still not obvious. The enhanced Bulk Editor (With a Search and Replace Feature) is now available.

---

Posted by pielady7 on Sep 21, 2009 9:36 PM Payment Reminder Email Text Griff posted ..."Keep in mind that the first email from eBay is not a demand, only a gentle reminder (and from eBay, not the seller)." Is there any reason why we, as sellers, are not allowed to know what the message SPECIFICALLY states? If there is not, could you please post the exact message for us? It might really help alleviate the "heebie jeebies" so many of us have about ebay sending messages to buyers on our "behalf". Here is the actual payment reminder email sent to buyers:

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Sep 21, 2009 9:44 PM Buyer Protection Does eBay Buyer Protection Policy cover the buyer is the seller goes into litigation or collection when a contract is voided by eBay? eBay Buyer Protection is not dependant or voided by any seller actions against the buyer outside of eBay.

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Sep 21, 2009 9:45 PM Insurance Questions Does eBay still ban the "self-insurance" by the sellers or just ban the payment of the insurance by the buyers? Neither. eBay’s policy change removes the line item for insurance from all seller invoices and prohibits the mention of “optional” or “required” insurance in an item description. You may want to read the FAQ for the details.

---

Posted by house-of-all-things on Sep 22, 2009 3:29 AM Free Shipping and Industry Standard Dear Griff, I am so confused, could you please clarify this for me? You state that ebay is supporting the 'free shipping' model because it is the industry standard today. Yet, when going over the list of America's Top 500 of etailers, you will find that not 1 (one) of those 500 offer blanket free shipping. Nor does eBay offer blanket free shipping. Granted, many do offer free shipping if you purchase for a minimum of $50/$100/$200, but this of course we are not allowed to offer on ebay. And it might be a feature in the future. (See my responses above to a similar post). As there is not presently 1 single company on Top 500 that offers free shipping, how exactly is it that it has become an 'industry standard'?? Your clarification, preferably with solid documentation, would be very much appreciated. See my response to the post above. Of course the buyers want free shipping, as you state it. I am sure, if you asked, they would also prefer all sunny days and no wind on bicycling paths (both as realistic demands as free shipping and free lunch). Wouldn’t we all. Luckily, sunny days and no wind bicycle paths are not an eBay marketable commodity. Free Shipping however, is. The problem with the ebay model of 'free shipping' is that we have to bury the shipping expense into the item price, thus making the items a good 15% more expensive (for media items), as we now also have to pay FVF on the 'hidden' postage cost. If you tried to ask buyers if they want free shipping at an additional charge of the shipping + an extra 15% for ebay, what do you think their answer would be? We KNOW what their answer is. We’ve asked them. They would prefer the more expensive item with free shipping. Another question: You are encouraging sellers who sell a lot to UK and German customers to list there directly in order to get Top Rated Seller rating and discounts on those sites. Does that mean that any seller not living in UK and Germany will actually get the hard-earned discount, if qualified? Yes. That seller, if they qualify for the Top Rated Seller or PowerSeller program on the site (UK or DE), they will receive a discount for the fees they paid to list on that site (either a PS or TRS discount).

---

Posted by wearitsatvintage on Sep 22, 2009 4:48 AM Artifacts Policy Hi again Griff, I have a follow up to my previous question about listing violations. Let me explain the actual scenario before I ask the question. Funny this should happen but I listed two vintage Chimayo miniature rugs last week in: Collectibles > Cultures & Ethnicities > Native American: US > 1935-Now > Rugs & Textiles (Non-Navajo) Because after all, that category seemed appropriate for the item because it is a post 1935 non-Navajo rug. That and thats were others were listed. I get a message from ebay stating that both of the auctions were removed for "Search & Browse manipulation". Stating they should have been listed in: Collectibles > Cultures & Ethnicities > Native American: US > 1935-Now >unsigned artisan crafts So, someone reported my items for apparently be off by one branch of a sub-category and they get pulled!. Yet, there are (and I've reported) sellers from China listing brand new clothing in: Clothing, Shoes & Accessories > Vintage > Women's Vintage Clothing > 1965-76 (Mod, Hippie, Disco) > Dresses> Which as the category cleary states is for VINTAGE clothing. Get this, the very first line of their description reads: "Everything in our store is brand new", oh and not to mention using the word VINTAGE (not vintage-style, but vintage) in the title which is search manipulation, because the item as stated by the seller is NOT vintage but brand new. Nothing like blatantly pointing out your listing violation in your description. So, I report it as I've done so in the past for these items. What happens???? NOTHING! (just like always, lol). So, this leads to my question: Being the person who reports an item, do you have to carry a certain clout with ebay or apparently be a more important member of the "community" to actually have them take action on a reported item? I hope that maybe you can clarify why certain minor violations (like the one I apparently made) are acted on so fast, its got to be the status of the person reporting it because I've reported many blatant violations and nothing ever gets done about them. The violation is not minor. There is a specific eBay policy that governs the listing of anything made by Native Americans. The policy is based on several Federal laws to which eBay, and eBay seller, are subject. As for the other issue mentioned above, all I can say is keep reporting it. If you want to send me one example (and I mean one, not a list), I can ask T&S if the listing actually is a violation.

---

Posted by indiebiz on Sep 22, 2009 6:44 AM Handling Time in Best Match? Hi Griff, Is seller handling time considered in search advantage? ex: All things being equal - will the seller who has a 1 day handling time receive better placement in search than the seller who has a 3 day handling time? Handling Time is not a factor in the Best Match algorithm.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 22, 2009 7:46 AM US Sellers Listing in Some Categories on UK and DE eBay Sites Griff, You keep saying that sellers who list directly on ebay.co.uk and ebay.de will also be eligible for TRS status on those sites. What you're NOT saying--or have perhaps forgotten-- is that both of those sites have either MANDATORY free shipping OR very low shipping caps in far more categories than exist here. Listing directly on eBay.co.uk is no longer feasible for US sellers in the media categories. I certainly can't afford to ship to the UK for free nor can I include that postage in the item price. It's $9 for First Class international for a mass market paperback. It's far more for shipping anything with delivery information that is viewable online. eBay Germany has far more extensive shipping caps, so perhaps while you're advocating that sellers list directly there, you should also mention that they need to research the shipping caps and other convoluted polices before doing so? That is definitely a factor for sellers who sell in Media. (And it is made apparent once a US seller attempts to list in those categories on those sites where limits are in force). Here is a link to the http://pages.ebay.co.uk/help/sell/maximumPP_FAQ.html#maxcosts>UK Help Page for Shipping Limits.

---

Posted by art_vandelay_industr.. on Sep 22, 2009 8:19 AM Partial Refunds and Feedback Extortion Hi Griff , PLEASE HELP GRIFF said on Jan 14, 2009 11:30 AM please remember that you are not obliged to provide partial refunds and negative feedback left because you did not oblige a request for a partial refund, is subject for removal. We are doing something: When reported to us, we are removing negative feedback left by buyers who have attempted to extort services or funds (including partial refunds while keeping the items, or partial refunds in general) When I asked the buyer to revise her feedback left to me through Ebays Resolution Center for feedback She wrote this :: I never said that I would return the item for a refund. I asked for a partial refund due to inaccurate description. Seller did not list in description that there were any stains, but I do not plan to return the item. I do not plan to have spent $10.00 on shipping to have nothing just because seller did not accurately describe the item. I would not have bid as high if I would have known there were stains. That is why I requested a partial refund. I plan to get it dry cleaned. Thank you. Notice "partial refund" she wants to keep the item The above is the ONLY time she used the Ebay system to communicate. This buyer did NOT use Ebays Resolution / Dispute console to work this out or complain. This buyer NEVER contacted me THROUGH EBAY , only my personal email address. Her last email to me :: Yes, you offered me a full refund to send the item back, and I asked if you would give me a partial refund because of the stains/dirty condition of the item. This is a fair request as you did not mention the dirty and stained condition of the item. The stains were not visible in the pictures you listed with your description and there was no description of the stains. I asked you twice for a partial refund with no offer of a partial refund. I plan to have the item dry cleaned to try to remove the stains. Also on the feedback she left she mentions " no discount" ( another way of saying "partial refund") This item DID NOT ,have stains - I had 18 photos showing every inch. In any case , her demands of a partial refund is in violation of the feedback policy ,per your above post. Griff ,please help me get this negative feedback removed! I have wrote Ebay many times , I don't think they really even read my emails There is something important left out of my quote above: In order for a case to be ruled “feedback extortion,” the buyer has to have made an explicit threat, via email, in the nature of, “Give me a partial refund or I will leave you a negative feedback.” From your accounting, at no time did the buyer threaten you with a negative in an attempt to obtain a partial refund. Thus, this case does not qualify as Feedback Extortion. (Requesting a partial refund is not a violation.)

---

Posted by mccleadyb on Sep 22, 2009 9:24 AM Suggested Changes to the Insertion Fee Schedule SUGGESTION FOR EBAY TO HELP SELLERS OFFSET NEW EXPENSES - Any reason why "the powers that be" could not change the insertion fee schedule? I would like to see the 35 cent fee raised from 9.99 and under to 20.00 or 25.00 and under. My reasoning is that we sellers are now required to include shipping insurance into our cost and encouraged by Ebay to offer "free" or reduced shipping charges. I start most all items at 9.99 to save on expenses, sometimes I take quite a beating. Other times it helps get bidding started and items go for a higher price because of it. I will gladly include the cost of shipping/insurance in the price I start an item at, but I don't want to have to pay Ebay even more money for doing so. After years of full-time selling online, I will attest to the fact that it's incredibly difficult to make a go of it on here anymore. Maybe you can offer me some of your own suggestions. In tough times for everyone, is Ebay willing to make a bit less off of us to help us keep afloat? If sellers are expected to make less money by absorbing more expenses, should we not expect the same of Ebay? Thanks for your help! Sellers are not required to include shipping insurance in their item cost. Seller may do so if they chose. They may also add the cost to their shipping or handling fees. We introduced a new insertion fee change back in June. The first five auction format listing per 30 days are free. So far, the change has yielded positive results and we are exploring ways to provide for lower or no insertion fees for more listings. And I do have a suggestions for sellers looking to insure their packages against loss without having to charge their buyers higher shipping and handling. I will post them later.

---

Posted by mcjbob on Sep 22, 2009 10:34 AM International Sales and DSRs Hi Griff: I really appreciate your Q & A's, it has been very helpful. I'm sort of OK with the new DSR changes, but do have real concerns about fairness. The new DSR ratings that exclude international transactions seem to place international buyers in a second class position. Other than a negative, their feedback will not count at all next year, and minimally this year. Likewise, a seller such as myself with a large percentage of international sales also does not receive the benefit of their DSR's. An international buyer should be able to view DSR's for international sales in some manner. With the October change, will an international buyer only see US DSR's? What about next year? Some sellers may be better than others in international sales, a detail that may be useful to international buyers. DSRs are not filtered based on the location of the buyer. The only DSR ratings any buyer sees are those on the seller’s Feedback profile. As a seller who works hard for my buyer regardless of location, I do feel it is unfair to completely exclude international DSR's when calculating rewards for seller performance. My suggestion is to have a two tiered calculation. First tier, as it is, no international for Top Rated Seller. However, only when a seller does not qualify for Top Rated Seller for the US, then, and only then, give the seller a "second chance" and include ALL DSR's. That way, a single US buyer leaving 3 1's will not destroy a Top Rated Seller position for a whole year if there are enough overall DSR's to otherwise qualify and lower the % of 1's and 2's. I will forward your suggestion to the Top Rated Seller team for consideration. Standard disclosure dead ahead: I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your suggestion. This was not an easy decision however, since the vast majority of sellers on eBay.com sell mostly to eBay.com buyers and since the shipping DSRs are a topic of some concern for cross border trade, we made the choice to discount them from the calculations for Top Rated Seller. No decision is going to please all sellers. But that cannot prevent us from doing what we believe is the right thing for the majority of sellers. Griff, I am very concerned that Top Rated Seller badge is a target, and that only one US buyer can easily reek havoc on any seller. At least with the inclusion of international as a second chance option, I'd feel a little better. Sorry, I sure dont like the term second chance, but I cant think of better wording. I've been a Powerseller for many years, and do quite well by using the option to not display the Powerseller badge. I'd also like the option to turn off the Top Rated Seller badge. Will I be able to turn it off as I see it as only a target, not a benefit? No. The Top Rated Seller badge cannot be turned off or on.

---

Posted by barnfox on Sep 22, 2009 10:45 AM Selling Tickets I sold two tickets to a college football game. I specified that the buyer needed to pay within 24 hours of the auction close. I have invoiced him but so far he hasn't responded. I need to get the tickets in the mail soon because the game is in 4 days. If he exceeds the 24 hour period can I award the bid to the next bidder? Yes. Those are your terms and tickets are a perishable commodity.

---

Posted by redhead_vegan on Sep 22, 2009 1:40 PM Half.com Support Hi, Griff. I am an infrequent seller on half.com & occassionally on ebay. I recently sold a text book, packaged it and shipped it right away. I have received an email stating that the seller was notified the package was empty/received an empty package. It was full when I mailed it. They want a refund but I'm out almost $60 if I refund it as that book is now missing. I cannot find anywhere to contact half.com and either email or speak with a real person, and nothing in the help section is helping me. What can you suggest I do? Thanks! -Marie Although an eBay company, Half.com support and infrastructure is pretty much separated from eBay. Send the above to me in an email and I will forward it to the appropriate location. Send it to griff@ebay .com using regular email, not My Messages. I cannot answer email sent to me through My Messages. Thanks.

---

Posted by lurch-deeann on Sep 22, 2009 2:48 PM Sites Comparable To eBay First off, minor correction: "Any site comparable to eBay (this includes all major retailers) that offers any sort of guarantee or buyer protection, does not also charge said buyers for the guarantee or protection by including a line item on their invoices for insurance." First off - major retailers are comparable to eBay? I thought eBay brought together sellers and buyers (or some verbiage along those lines) and were "stewards of an ever evolving marketplace." That doesn't sound like a major retailer to me. Now that marketplace may or may not include major retailers, but that's not the same thing as eBay *being,* or even acting as, one. From a seller’s perspective perhaps, but from the perspective of most buyers, it doesn’t make a difference if an ecommerce site is a single retailer or a marketplace like eBay’s; they expect the same levels of service and protection wherever they shop. Accordingly - and for the record, there are sites comparable to eBay (enabling buyers and sellers to transactionally interact) particularly within the world of generally collectible items, which do "offer any sort of guarantee or buyer protection," who also allow for the option of insurance. At least one is larger and some are smaller, but they do exist. A site comparable to and also larger than eBay? Really? Feel free to share. Indeed, there are many smaller niche sites that cater to specific buyers. They may realize some level of success, at their size, not offering Buyer Protection or disallowing sellers to offer insurance. However, any site that I can locate that is comparable in size (if not breadth and depth of selection ) offers some form of buyer guarantee without charging the buyer for the protection. Furthermore, to expand on buried's post re, free shipping. Not only is he generally correct about free shipping usually kicking in when a certain order amount is reached, but when narrowed down to eBay's specific industry, free shipping often doesn't exist. There is another site which eBay was trying to compete with and emulate who both offers products directly to consumers and allows buyers and sellers to transactionally interact (a "marketplace" if you will). The retail side of this site offers free shipping after a certain amount is ordered. The "marketplace" not only does not have free shipping, they even state this in the shipping cost explanation to buyers (on a help page): "Shipping costs are an inherent feature in any mail-order service, and we hope that you will understand." Why did eBay choose to not move in this direction instead? Explaining and reinforcing to buyers that shipping costs are an inherent feature in any mail-order service? Because, despite rumors to the contrary, we are not attempting to emulate the specific policies or features or marketing strategies of said site. Re: restocking fees and supposed "industry standard" (and this is still the same general subject): You stated: "Correct. A full refund of payment (without restocking fees) t is also an industry standard for ecommerce. Keep in mind, an 'Industry Standard' doesn’t mean it is the practice of 100% of every marketplace or retail business online. It means that it is the standard adopted by a majority of the industry. There may be some smaller retail sites that do charge a restocking fee." I'm curious what your definition of "smaller" is. Granted, I can't think of any retailers who have a blanket restocking fee for all products sold, but many, many, many major online retailers (or traditionally b&m retailers with an online presence) have restocking fees for certain items, sometimes under certain circumstances. These are not smaller retailers. And while some larger online retailers don't (eg, a certain Diamond Seller who uses another word for the verb "purchase" as their name), they have a labyrinth return policy which neither eBay nor PayPal would support or allow them to enforce for sales on eBay. Usually, a restocking fee applies to only certain product lines or categories, sometimes it applies if an item is not complete (eg, a missing manual or cable in a package), sometimes it applies if the item is not returned in the original mailer, etc, but many - and I mean *many* have them, including many in the top 100 etailers. By smaller, what did you mean? Additionally, as buried asked about data re, free shipping being an industry standard, is there any data about this you can provide? Given the fact that the reality seems to indicate otherwise (except, of course, for a blanket restocking fee on ALL product lines)? Thanks. And I hope you don't view these as disparate topics. To me, they are intertwined under the use of "industry standard." See my previous comments about the term “industry standard.” We may disagree about its applications but I (as well as eBay, this is also my opinion based on the realities of ecommerce today) hold that any website that wants to compete in the retail space (and it’s all retail, regardless of size, category, breadth and selection of merchandise), will have to provide for some form of free or discounted shipping and buyer guarantee.

---

Posted by marsull_inla on Sep 22, 2009 4:28 PM Item Description Not Displaying No one here can duplicate what you claim your buyer’s are seeing. I'm not "claiming" anything. I am telling you what my buyers emailed to me. I don’t doubt they are seeing it but we cannot duplicate it. In order to investigate a case like this, we need the item number and the buyer’s ID so that we can contact them for information as needed. This has been going since late July and sellers cannot know whether it is affecting them unless a buyer emails them because the listing may look fine in the seller's browser. We have nailed down the source of this issue that some buyers are experiencing. If a buyer is using a security plug in or add on (and there are several available), especially those that scan a page to check every link on the page, they will very likely experience delays, some extremely long, in displaying an item description on eBay, especially if that item description contains many links to say, images hosted on a third party site. The solution: if you are shopping on eBay, disable the security plug ins or add-ons. For most cases, they are redundant in that the latest versions of all browsers include built in anti-phishing or –anti-spoof detection and blocking tools. Why is this happening now? Most of the plug ins or add ons focus in on iframe constructs on a listing page. eBay’s item description is now contained in an iframe. There are no plans to change this. If you have a buyer who informs you that they cannot see your item description, tell them to disable any security plug ins or add ons. Or better yet, send them to me and I will send them instructions on how to do so.

---

Posted by marsull_inla on Sep 22, 2009 4:45 PM Unpaid Item and Non Approved Payment Methods Just need some clarification - The first is that eBay cannot verify non-payment. That is, with a number of available payment methods available, eBay cannot always determine whether or not payment has been made. Any payment used during checkout can be verified as “payment.” Then this was stated Since eBay has visibility into payment with the Unpaid Item Assistant, the first of these challenges has been met, giving us more confidence in knowing what actually transpired. With manual cases, this is not the case. How can "eBay ha(ve) visibility into payment with the Unpaid Item Assistant" if payment is made via check or money order? or merchant account via phone call between buyer and seller? We can tell a payment has been made when completed with any approved payment method. That is what is meant by “visibility.” However, if a transaction happens outside of eBay’s checkout, it cannot be verified. Therefore, if a seller agrees to accept payment via a non approved payment method, that seller should shut off the Unpaid Item Assistant for that transaction.

---

Posted by dorothysew on Sep 22, 2009 5:34 PM PowerSeller Invites Weren't they supposed to go out to those who qualified before the Top seller program started? I think it's starting 10/1? The Top Rated Seller program is launching this week and will be open incrementally to all qualified sellers over the next four weeks. Sellers who qualify for TRS and are not yet PowerSellers will receive an email alert asking them to join the PS program.

---

Posted by dorothysew on Sep 22, 2009 7:28 PM Traffic Reports Issue: Fixed. About traffic reports----going to be fixed mid Sept? are they? I see some uptick. They are. It was announced on the System Announcement Board on Sep 28th. But also notice a big increase in hits to store categories (as opposed to specific listing)-is this a change of some sort? I didn't see that before July. Never saw "bid confirmation" either- No change on this end that would have resulted in an increase of hits to your Stores categories.

---

Posted by tribblekitty on Sep 22, 2009 8:40 PM Requiring Buyers To Cooperate in an Insurance Claim Re: your answer regarding the inability of eBay/PPal to require a buyer to participate in an claim in the even of carrier caused damages. If you have ever done biz with or looked at the return policy for items damaged in shipping from major retailers - from Walmart & Target, to Marvel to JC Penny, to Sears, etc - you will not find any major retailers that will accept a return with no stipulations, guidelines or procedures that a buyer must follow prior to returning an item. If a buyer receives a damaged item, in most cases they must either contact the retailer for a return claim # ,or must include a packing slip provided by the seller, or agree per the seller's policy to pursue any claim with the delivering carrier themselves. I am curious about that last one. I searched for a weekend looking for any major retail ecommerce site that required a buyer to “pursue any claim with the delivering carrier themselves.” I could not find one. It's definitely not an industry standard practice but please feel free to mention that site. Buyer must also provide ALL original packaging, and return the item via the method & carrier specified by the seller. Try shipping an item back to JC Penney that is delivered originally via UPS, with no original packaging, poorly packaged, / no packing slip & via USPS. Good luck getting the refund on that. But that is exactly what eBay sellers are expected to do. Seller ships well packaged via USPS Express, & buyer ships back item with no packing at all via UPS Ground. At the very least, I do not see why eBay could not make it mandatory that a buyer must make the return with the original packaging included and via the same carrier. That in itself might make it possible for seller's to collect from the carrier in the event of damages. Yes some sites will only accept returns from buyers if reshipped in the original packing. Such a policy would be pretty much unenforceable and unworkable (and just because some businesses might make this requirement, doesn't mean its right for eBay's marketplace). For one, the packaging of eBay items is, by nature, pretty varied. I have received parcels where the packaging material – box for example, - cannot be safely reused either because the packaging is unavoidably damaged when opened or the integrity of the packing material has been compromised by previous uses. And many buyers discover flaws or condition issues after the packaging has been discarded. So, in order to apply such a policy for all eBay sales, we’d have to stipulate the type and quality of packaging all sellers would be required to use (Brand new, specific sizes and types of sealing allowed or disallowed, only approved packing materials, etc. How well do you think that would go over? Any finally, requiring buyers to cooperate with a seller's insurance claim would be an unacceptable contradiction to the terms of the Buyer Protection Policy.

---

I will post the remainder of the responses later this week. If you don’t see your question answered but your post is still displayed, it means I am still hunting down information needed for a response. Regards, Griff Jim Griffith ___________ eBay

Griff _________________ eBay

---

Posted by the-cash-man on Sep 24, 2009 11:38 AM Procedure for Cancelling a Purchase Made In Error Griff what happens if somebody by "mistake" clicks buy it now twice, but only pays for one. If you go through the UPI process and give them a strike they can't leave you a negative for the unpaid item, but can they still get revenge by leaving you a negative for the item they paid for? eBay CSR's will often tell buyers to ask the seller for a mutual request to cancel a transaction, but the problem is that this has to be followed through by the buyer. Since the buyer isn't paying FVF's they have no incentive to cooperate and sometimes they disappear and don't respond to these. Wouldn't the mutual thing be better if the buyer initiated it, and the seller could then accept it or decline? You would think that there would be a simple way to just cancel a sale without requiring a buyer to follow through. Although not the simplest of solutions, the best way to deal with a case where the buyer has purchased something in error is to immediately refund the buyer’s payment for the mistaken purchase and issue a mutual cancellation as soon as the window opens.

---

Posted by tterrific1 on Sep 24, 2009 12:45 PM Specifying Discounted Shipping for International Transactions Hi Griff, I get almost no international sales from my listings with free shipping. I offer free shipping in the US, calculated shipping internationally. International buyers obviously don't want to pay the full price that includes US shipping PLUS the cost of international shipping. If I could, I would offer international buyers a shipping discount equal to my average cost of shipping the item within the US. For example, item is $30 with free US shipping. My average US shipping cost is $10. International buyers pay calculated shipping minus $10. Sure wish I could just apply that discount in the shipping section when listing an item. Think eBay would consider changing the International Shipping section of the listing form to set up discounts? Yes, a feature that applies seller-supplied discounts for item price specific shipping is a possibility. I forwarded your suggestion to the shipping team for their consideration. (standard disclaimer: I cannot promise that doing so will result in the adoption of your suggestion).

---

Posted by ted_200 on Sep 24, 2009 1:08 PM Feedback Abuse Policy Hi Griff, a couple of more questions... If a seller ships an item for free and gets a low DSR for shipping cost from the buyer, who is also a Powerseller in the same category the seller sells in, does that qualify for removal under the Feedback Abuse Policy, the Unwanted and Malicious Buying Policy, or the Feedback Manipulation Policy? It might. It depends on the specifics of the transaction and any previous history for either party but I would be amiss in making a blanket statement that the above scenario would automatically and always qualify as Feedback Abuse.

---

Posted by ted_200 on Sep 24, 2009 1:16 PM eBay’s Artifacts Policy And, I've been listing some Native American made jewelry on another account. Every time I see the following: Oops! Before completing your listing, make sure you're following these requirements: If you're listing an art or craft made in 1935 or later and you're describing the item as Alaska Native, Indian, or Native American, you need to: Include the state or federally recognized artisan’s name and tribal affiliation. List the item in Collectibles > Cultures & Ethnicities > Native American: US > 1935-Now. If you're listing an art or craft that's not made by an enrolled member of a state or federally recognized tribe and the item is in the style of a Native American piece: You should list the item in Collectibles > Cultures & Ethnicities > Native American: US > Non-Native American Crafts. You're not allowed to describe the item as Alaska Native, Indian, or Native American. Make sure your listing follows these guidelines. If it doesn't, it may be removed, and your buying and selling privileges could be restricted. See our policy for more details. Is this actually telling me I cannot list the item under the "Jewelry and Watches - Ethnic, Regional & Tribal - Native American" category? It is NOT a collectible, it is JEWELRY. Under these guidelines, NO ITEM may be listed in the category I referenced. Is this just another eBay "glitch" or policy contradiction, or is this warning simply in error, or am I missing something with regards to the policy and this category? The eBay policy regarding the listing of Native American items is proscribed by US law. See BuriedByBook’s post below.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 25, 2009 7:37 AM eBay’s Artifacts Policy eBay's Native American policy is an attempt to comply with the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. (a) The recommended method of marketing authentic Indian products is to include the name of the artist or artisan, the name of the Tribe in which the artist or artisan is enrolled, and the individual’s Tribal enrollment number. If the individual is a certified nonmember Indian artisan, rather than an enrolled Tribal member, the product identification should include the name of the Tribe providing official written certification that the individual is a nonmember Indian artisan and the date upon which such certification was issued by the Tribe. In order for an individual to be certified by an Indian Tribe as a non-member Indian artisan, the individual must be of Indian lineage of one or more members of such Indian Tribe and the certification must be issued in writing by the governing body of an Indian Tribe or by a certifying body delegated this function by the governing body of the Indian Tribe. (b) For example, the Indian product should include a label, hangtag, provenance card, or similar identification that includes W (name of the artist or artisan), and X (name of the Tribe in which the individual is enrolled) and Y (individual’s Tribal enrollment number), or a statement that the individual is a certified non-member Indian artisan of Z (name of the Tribe providing certification and the date upon which the certification was issued by the Tribe). Thanks buriedbybooks, for this information. It bears repeating that many of eBay’s listing policies with regards to restricted or prohibited items were implemented per request of a US agency or department.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Sep 25, 2009 8:38 AM Announcement Re: Change in Shipping Limits Policy Griff, it's been well over a month and I still haven't seen an announcement about the shipping cap policy refinement. Are we NOT going to see an announcement or did I miss it? I inquired. No announcement planned. Instead, the team is revising the existing content on the Help pages.

---

Posted by tifjesjoe3 on Sep 25, 2009 9:22 AM Changing A Zip Code The city in which I live, very recently changed our zip code. You would think that it would be a easy process to just log in to eBay and make a simple change...nope...I cant change it myself. So I call them and they tell me they cant change it until their "technicians" Log the new zip code in themselves. Okay I say, how long will this take? They have no idea. I ask to talk to one of those "technicians" and I'm told I cant, but they will send a message to them. Are these calls all outsourced? Ive called 4 different times to see if this can be fixed and each time the people I talked to can barely speak English. Anyway, long story short, I cant buy anything until this is fixed because all I get is an error message about my zip code being wrong...UGH...anyone have any idea what I can do? P.S. Pay Pal has already changed my zip code...wasn't hard for them...weird...arent eBay and Pay Pal one of the same? Per the guidelines posted for this thread at the top of the thread, please send any timely, personal account issue of this nature directly to me at griff@bay.com using your regular email (not My Messages. I am unable to respond to eBay buyer or seller email sent to My Messages).

---

Posted by ted_200 on Sep 25, 2009 11:07 AM New Unpaid Item Process Well... that didn't take long! On my other acct., my only established repeat buyer sent me a message last night saying she got a "notice" from eBay telling her to pay for an unpaid item she bought from me, asking me to "deal with it on my end". The item is one of three she paid for on a combined invoice. I checked PayPal again, it is indeed paid. On myeBay though, one of the three items is now showing "refunded". I didn't do this, they were all "paid" two days ago. Naturally, eBay didn't bother to send me a copy of whatever it is they sent my buyer. Not knowing what else I could do, I decided it best to just mark her item "paid" manually to end the problem. But for some reason, the "Mark As Paid" option isn't available in the drop-down menu for that item, or for her combined order. Is this some kind of additional improvement? Then, when I went to message her back, the messaging system has a new warning on it that eBay may block my message from going through if they deem it to contain "prohibited" content, or some such language. Can you answer ozzie's question about what eBay is reading in the messages, what they are doing with the information, and why you want to interfere with communications between me and my buyers when I'm ultimately going to get rated on that? So I now have a string of communications with the buyer, I can't fix her problem, and I had to ask her to forward to me whatever it is she got from eBay via email so I can try and fix this. Griff, this in NOT helpful! Again, can we PLEASE have an opt-out from this idiotic idea that doesn't work right? Can we at least have eBay send us copies of whatever "notice" eBay is sending our buyers? I obtained and posted a copy of the initial payment reminder message in my previous response post. Why wasn't there a clear announcement on the Announcement Board that this had started? Not sure why it wasn’t included in the update announcement. We did announce in the FAQ on this topic that the new UPI process would be released at the end of September. I don’t know the answer to your specific situation. As I have previously stated, I need any personal account issues or situations sent to me directly (User IDs, item numbers, details, etc). If the issue continues, feel free to email me directly (at griff@bay.com, not My Messages. I cannot respond to messages sent to griff@ebay.com through My Messages).

---

I am still waiting on information needed for a few of the unanswered posts. When I have it, I will post responses. In the meantime, I will leave the original posts in place. I will open an October thread tomorrow. regards, Griff Jim Griffith ____________ eBay Inc

Griff _________________ eBay