Thank you everyone for your posts over the weekend. I will now close the thread temporarily to create a response thread (this will take a day or so).

In the meantime, while the thread is closed, if you have a question that you would like to have posted on this thread, send it to me as an email to griff@ebay.com (regular email, not My Messages!) with the words Ask Griff Thread in the subject line and your User ID in the body of the response. I will include it in the next post.

regards,

Griff
Jim Griffith
_____________
eBay Inc

---

The following post was left out from the first response thread as I was awaiting confirmation on the accuracy of my response. Unfortunately, I left a reference in the last response post (“see the post above to katydidscards”) and there was no post to katydidscards.

This is that post:

---


Posted by katydidscards on Apr 3, 2009 1:37 PM 



The Hypothetical SNAD/Buyer Fraud Question 


I have a question with regards to buyers who file a SNAD and then return something that is not at all what they were sent.

Hypothetical:

Buyer purchases a new iPod. Seller ships it out. Buyer emails seller and says "Not new, old and broken." Buyer files SNAD. PayPal tells Seller to refund.

Seller says "Send it back for full refund less your shipping." Buyer sends back a rock (to approximate weight of iPod) and keeps the new iPod. Buyer gets a refund from PayPal (he shipped with DC, of course), and gets to keep the iPod.

What recourse does seller have in this sort of situation? How can the seller prove that the item that was returned was not the item that was shipped? Must we start video taping things as we pack, and then video as we open packages that are returned?

Just curious as to what TPTB think about this sort of scenario.

Defrauding an eBay seller in this manner is despicable. Any buyer who would defraud an eBay seller by sending them back something other than what the seller sent them should be shown the door (and worse. Any seller defrauded by a buyer in this manner might want to pursue the matter with the law as it could constitute mail fraud.).

The good news: The incidence of this activity is extremely small.

The better news: I spent the better part of this week on this particular issue, working with folks at PayPal so I could provide an accurate and helpful response based on what PayPay can and will do for sellers in these circumstances. From PayPal:

------------------

Sellers have the ability to appeal Significantly Not as Described cases that are found in favor of the buyer for the following reasons:

• The item was returned in a condition other than the buyer received, ( this does not include normal wear and tear from the return shipping.)
• No item is returned (empty box)
• The wrong item is returned
• PayPal made an error during the initial case closure

In order to appeal a Significantly Not as Described case a seller should log into their resolution center and click the “appeal” button:



PayPal will generally require the seller to provide documentation to support their appeal (the type and requirements of the documentation will be provided to the seller at the time that their appeal is reviewed for example, an affidavit or police report. [Although it should not be an issue obtaining a police report, from what some sellers have told me, it isn’t always possible. PayPal will always provide, on request during an appeal, the affidavit form for the seller to fill out and have notarized. – Griff]

Upon receipt of the supporting documents the case will be facilitated in the order it is received and a PayPal representative will review the case and determine if the appeal should be granted. In some cases the seller may be required to ship the item to PayPal prior to receiving their credit.

If an appeal is granted the seller will be reimbursed for the amount of the transaction and the buyer’s account will be documented and reviewed for potential abuse of PayPal’s Policies.

Please note that abuse of PayPal’s policies by either a buyer or seller is strictly prohibited.

------------------

If you are a seller who has been defrauded in this manner and you need assistance with your case, email me. I am always happy to help a seller in this situation.

---


Posted by semrafoster on Apr 3, 2009 4:57 PM 



New Seller 


Hello Griff,

I am very new to selling and there is so much to learn about ebay. I am trying to sell designer clothes and shoes. I have tried buy it now option, I have tried online auction style, I have tried reserve option. However, I cannot seem to attract high bidders. Do you have any advise please? Thank you

The first step to selling on eBay is research. Research will help show you which formats work best for your items as well as the current values of sold items and the best starting prices for auction format listings. You can use eBay’s Completed Listings option for Search to view recently closed items matching a keyword search, or you can use a third party certified provider application like Terapeak.com to dig deeper into the data back 90 days.

Also, you may find that as a new seller, you may be restricted in the amount of luxury brand items you can list. I advise any new seller who is selling only brand or luxury brand names items to find a second product line to offer to build up a history of selling on eBay in case you do find that you are restricted.

If you need further assistance, you might want to visit the following pages:

The Answer Center: staffed by expert eBay member volunteer experts in all aspects of eBay, including selling.

The Learning Center with online tutorials and other resources.

Seller Central (this discussion forum) where there are many experienced and seasoned eBay sellers who can offer general insights and advice on all aspects of selling on eBay as well as other topic specific discussion forums for more specialized discussions.

Feel free to email me if you have any questions. griff@ebay.com using your regular email (not My Messages).

---


Posted by bscheffl2 on Apr 3, 2009 4:59 PM 



 Leaving Feedback and Ratings 


I posted a question about why a buyer was allowed to leave feedback if they never paid for the item. Your reply was to in part, was to repeat the policy. Though I appreciate the response, I know the policy, and my question was about the "why" of the policy.

1) According to eBay's own explanation about why to leave feedback the answer is, "Leaving honest comments gives members a good idea of what to expect when dealing with other members." The key word being honest... How does a non-paying buyer's response about shipping, item meeting description, etc.. help others determine a seller's worthiness? Again, rate shipping... what shipping it?

I want to know HOW eBay thinks a buyer rating shipping costs, time, item description, etc., for an item they never paid for and therefore never received, helps other buyers?

Viewing the ratings and feedback for a seller helps a buyer better understand the overall service levels for that seller based on what all of their buyers have left in the way of ratings and feedback. That way, a buyer has better expectations beforehand of that seller’s customer service level.

The feedback left under these circumstances and all their DSRs are false, could be retaliation, and for lack of a better word is a blatant lie. How does this help buyers?

Except that a seller’s ratings are provided as an aggregate, not as individual ratings (feedback comments show individual comments). You supposition is that all feedback and ratings left are “lies,” or “false” or “retaliation.” Since the vast majority of ratings left are 5’s and since the vast majority of feedback left is positive, it would be incorrect for anyone to thing that all feedback or ratings are “lies,” or “false” or “retaliation.” That would mean the that the majority of left feedback and ratings – positive and 5’s – are “lies,” or “false” or “retaliation.” And they are not.

It is such a flaw in the system. Why isn't this seen as compromising the integrity of the feedback system... again something that is not supposed to be done according to eBay.

Because it isn’t. Ratings are left by buyers for sellers based on the buyers, not the seller’s, experience with the seller and the transaction. And, although it is not perfect (no rating system is), it works.

2) Non-paying buyers have increased since the feedback changes. eBay encourages sellers to file for this with no protection from retaliation as long as the buyer responds to the claim. Not pay for the item, simply respond.

Sellers have protection in filed UPI cases. It is not accurate to say they have “no protection.”

There are many sellers who will not file because of fear of retaliation because eBay's protection under these circumstances is limited to none.

And that is unfortunate (that some sellers won’t file a UPI). A seller with a non-paying buyer needs to file the UPI in order to report the buyer and the transaction to eBay.

How does this issue with the current feedback system and non-paying buyers help get non-paying buyers to stop bidding and not paying?

By filing a UPI claim, a seller is alerting eBay of a non paying buyer so that we have a record of it. Chronic non paying buyers are suspended from eBay.

All sellers know there is no recourse from an untrue feedback received because the seller had the audacity to file a non-payment claim with eBay.

If a seller files a UPI claim for a non paying buyer and the buyer doesn’t respond or responds with an insufficient response, the claim is awarded to the seller and the buyer is blocked from leaving feedback.

EBay's own policies seem to have created this vicious cycle and it needs to be remedied. I know sellers are sick of non-paying buyers, but isn't eBay?

Yes of course. UPI’s cost eBay and sellers time and money. Our goal, as I have stated many times on this thread, is to eliminate, eventually, the possibility of UPIs by changing the transaction model so that all transactions on eBay are paid for upon purchase (like today’s Immediate Payment option for fixed price listings).

Couldn't resources be better spent elsewhere? Is there ANY plan to address this issue? I would think money would be a motivating factor here...

If you have had a UPI buyer recently that left you negative feedback and the buyer’s reason for not paying was not legitimate, and the buyer left you negative feedback and Trust and Safety would not remove it, email the details to me.

3) You said that eBay does not question the veracity of the feedback left because it would be a daunting task. An example: A buyer claims they never received item, but tracking proves otherwise. How difficult would it be to verify this? That does not seem too daunting. If it is daunting a task to research the claims made about veracity, then doesn't that tell eBay something about the system is wrong??? If the system is a working system it would not be that way. If you suspect the number of claim to be such that it would be daunting... doesn't that elude to a serious issue? It renders the entire feedback system's integrity. Daunting task or not... eBay created the feedback policy and sellers are being crushed by it everyday. EBay should have to deal with the consequences of a policy they developed all in the name of maintaining the integrity of the system.

The primary reason that eBay cannot and will not verify the claims made in feedback statements is, as I said earlier, because if we did, we would have to verify all comments left (several million a day) and could be held responsible for these comments. That is why we have never, since the inception of feedback in 1996, ever verified the statements in feedback. That is what every eBay members agrees to upon registering (when they agree to the terms of the eBay User Agreement)

---


Posted by mtndrifter on Apr 3, 2009 9:40 PM 



Shipping Time DSR 


Hello Griff,

Quite often on the Seller's forum, I read that many sellers are saying that they are being unjustly penalized on their DSR ratings by buyers on their "Shipping time" category. Almost everyone who is taking a hit is saying that they are being graded NOT on how fast they get their package in the mail but on how slowly the post office gets the package to the buyer, especially in cases of Media Mail and Parcel Post.

The way the third category of the DSR is currently worded ("Shipping time"), it opens the door for buyers to grade the Post Office instead of the seller.

For those sellers who frequently ship by Media or Parcel Post, it does present a problem for them.

Wouldn't it be much more practical to change the wording of the "Shipping time" category to something that reflects more closely the time it takes for the seller to get the package in the mail instead of phrasing it as "Shipping time?" To many people, "Shipping time" means the time it takes for the post office to get their package delivered to them.

How about instead of "Shipping time", it becomes "Time it takes seller to send package" or "Time it takes seller to get to Post Office with package" or "Speed of seller putting package into the mail" or something to that affect? Anything that conveys how long it takes the seller to get to the post office once they've been paid, instead of how long it takes for the post office to deliver the package after it has been mailed, would be better than the way it is worded now, IMO.

I think it would be a very simple change for eBay to make, but I think it would be one that saves millions of misperceptions and headaches that sellers seem to be suffering over "shipping time" that the Post Office takes, which is out of the seller's control. "Shipping time" is the responsibility of the Post Office, not the seller, but it is the seller who is getting judged due to the literal sense in which that particular DSR category is worded.

Sorry if I rambled, but I guess I'm just suggesting a simple change in wording for the 3rd DSR category to one that is more reflective of the time it takes the seller to get to the Post Office, not the time it takes the Post Office to get the package to the buyer.

Thank you for listening.

No secret. I agree. In fact, a better wording might be “time to ship.” It is something I have suggested (and yes, something for which I continue to advocate). I cannot promise it will be adopted but I will continue to advocate for it.

However, in the meantime, I can only advise sellers on how to best avoid a low rating in this particular DSR category by setting realistic buyer expectations in their listing descriptions for all the classes of shipping service they offer, including and most importantly, those that tend to take the longest time like Media Mail. Make it very clear in your descriptions, in your invoices to buyers and in all follow-up correspondence.

---


Posted by locanda on Apr 4, 2009 12:29 AM 



Invoice Limitations 


Hi Griff, thanks for starting another month of Q&A.

I have encountered a different problem in invoicing (not the supposed eBay mailings you've already addressed):

I am not always able to re-send an invoice for buyers that can't find the initial invoice I sent.

In addition, I recently filed a NPB dispute, and have communicated with a buyer who had unusual family circumstances, and their feedback profile certainly didn't fit a bad buyer that I would wish to leave a strike for.

Thus, we've attempted to work it out through the eBay Dispute process, and are probably nearly resolved. However, as it is now over 30 days since the End of auction, eBay says the transaction cannot be re-invoiced. So, the buyer has to pay via PayPal, but can't link up the payment to the eBay item#. I'd like to be able to do this for a couple of reasons - 1 so that my recordkeeping is neater and My eBay shows the sale and its payment, and so that shipping the items can be eligible for PayPal Seller Protection.

So, the question(s):
Why isn't it easier to re-invoice, and why won't eBay allow this for a longer period (particularly if a dispute is open)?

I am not sure why there is a cut off time for invoicing. Seems it would make sense to allow for more time. I will forward this to one of my colleagues for their attention.

Can I get any assistance in connecting the payment up to my eBay items in this instance, and regain my SPP?

Have you tried sending an invoice from PayPal? Log into PayPal, click Request Money. There are two options. One for Create A Money Request and one for Create an Invoice. Try the Money Request and select “eBay Items.” If you unable to connect the item number to the request, put the item number in the message box of the request. If anything goes wrong with the transaction (it shouldn’t), email me. I will vouch for you.

---


Posted by zboo2 on Apr 4, 2009 12:37 AM 



 Accepted Payment Violations Enforcement Progress 


Mr. Griff Sir: I would like to give you and/or ebay or both a soft pat on the back for handling the many mentioned before problem with a PS about non conforming acceipted payments in their listings. As of tonight, it appears they, the PS, have changed their listings to be in compliance with ebay rules. Thank You.

Thanks! The credit goes to our tireless Trust and Safety team.

The question would only be, why did it take so long, at least 45 days after the first reporting?

As I posted a few weeks ago in regards to a similar question: There were millions of items that needed to be changed and as we said in January, enforcement would start in January and ramp up over the subsequent months until we had as close to 100% compliance as possible. It takes a lot of time to field, investigate and facilitate the volume of reports we received but I am happy to say, and as you noticed, we are nearly there.

---


Posted by here_we_have on Apr 4, 2009 3:38 AM 



Questions on Feedback 


What is ebay's policy/stand on

Q. 1)
Buyers who leave Negative Feedback concerning an Item Not Received and DO NOT file a dispute/claim for such?

A buyer is not required to file an INR report as a condition to leaving any feedback comment. Although we hope that they would, they are not required to do so.

Q. 2)
Would/Does ebay consider this as malicious bidding/buying???

Not necessarily and not without other supporting evidence.


My ducks are all lined up, and I have a reasonable expectation of winning any such claim from buyer. Even though I list/buy here as a hobby, I treat it as a business.


It has been about a week since you requested outreach and yet I have not been touched from a member of the T&S team.

Resend the email and the details to me and I will reforward it to Trust and Safety.

Q. 3)
If ebay can associate other member ID's, when shilling is involved, why can't ebay associate my ID's when shilling is not involved?

I am not understanding the question. Is there reason that you would want eBay to connect your own ID’s?

---


Posted by craftygeezerette on Apr 4, 2009 8:19 AM 



 Leaving Feedback For Buyers 


Hi Griff,

I still haven't starting listing again as more and more questions arise for me each time I read your posts regarding various sections. This response you gave below was in regards to automatically giving a seller a 5 if he/she offered free shipping.

"As I stated in an earlier response to the same question/request, we wouldn't ever automatically award a rating to a seller. We are not the buyer so it would be inappropriate for us to give a rating in place of the buyer. What we could do (and please, I am only speculating here. This is not an announcement) is something along the lines of not providing the buyer an opportunity to rate a seller for transactions where the shipping cost was free but still keep an internal (eBay and seller viewed only) metric in place to tally all successfully-concluded free shipping transactions and use that metric as a factor for discount eligibility, ranking, benefits, rewards, etc... And coincidentally enough, this is actually the type of change for DSR and Free Shipping for which I have been advocating. "

This I could understand but isn't eBay really giving a buyer an automatic "5" or postive feedback when you require sellers to leave nothing but postives (5's) for each transaction?

Not really. We don’t require sellers to leave feedback. (Sellers cannot leave ratings for buyers). It’s up to a seller to decide if they want to. If a buyer pays for the item, it’s smart business to leave the buyer a feedback to acknowledge the payment. Or the seller can choose to leave no feedback. But sellers cannot “rate” a buyer.

That is the part I cannot find that it is fair at all.

Sellers are required to leave Positive feedback no matter how the transaction goes with the buyer while the buyers are allowed to give negative or positive feedback and low DSR's just because they want to.

Sellers are not required to leave feedback. They can leave a buyer a feedback at their discretion.

Guess my question is how is this policy fair to sellers? Don't we deserve to know how a buyer acts during a transaction?

Acts? A buyer has one obligation in a transaction: to pay for an item. It is hoped that a buyer will be civil and courteous in their correspondence with a seller and most are but a buyer is not required to be. However, no marketplace allows sellers to rate buyers on their disposition, etc. If a buyer violates policy (doesn't pay for an item or attempts to defraud or extort a seller), the seller can and should report the buyer using this link to the Seller Report Hub which has just been updated btw, so make sure to visit it.

There is a mistaken belief among some sellers that leaving negative feedback for buyers was an effective way of determining their past behavior so the seller could block or cancel their bids. It wasn’t. The truth is that since most bidding takes place in the last minutes of an auction format listing, it was virtually impossible to check the feedback for a bidder in time to cancel their bids. And for Fixed Price it was impossible.

Sellers can limit bids or purchases based on the criteria provided in Buyer Requirements. They do work.

Oh and yes I did sell quite a lot at one time but after the frustrations of non-paying buyers, and the rule changes. I stopped. In fact had I had a better understanding of the coming changes, I may have still been selling but now, well, I am just not sure aobut selling on here anymore.

This is my selling id if and when I decide to sell again but right now what incentive do I have to sell where small sellers are being shoved further and further down the selling chain?

Buyers and sales. If a seller is not making sales or is not finding buyers visiting their listings, they are always free to email me and I will take a look at their listings and make suggestions.

---


Posted by guitar_parts_for_you on Apr 4, 2009 9:15 AM 



The Invoice Question and The Number of Releases per Year 


Hi Griff,
Just had this happen, sometimes I will allow a buyer to go a while without paying, so they can get a bunch of items to ship together and save on shipping. Especially if I have had multiple dealings with them in the past.

Had one where I couldn't combine their items together on eBay, because 2 of the items were already a month since the auction ended. I wound up having to use a back door and combine it through Blackthorn. Why would eBay make it so I couldn't combine these in the first place through SMP? Especially since it can be done.

See my response to locanda above.

Another question I have deals with the recent announcement that eBay would limit major changes to (can't remember if it was 3 or 4 times a year). This was a major issue years ago also, and I seem to remember at one eBay live (2005 or 2006) where it was announced that it would be limited to 1 time a year. This held up till JD took the reigns. Please can we go back to that promise of just one time of major changes per year.

I know there are a lot of great idea's out there, but having to restructure your business model every couple of months is a real pain. That way also you give the techs a chance to work out the bugs before applying to the site.

We cannot limit changes to the site to once a year. However, we can group them together into 2 or 3 a year with a known and consistent process from announcement to release. That is the course we have decided upon for this and future years. This year there will be two releases. The first will be announced sixty days prior to release (this coming Tuesday).

---


Posted by mygift2u on Apr 4, 2009 9:21 AM 



DSR and Suggestions 


Griff

Thanks for all you do here.

It is apparent to eveyone that DSR's are here to stay no matter what the Community thinks about them.

Not true. They are here for now (and for the year) but I have continually made mention (and it is no secret) that a new reputation system is in the design phase and could see a launch next year. But for now, DSRs are here and we have to work with them.

However, why can't they be revised so they would be more representative of the "OVERALL" transaction?

By picking apart the "overall transaction" it is almost impossible to obtain a perfect rating. I do believe the majority of eBay sellers are good and honest and DO try for perfection. That being said...

MY Question Is: Wouldn't a system with single rating for a customer's "overall" experience of the transaction be better than breaking it down into multiple ratings? Customers can still leave comments such as "slow shipping", etc. in the comments area.

Perhaps. A single rating system could be a part of a future reputation system.

I feel more buyers would take time to leave feedback if the rating system was simplier. I am getting very few of my customers to leave feedback since the DSR system when into effect.

Yes, simpler is always better. A new reputation system should be simpler.

I feel a SINGLE RATING system would benefit sellers while still allowing buyers to grade the transaction.

For example:

How would you rate your overall transaction with this Seller?

Positive Feedback: 5 or 4 stars
Neutral Feedback: 3 stars
Negative Feedback: 2 or 1 stars


We all know that on the other major venue, a transaction is graded on the OVERALL experience and not on indivudual aspects of the transaction like Communication, Description, Shipping Time, Shipping and Handling Charges. Customers KNOW what the shipping costs are before making a purchase. Why should a seller be graded on that? The shipping date is usually on the postage label, so a buyer KNOWS when the package was shipped. Why should we be graded if the post office mis-directs the package or is slow because of a postal holiday or just postal error??

Thoughts?

Not many in disagreement with your suggestions overall. A simple rating system would be a plus. As I said, nothing major in the way of changes will happen this year.

---


Posted by mygift2u on Apr 4, 2009 9:24 AM 



Major Announcement 


One more question

are we getting closer to the "major announcement?" and when will it be?

days? weeks? or months?

Days. As we announced at the last Town Hall, from here on, we will be grouping releases and changes to features and policies into two or three releases per year (two this year) and announcing them in detail sixty days prior to release.

Watch the Announcement Board on Tuesday morning.

---

More responses on Monday.

Note: If I didn't include your question in a response post and the original question post is still visible (hasn't been deleted), it means I am waiting for needed information from either an individual or team here at eBay or PayPal before I can create a response.

Hello everyone,

It's been a very busy week here in San Jose with the Spring Update announcements and Town Hall (not to mention a flood of email) but I'm caught up and can now re-open the AG thread for more questions.

Before posting, please review the guidelines at the top of this thread.

I'll close the thread on Sunday evening (April 19th) and start compiling responses on Monday.

Thanks!

Griff
Jim Griffith

---

This is a question from March to which I was unable to post a response till now. Thanks for your patience.
Posted by robshelp on Mar 24, 2009 1:31 PM

Next Generation View Item Page Questions

Hello Griff,

For many sellers there are / will be some subtle (and not so subtle) adjustments necessary to adapt to the new View Item page. Most profoundly affected are eBay Store/Shop owners because the standard listing frame option to show a left nav bar with categories is not (currently) offered for the new View Item page layout.

For example, recently I encountered an eBay Store owner with a thousand+ listings using a template that includes a big yellow arrow pointing to where the categories would be displayed. Although perhaps not so dramatically, I'm sure most Store owners either reference the category list or depend on it being there as a part of their listing/selling strategy.

Along with content, there are structural/coding changes that many (including non-store owner) sellers may need to perform if they use their own HTML or have purchased templates designed specifically for the environment of the current View Item page. At the most basic level the new page imposes a margin on the left that is not present in the current version. Due to the presence of that margin and as a result of the item description going into an iframe 100% isn't 100% any more, nor will a layout designed to fit snugly onto any given screen size still fit.

Bottom line, there are significant adjustments required. Because some of those entail forgoing advantageous features of the current item page layout it isn't necessarily a wise decision to immediately begin adapting to the new layout. Furthermore, although eBay has been working on this new layout for an extraodinarily long time there still seems some possibility that further changes to it would require a different set of adjustments.

In light of all that, here are my related questions:

1. How many shoppers are intentionally presented with the new View Item page at this time?

We don't release that info. We are currently testing three variations in the US, with a very small percentage of buyers in each group.

2. How may shoppers are unintentionally presented with the new View Item page at this time?

I ask because I quite accidentally discovered I am able to view all sellers items in the new format when I use FireFox 2 as my web browser if I first view my own items in the new format.
Again, we don’t release this specific number. Sellers can choose to see their own listings in the new design. Different browsers and different versions of those browsers handle cookies in different ways—often depending on user settings. It's possible that other sellers can end up seeing items in the new design (assuming they took action to view their own listings in the new design), but these people would not be part of the test we're running

3. Will eBay be offering shoppers a choice of which view they want to use such as the opt-in period that was provided for My eBay and for Search?

No. After our testing is complete, we will increase the percentage of buyers who see the new item page design in a couple of increments. These increments are necessary so that we can respond to any unforseen issues or bugs. However, we expect the increase to 100% to happen quickly this summer.]

Please answer no! That would be bad for sellers because they'd have no way of knowing which view any particular shopper will be seeing. It would be preferable to set a date when all shoppers are presented with the new layout. It would be better yet if sellers have a grace period to determine that, my next question...

4. Will there be a grace period during which sellers may determine which version of the View Item page their shoppers will be seeing?

The migration to the new item page is not listing-based or seller-based. Rather, because it is important for buyers to have a consistent experience, the migration is buyer-based. That is, a buyer moved to the new design will see that design for any listing he or she views.

Thank you,

Rob

---

Posted by austiners on Apr 6, 2009 5:35 AM

Support for Thermal Printers and OS X (Mac)


Griff --

Could you find out the status of PayPal support for thermal printers using a Macintosh?

Currently, PayPal supports thermal printers for the Windows platform, but Macintosh users are out in the cold. PayPal suggests that Mac users install an emulation program and run Windows to use a thermal printer, instead of actually fixing the problem themselves.

Endicia, which also uses Pitney-Bowes behind the scenes, prints thermal labels for Mac users, so it is clear that it can be done. One can find on the net several complicated work-arounds, but none work flawlessly.

It just comes down to one question: When will PayPal support thermal printers (i.e. Dymo) for Macintosh users?

I asked our shipping team for an answer and was told the following:

In eBay’s label printing flow, we currently do not support thermal printers for Mac.

We are investigating it further to figure out, when we can support it in future.

That’s all I have at this time.



---------------------------------------------

---

Posted by robshelp on Apr 17, 2009 5:26 PM

Next Generation View Item Page - More Questions


Hi Griff,

Some of my March questions regarding the new View Item page you have not yet addressed are answered in the Spring Announcements. I have another...

In the FAQ: Link

the question is asked and answered:

Will the iFrame in my item description affect my search engine standings and the marketing of my listings?

eBay serves a non-iFrame version of your listings to search bots and all non-browser based requests, so search engine standings will not be affected. The same non-iFrame version of your listings will be served to users with browsers that do not support JavaScript.

Will you find out for us, if you can, whether or not the non-iFramed version will be served also to users with browsers that do support JavaScript, but have disabled it? (Yes, there is a difference)

In both cases (JS not supported; JS supported but disabled), a non-iframe version of the page will be served.


I ask because when a shopper visits the new View Item page (or the current eBay Motors View Item pages) with javascript disabled, links in the item description (including even eBay's automatically added Turbo Lister link) open into the item description (iframed) portion of the page, not the whole page. That could lead to quite a bit of confusion including nested display of VIew Item pages within other View Item pages.

Before you answer against the likelihood that shoppers may have JavaScript turned off, please consider how much faster (try it yourself) almost all of eBay seems to perform with it disabled. Anyone with more than a casual interest in speeding up their eBay shopping experience could learn that, but not fully understand the implications.

I may as well ask again (never answered from March) if there are any plans to detect a not-displaying iframe due to a web browser similarly having those disabled. Not so far fetched as you might think because eBay displays content in the iframe from a separate domain (potential security issue explained in my original post).

No need to detect an iframe that's not displaying because of JS being diabled, since we'll serve a non-iframe version.


Thanks,

Rob

---

Posted by ifthatdontbeatall on Apr 17, 2009 7:09 PM

DSRs



Griff, I am a small, small seller and usually list auction style. I only get between 12 to 20 feedback per month. I ship all my items the day of payment or the next day. I use DC on every package. My shipping charges are actual or free. My DSR scores in shipping time and shipping charges, both are at 4.68. Well, red is flashing before my eyes. How on earth am I going to survive this maddness? I email every buyer at the end of the auction with a nice note, email as soon as I ship with the DC number. It only takes a couple of buyers to ding my stars and I am down again. This is just too much!!! How can Ebay justify the star system? I am a good and honest seller and have been here since 1998. I feel like an ugly step-child. Do something to make me feel better!!!

I’ll try my best. I checked your feedback. Your current 12 month averages are 4.9, 4.8, 4.7. 4.7. These are not bad ratings. However, I am certain it is possible to raise them.

I checked your listings and found this:

“DSR Ratings
DSR ratings are important to all sellers. For those who do not know, anything less than a 5 star rating is unacceptable by Ebay standards. A 4 rating can get your favorite seller ban from listing. Please consider this when you leave feedback. Sellers have no control of the actual shipping cost. Nor do we have control of actual time the item is in the mail once it has been shipped.”

I don’t recommend sellers include text like this in their descriptions. The statements reflect your concern about your ratings which is understandable. All good sellers are concerned about their ratings. However, the statements do not reflect your concern about the buyer’s experience buying from you. Don’t take offense at this but in reality, most buyers don’t care about a seller’s status. Yes, some do (buyers who are also sellers, for example, as well as repeat customers, etc)

I do recommend that sellers provide information about leaving feedback and ratings in their last correspondence with the buyer: the printed packing slip/invoice included in the package with the purchased item. This is the best, and in my opinion, the only time, to mention ratings and even then, they should be mentioned only in the context of your concern with the buyer’s satisfaction with their purchase. Something along the lines of : “I hope you are happy with your item. Please email me if you are not. My goal is to provide 5-star service!” If you ship items for free, add something like the following to the above, “That’s why we provide the most reasonable shipping option possible: Free Shipping!”

This points out to the buyer that his or her happiness with the transaction is your only goal (and the subtext says, “Please leave me Five Stars” without begging for them.)

You may also want to rethink the wording of your Return Policy:

“I do not take returns for buyer’s remorse, ill fit, flaws that are clearly stated in the description. I will however, consider returns for other reasons. Please email with any problems.”

Although it is ok for a seller to state the above, consider how this might affect your ratings. For example, a buyer buys something from you and receives and although it is exactly as described, they are not happy with it. It happens. It’s not necessarily anyone’s fault (buyer or seller). But in cases where a buyer cannot return an item for “buyer’s remorse,” (they have read your terms) is it not possible that they might leave all 4’s? After all, they aren’t happy and there is nothing they can do about it since you have stated you won’t take an item back for “buyer’s remorse.” Would it not be wiser to state something like, “Your satisfaction guaranteed. If you are not happy with your purchase, for whatever reason, send it back and I will happily refund your initial payment.”

Finally, I am certain it isn’t your intention, but the wording of your Shipping terms could be viewed by a buyer as a bit perfunctory, if not a harsh:

“Shipping is listed in every auction. International buyers need to email for cost. For UPS shipping I need a physical address. I ship within 36 hrs. or less, excluding weekends and holidays, once payment has been received. I will send an invoice after the auction ends. Please respond to the invoice as soon as possible. Payment is required within the 7 days.”

You might want to consider rewording it as well.

When I make recommendations like this, a seller will often ask me what difference does the wording make on my selling? Many sellers believe that if a buyer isn’t happy with their terms of service, they should shop elsewhere (and many probably do) but more often than not, a buyer will choose to purchase from a seller, even after that buyer’s initial less-than-positive impressions of a seller have been set by the presentation that seller provided in their listing description and TOS. (And buyers tend to remember these first impressions when leaving feedback and ratings.)

These tips are not guaranteed to result in all 5’s across the board (there will always be buyers – thankfully a miniscule minority – who will leave a 4 instead of a 5) but they can help raise your ratings. Let us know if you do adopt them, how they work out.

---

Posted by ifthatdontbeatall on Apr 17, 2009 7:11 PM

More on DSRs


Oh, I forgot to add that I leave feedback as soon as I ship an item or at payment.

A very wise strategy!

---

Posted by ted_200 on Apr 17, 2009 7:17 PM

An Archived Thread and Recent Announcements



Hi, Griff. You started a thread titled "The Customer: Always Right?" and invited everyone to discuss this concept. Now, there is a buyer situation here that I thought would be a useful example for that discussion - the guy who posted "I've got a bad feeling about this one..." who sells sports cards - but I could not find the discussion anywhere.

After much searching, I finally located it on page 37 (it is even further down now), last posted to on Feb. 25. It does not indicate it has been locked (although I understand that has since been changed), but there are no reply buttons in the discussion, it cannot be posted to, and is rapidly sinking further and further back to never be seen again (by design, no doubt). At the top it indicates it has been "archived".

You can find it here:

Link

My questions are: Why was this thread "locked", even though it did not indicate locked? Why has it since been locked?

It wasn’t locked. It was automatically archived. This is a feature of the new discussion board format. Once a certain period of time passed with no new posts, a thread is either deleted or, if the creator of the thread had admin rights and selected “no auto delete,” it is archived. An archived thread remains available until it is manually deleted.
Why have you never commented any further on this subject?

As I said at the top of that thread, my purpose was not to participate in a discussion. It was to encourage among sellers, a discussion on the topic..

What do you have to say about the dozens of examples of outright fraud that are posted there, and continue to be posted to Seller Central each and every day since it was locked?

If someone has been defrauded by another member, and they need assistance with resolution, they are always free to email me and I will assist them.

I know you said you were not going to interject in the discussion, but since it has apparently ended, I thought you might provide some insight into why you posted it, why it was locked, and if it had any effect on your own answer to the question you posed in it.

I posted it to start a seller discussion on the topic. I didn’t lock it (it auto-archived). And I was curious to see if the resulting discussion might provide insights to inform or alter opinions on the subject of customer service. I found the ensuing discussion interesting with a few good points made. Keep in mind the purpose was not to provide me a platform to express my views on the topic. That’s why I stayed out of it. I believe sellers can learn more from each other in these discussions than from just one person.


On a related note, you promised some "good news" for sellers in the Spring Announcement. I was wondering, can you elucidate what in there is supposed to be "good news" for sellers?

Sure. Here’s a list of ten examples from the recent announcement and how each benefits all sellers:

1. The capacity to display larger photographs (zoom) so that your buyers can see more clearly what it is you are selling (and help prevent confusion about condition, etc). Less confusion on the part of buyers means less chance of those buyers filling disputes regarding an item’s condition. Fewer buyer disputes are good for all sellers.
2. More buyer loyalty programs (eBay Bucks for example). By providing buyers with a system whereby they can collect “eBay Bucks” to spend on eBay based on their spending, (and the eBay Bucks money comes from eBay, not sellers, btw), we will provide more incentive for those buyers to spend more on eBay. When buyers spend more on eBay, it is good for all sellers.
3. The ability for sellers to provide their own custom tags for their listings which will make them easier for buyers to find. The easier it is for a buyer to find an item, the better the chances of the buyer purchasing that item. More purchases means more sales for sellers, and, wait for it… more sales are good for all sellers!
4. Multi variations will let a seller list one product in one listing with an easier way for buyers to choose variations of that product (size, color, etc) without having to indicate the variation in a separate communication. This means faster buyer decisions, less chance for confusion or mix-ups, less transaction friction, and lower listing costs, all of which are of course, good for all sellers who list items that come in multiple variations.
5. Smart FAQ’s to help cut down the time spent by many sellers answering customer queries for basic questions. The less time spent on a repetitive task, the more time to spend on other aspects of a business which is, indeed, good for all sellers.
6. Selling Manager will be free to all sellers. Selling Manager provides many features to improve a seller’s efficiency with regards to recording, listing management, customer management, etc. And, free is good too.
7. Printing postage and labels directly from eBay (as an alternative to printing them on PayPal or a third party site). Keeping this information and process in one place provides better efficiency for all sellers.
8. Better Bulk Editing tools. Our current tools are insufficient to handle the types of editing that sellers need to accomplish whenever there are changes made to site features or policies. Better bulk editing tools will significantly shorten the amount of time it takes to make edits to all parts of a large group of listings. Less time spent on bulk editing is good for all sellers.
9. Tracking information uploaded automatically into My eBay (works in tandem with 6 and 9). Uploading tracking information into the eBay end of listing management will provide a way for sellers to assure buyers their packages have shipping (and are either tracked or have Delivery Confirmation). More recorded information regarding shipping and tracking provides sellers with more protection in cases of INR. More protection in disputes is good for all sellers.
10. A better dispute and resolution process. The current dispute processes are in need of improvement. (as evidenced by the ongoing discussions on this topic in various threads across eBay’s discussion forums for one). The new resolutions process will live entirely inside eBay (as opposed to living between eBay and PayPal). It will provide a faster channel for buyers and sellers to resolve disputes amicably between themselves and it will provide sellers with a better level of protection in cases where they are not at fault. This is definitely good for all sellers.

Hope that helps answer your question.

---

Posted by ted_200 on Apr 17, 2009 7:23 PM

Coins: Replicas and Categories

My other question this week revolves around a previously asked question:

Your answer to vedave regarding replica coins and why they are not required to be listed in the "reproductions" categories within Coins and Paper Money was unsatisfactory. You replied:

"We can create a category for legal coin replicas and we can take reports of Miscategorized items and move them as appropriate but since we cannot rule on what is and isn’t a replica coin (we are not the experts, we don’t hire item experts and we don’t handle the merchandise so even if we did have item experts, they couldn’t rule on items they didn’t actually handle) we can only rely on reports from other members and even then, it can take 24 hours or longer to move items into the appropriate categories."

1. The categories already exist.

2. The current policies do not require these categories be used. So if someone lists a replica Morgan Dollar in the Morgan Dollar category, instead of the Dollars > Reproductions category, and it is reported, it will not be removed because it is a replica of a MORGAN DOLLAR.

3. What do you mean, "we cannot rule on what is and isn't a replica coin"? Here is eBay policy on replica coins:

The sale of replica coins and paper currency is regulated by U.S. federal law. Accordingly, the sale of such items is permitted on eBay as long as the following requirements are met:

Replica coins

Any "reproduction," "replica," or "copy" coin (U.S. or foreign) must be plainly and permanently marked with the word "COPY".

The listing must include a photo of the coin with the appropriate markings. Images that are dark, out of focus, doctored, or otherwise deemed misleading are not permitted. Stock photos are also not permitted.

The listing must clearly state that it is a "reproduction," "replica" or "copy" in both the title and description.

We are not talking about unmarked replicas that are not properly identified (those would be "counterfeit" or "forgeries" coins - a whole other issue eBay needs to deal with, but outside of what vedave and I and others are asking here). We are asking about listings that say "REPLICA" in the title, "REPLICA" in the description, and have the word "COPY" stamped into the coin in the photo.

How can you possibly say eBay cannot rule on this - it is plain as the nose on my face (I'll leave your face out of this...)!

If you find a coin listing that is in violation of this policy, you should report it directly to Trust and Safety using the Report This Item link.

All this requires is adding one single sentence to the Replica policy I posted above. "Replica coins must be listed in the "Reproductions" categories within Coins and Paper Money, and must not be listed in the categories intended for authentic coins."

Again, why cannot this be done?

I don’t know. Maybe it can be done. I will ask.

Yes, Any "reproduction," "replica," or "copy" coin (U.S. or foreign) must be plainly and permanently marked with the word "COPY". My point in the first response was that if a replica coin is not marked as such and there is nothing in the listing description to indicate, overtly or covertly that the coin is or might be a replica, we cannot rule that it is. We are not coin experts and we don’t hire coin experts to make these rulings.

Thanks for your consideration of these issues, and taking the time to continue to communicate with the users here.

My pleasure.

---

Posted by adrian44 on Apr 17, 2009 8:23 PM

How To Appeal a SNAD Claim


Hello Griff and thank you for taking the time to answer questions!

I realize this subject has been around a few times with no helpful answers or I missed them.

This has now happened to two of my friends and my daughter. Buyer states item is SNAD and files claim with Paypal. They return item with DC so Paypal refunds buyers money. Seller receives returned item and it is NOT the item they sold. What can a seller do or what can Paypal or eBay do to avoid this fiasco?


I posted instructions on how to appeal a SNAD case of this type (buyer sends back something other than what the seller sold and sent) earlier in this April thread (Post 5). The title is: Posted by katydidscards on Apr 3, 2009 1:37 PM , The Hypothetical SNAD/Buyer Fraud Question
I have some additional information to add, so I will repeat that post here. (The new detailed information is in italics).
Sellers have the ability to appeal Significantly Not as Described cases that are found in favor of the buyer for the following reasons:

• The item was returned in a condition other than the buyer received, ( this does not include normal wear and tear from the return shipping.)
  
• No item is returned (empty box)
  
• The wrong item is returned
  
• PayPal made an error during the initial case closure
  

In order to appeal a Significantly Not as Described case a seller should log into their resolution center and click the “appeal” button:

PayPal will generally require the seller to provide documentation to support their appeal. For payments $199 or below the seller will need to fill out an online affidavit that will be provided by PayPal. For payments over $199 a police report will be required. Please that there may be additional documentation required by PayPal before an appeal is processed. The type of documentation required will be determined on a case by case basis and will be provided to the seller at the time of appeal.

Upon receipt of the supporting documents the case will be facilitated in the order it is received and a PayPal representative will review the case and determine if the appeal should be granted. In some cases the seller may be required to ship the item to PayPal prior to receiving their credit.

If an appeal is granted the seller will be reimbursed for the amount of the transaction and the buyer’s account will be documented and reviewed for potential abuse of PayPal’s Policies.

Please note that abuse of PayPal’s policies by either a buyer or seller is strictly prohibited.

In addition to the above, all sellers should take pre-emptive action to reduce the chance that a buyer with fraudulent intentions will bid on or purchase your item or if they do, they will have greatly diminished chances of winning a SNAD claim:

• Provide clear pictures of all aspects of each item (front, back, sides, etc) with close-ups where ever appropriate.
  
• If you items have any unique identifying marks, show them in close-up photos. This includes serial numbers, scratches, marks, tears, cracks, etc. Feature them all.
  
• Indicate in your return policy that all items returned must be returned in their original condition.
  

If you should receive a returned item that is not what you sent originally, keep the box, the item, all packaging and any labels, packing slips, etc. Immediately photograph the contents and packaging and immediately contact the closest law enforcement office and file a police report (for items valued at $199 or above) and then file the appeal per the instructions above. Or for items valued at $199 or less, immediately file an appeal following the steps above and follow the instructions for the online affidavit form. Do not wait!

I don’t advise contacting the buyer. At least not until you have filed the appeal and required paperwork.

Last of all, if this happens to you, don’t panic. You can win these cases on appeal. Just make sure to follow the steps above. If you run into an issue, feel free to contact me at griff@ebay.com using your regular email, not My Messages! I cannot respond to seller or buyer emails using My Messages!

---

Posted by jr49321 on Apr 17, 2009 8:38 PM

Restricted for Listing


Hi Griff,

I've recently started selling here again after a long absence and am being restricted in certain areas that I want to sell in. I understand that I have to build my feedback up before the restrictions are lifted but I don't understand why those restrictions prevent me from editing auctions I have waiting in my scheduler. If an auction is not even showing to the public yet---and won't for days---why are we restricted from editing it? That's not fair in my opinion.

I need more details (I am assuming this restriction is for certain brand name items you have scheduled to list). Send the details to me at griff@ebay.com using your regular email (Not My Messages Please!) and I will forward it to the appropriate department.

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Apr 17, 2009 8:48 PM

Seller Protection in UPI Disputes


"Sellers have protection in filed UPI cases. It is not accurate to say they have “no protection.”

And, that is what is known as creating something out of nothing!

Exactly what protection do ALL sellers have on filed UPI cases!

Unless you mean, heaven forbid, that because one seller files a report on a UPI that that will somehow prevent another buyer from not paying as he sees that a seller was protected.

If you can not protect sellers from bad feedback from UPI, then they have no protection, although they might have protection if they block that bidder from bidding again

You have no idea of how this parsing of question with these types of answers affect some sellers

My response was 100% accurate. Sellers do have protection from negative feedback in many filed UPI cases. It is inaccurate for anyone to claim this is not true (to claim that sellers have no protection).

I did not say “all sellers.” (You did.) Yes, currently, not all UPI cases where a negative has been filed will result in that negative’s removal. But many are (I see them every day). I have, on more than one occasion here, made my own opinion on UPI and feedback clear (UPI cases should result in no feedback, ever). However, it is a disservice to sellers for anyone to claim that all sellers currently have “no protection” as an absolute.

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Apr 17, 2009 10:14 PM

Shipping Calculator Messaging


What, exactly , does this mean?

Important: If you send an eBay invoice to a buyer or enter charges in a Selling Manager Sales Record, the shipping and insurance costs you enter will take priority over the calculated shipping costs, and the buyer will be charged the amounts you enter.

And how does it interact with this?

"Note:This shipping information is provided to you for general information purposes and may not be applicable or accurate for shipments processed with some carriers or for goods shipped across certain international borders. Please check with your carrier for any special rules that govern your shipment of goods. For international shipments, please also check with countries whose borders your shipment may cross for any additional rules, regulations, duties, or taxes that apply. "

Now the second one says the shipping information may be incorrect when you use eBay's information,

And the first one simply says that what you say on the invoice is what the buyer will be charged!

How does that correct the information provided by the shipping calculator?

Are those the real effective policies for determining shipping costs using the calculator?

Why not?

The first statement provides information for sellers who edit their invoices before sending them, specifically, the shipping charges. The second statement is for charges that are beyond the capacity of any shipping calculator to know. For example, for international sales, any assessed duties, taxes or fees. The shipping calculator cannot calculate these. Another example: carriers may require additional fees (or paperwork or both) for certain types of items (hazardous materials for example). Again, the shipping calculator cannot calculate those. That is why this paragraph is included for the buyer, so that the buyer doesn’t hold the seller responsible for those post shipping fees that might be applied to the service upon delivery.

---

Posted by nanartchik on Apr 18, 2009 3:56 AM

Relevance


Dear Griff,

Thanks for the answers on Best Match and Search. As I am still trying to figure out how it might be possible for me to continue selling on eBay, I have a few follow-up questions.

Even though I understand that Best Match is not going to be the way most - or any - Bidders find my listing, I was curious as to the meaning of one term used in describing the way Best Match sorts:

Could you explain "relevance" as it pertains to Best Match. How is "relevance"determined?

“Relevance” is determined by what the buyer uses for search terms or search key words. These key words are matched against the database of existing listings and weighted by matches to keywords used in item titles.

Secondly: You responded to my previous questions about finding my art on eBay:

My point: Sort order (Best Match, Time Ending Soonest, Newly Listed, etc) has little or nothing to do with how available your items are. What really matters are title keywords and quantity of listings within the category, especially in the Art category. In fact, in this category Everything depends one the keywords a buyer uses to find your items and the number of items listed by one seller.

and

nearly all of them have at least 10 current listings, and most have closer to 50 to 100 items. Although they do not all have the words "painting floral" in their titles, each of the extra listings provides another "window" into their total listings (or eBay Stores).

I understand that if I list 50 – 100 “items” – difficult for me to think of an original painting of mine as an “item” – is my increased visibility because there is just more chances of a Bidder finding me?

Yes.

As when one uses buckshot, rather than a single bullet – forgive me, I am not a hunter, but that is the only analogy I can think of.

The analogy fits. Of course, it depends on what the searcher uses for search terms but if a buyer searches for, say, “floral paintings,” and there are 300 returned results, having say, 10 of the seller’s items returned in the results (regardless of ranking) as opposed to say, 1 result, gives that seller better chances of being picked out by the buyer.

Or, do Sellers who list a lot of “product” get a higher place in the list? I know that PowerSellers go to the front of the line, and Diamond Sellers get an even higher placement.

No. Not true. No seller receives an advantage in Best Match ranking because they are a PowerSeller of any level, Bronze to Diamond. . PowerSeller status is not a criteria for ranking in Best Match. Thanks,

Speaking of Diamond Sellers…My next question has to do with Keywords, and the rules regarding same.

I understand the importance of Keywords in the Title. I also thought I understood what the rules were regarding “keyword spamming” and “search manipulation” until I did some research on the large Sellers who are my competition, (and according to Lorrie Norrington, the future of eBay.)

Unless a Diamond Powerseller or large Seller is selling items similar to yours, they are not your competition. I checked your category and though there are PowerSellers in that category, there are no Diamond PowerSellers selling in the Art category. PowerSellers, yes, but none are Diamond level. And no one category of seller is the “future” of eBay.

In my research on my competition, those Diamond Sellers who list a lot of paintings, and I came across this:

There are no Diamond PowerSellers listing paintings in your category.

Monet "Walking Near Argenteuil" Oil Painting

Own a work of art! These large hand-painted reproductions carefully recreate original masterpieces, brushstroke for brushstroke, detail for detail, in brilliant oil paints.

Features
Monet "Walking Near Argenteuil" oil painting
Oil reproduction of an original painting by Monet
30" x 34"
100% Hand painted, oil on canvas
The original masterpiece was created in 1875
Mediterranean wood frame with gold finish
Frame width = 5"
Arrives ready to hang on wall

Link

Isn’t this a violation?

No.

This is not an original Monet. In the listing title, the seller does not identify this as a copy – which is what it is, rather than a reproduction. If I was searching for a “real” Monet, and came across this listing, I – as an artist with a BFA – would certainly know it wasn’t created by Claude Monet in 1875, but would the general public?

Sure. When they read the listing, it states: “Oil reproduction of an original painting by Monet”

Isn’t this misleading, as least as far as the title of the listing goes?

Not really. A real “Monet” for $179 and free shipping? On eBay? I think not. I suppose the seller could say “reproduction” in his title but he isn’t (and you aren’t) required to do so.

And isn't the point that a Keyword Search for "Monet" will bring this up, especially since this is a Diamond Seller.

(The seller is not a Diamond PowerSeller.) Sure. It would bring it up for any seller of the same painting. If I was listing the painting and I titled it “Monet "Walking Near Argenteuil" oil painting” it would come up in a search for “monet.” I am not a Diamond Powerseller and the title is not a policy violation.


Currently, I am doing a series of Famous Art Parodies, and I have been oh-so-careful NOT to violate the rules regarding KWS. When I did a parody of Jacques Louis David’s “Death of Marat”, I did not put the original artist’s name in the title, although that surely would have helped Bidders understand what the painting was. Similarly, I could have reached a much larger Keyword Search audience, if I put the words "Munch" "VanGogh" and even "Mantegna" in my titles. (Mantegna is a Renaissance painter, and the subject of my currently running parody.)

That was a mistake. Including the name of the artist that your art is parodying is not a violation of policy!

If your painting is a parody of a Mantegna (ripe for parody I might add. I was fortunate years ago, to view up close his incredible frescoes in the Camera degli Sposi in the Palazzo Ducale in Mantua . Jawdropping.) then you should use the term “Mantegna” in the title. Doing so is not a violation of the keyword spam policy. Just because it isn’t an original Mantegna (what? On eBay?… I suppose it could happen. What a lucky person that buyer would be!) doesn’t mean you cannot use the word. This goes for words like “Van Gogh” or “Picasso” or “Jacques Louis David.”

Admittedly, this Series is a narrow niche market, but I have gotten more attention and "buzz" on these works than the more traditional art I have listed. It is just this kind of unique "item" that has made eBay famous.

And you should start titling them appropriately as soon as possible so you can garner even more traffic. .

Oh, and if I could produce and list 50 - 100 paintings at a time, I wouldn't be an artist...I'd be a factory. (And I suspect that is the way those bogus "Monets" are being produced.)

The demand for reproduction art is huge, thus the supply. (That’s how markets work.) Personally, I would rather have a real work of art by an unknown artist than a reproduction of a famous work. Luckily, there are still many buyers who feel the same. Some artists I have known are nearly as prolific as a factory so it is possible to be both.

By the way, apropos of nothing, I was a decorative artist for several years prior to my tenure at eBay. I worked in NYC schmearing murals on the walls of the rich and famous. Thus my more pointed interest in your selling on eBay.

---

Posted by here_we_have on Apr 18, 2009 4:09 AM

A NARUed Buyer


Help me Griff,

I have/had? a buyer of 3 items, currently a NARU member. I recieved no email from ebay stating such, just ''note from ebay'' attached to the bottom of the sold listing in myebay. When I click the naru link there, it takes me to a page concerning not being able to leave feedback. I'm really not concerned about the FB now, (I've already been hurt enough as it is).
Should not this link take me to a HELP PAGE that describes what I, as a seller, should do next??? Yes, it should. That would be more helpful. I will pass this suggestion on to the appropriate team.

What would you do next?

File a UPI and immediately relist (I wouldn’t wait).

This buyer has been registered just less than ninety days, has received 150 FB , 100% as buyer and seller.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Apr 18, 2009 6:59 AM

PayPal Process for SNAD Claims


A buyer must check a box saying they're not filing a false dispute, and they must use an online form to tell PayPal how it was significantly not as described. If they do that, then we take them at their word that the item was misrepresented.

Griff, the above post is from Monroe. You can find it on the special announcement forum.

I would like to know why we were mislead about the TRUE nature of how Paypal SNADs work. Since we were told that Paypal 'investigated' those claims and made a decision after looking at the 'evidence.'

Not all SNAD claims are decided automatically in favor of the buyer without prior investigation. Claims made for transactions over a certain value (undisclosed) or by buyers who have made previous claims are first investigated by a rep. And all appeals are investigated by a rep.

Instead, we're told that all a buyer has to do is assure Paypal that they're not lying.

I find it disturbing that so little effort is made to make sure buyers aren't using the SNAD process to overturn a seller's return policy. And that the disputes, themselves, are used to punish sellers without any attempt to verify the veracity of the claim.

The “appeal” option is available to every seller in a SNAD case.

Here's my question: Why doesn't Paypal/eBay put a FIRM limit on the number of times a buyer can file a SNAD dispute?

We don’t use a number. We use a percentage. Using a number wouldn’t make sense. There is a big difference between five reports filed by a buyer who has purchased 50 items and five reports filed by a buyer who has purchased 1000 items. Thus, we do use a percentage (filed reports over number of purchases).

The competition eBay is so bent on copying has a firm limit of 5 LIFETIME claims. But the anecdotal evidence seen here shows us that certain buyers are allowed to abuse this process without any repercussions whatsoever.

That is not true. And in fact, if it is determined that a buyer actually defrauded a seller (“Rock in a Box “scenario), eBay will take action against the buyer. (And though I cannot speak directly to any single non eBay site’s policies, we do know that all of them will intervene on behalf of the buyer more often than their stated policies might imply.)

---

Posted by buyalot! on Apr 18, 2009 8:23 AM

Small and Large Flat Rate Priorty Boxes Availability


Griff,

Rich said that PayPal was "ready" for the change to accommodate Small and Large Flat Rate Box and that it would come out in Q2 2009. Now, Anar has posted in the announcement forum that Small and Large Flat Rate Boxes, the latter of which has been around since March 2008, "will not be added in PayPal labels." Not now, not ever. "PayPal is looking at working into PayPal's label solution in the future. But we don't have definite plans to do so at this point."

Link

I feel like I have been lied to. I use PayPal shipping for my off-eBay sales. Also, I use MultiOrder Shipping because the acceptance scan is very important to me - because without it, the Delivery Confirmation number - which eBay calls Tracking unapologetically - never shows that I gave the item to USPS, making buyers nervous and dispute/neg trigger-happy. I will not be using the eBay label product until it has SCAN form support.

Therefore for all intents and purposes, eBay has dropped the ball on Small and Large Flat Rate Box, again. What the heck is so hard about adding two more items in a drop down list on the PayPal shipping product? PayPal always gets all of the other rate changes in on time, but this one thing always seems to be a stumbling point - just look at how long the first Flat-Rate Box took to show up in PayPal shipping.

In the past you have said it was a problem with the carrier. But USPS isn't the problem, clearly, since the labels will be available from eBay labels.

Seriously, I know the coders at PayPal are smart folks - is there some ulterior motive at play here keeping these options out of PayPal shipping? Do Endicia and Stamps have something to do with this? I hope you can see why so many eBay sellers find this ridiculous.

Small and Large Flat Rate Priority Boxes will be available in the eBay Label Printing product. As for the PayPal Label product: as soon as we can provide them there, we will. Keep in mind that with the PayPal labels, we work through a third party (Pitney Bowes), and not directly with the carriers.

---

Posted by the-cash-man on Apr 18, 2009 10:12 AM

Private Auctions


Griff, I am a seller and a buyer on eBay. I sometimes like to buy expensive goods, and I often on expensive items see that the auctions are "private".

I get very skeptical of "private" auctions as I feel that they are a way to hide shill bidding. Their were legitimate sellers that were using these auctions to prevent fake second chance offers, and other spam from being sent to their bidders.

The purpose of Private Auctions was to protect the privacy of buyers who were buying in adult categories. It has recently been used by sellers to keep "Best Offer" prices from showing up on Feedback Pages.

Now that the masked bidder ID's have eliminated fake second chance offers and other spam why can't the masked ID's show up on "Private Auctions"?

I'm seeing more and more of these private auctions and I click the back button. What harm does it do to put the encrpyted ID's on the bid pages.

Good point. I will forward to the appropriate team for their response.

---

I will post a second batch of responses tomorrow (and reopen the thread at that time).

Regards,

Griff

Thanks everyone for your replies. We are now in closed mode (locked) until the end of the week.I will finish up and post the previous session's unanswered questions today and will post responses to the most previous posts towards the end of this week.

Someone asked me in an email last week why it takes so long to respond to 50 or so questions. They asked, "Griff, what is so hard with answering 50 questions? Why does it take you all week or longer?" with more that I won't quote here except to say the gist of it was that I should get off my fat duff and get to work instead of luxuriating in my cushy job.

I thought, what a wonderful opportunity this email provides for me to shed a little light not only how the process of compiling responses for this thread works but also how this one self-assigned task fits in with the rest of my roster regular duties.

First, Ask Griff.

The actual writing of responses does not take that much time (I am a fast typist). It's the prep that does.

After I lock a thread (usually on Monday morning), I go through each new post individually, looking specifically for those that will require research, usually questions where I do not have a complete answer (for example, the previous posts about appealing SNAD claims. I knew the process from a high level. I wanted to understand it completely, top to bottom, before posting a response).

I email each of these particular posts to the appropriate persons or teams for either their assistance in fact gathering or, if I have compiled a draft response, for fact checking for accuracy. This often involves quite a lot of email back and forth, sometimes taking several days to complete. For example, the situation last month with the changin of the wording on End of Listing email notices (aka, the automatic invoice issue). It took quite a lot of sleuthing on the part of many here to determine exactly what had changed, why, and what it would take to reverse the change to solve the issue. Although the issue itself was definitely a major inconvenience for sellers, it was your posts and emails on the issue that not only drove a roll back on the text change, it drove a refinement of the existing process regarding changing of messaging on eBay pages and in eBay emails to prevent a repeat of this situation.

This is why it takes a work week to post a list of responses.

Besides Ask Griff....

I receive about 500 emails per week from sellers and buyers all of which I either respond to directly as appropriate or forward (and track for follow-up) to either Trust and Safety (for T&S) issues) or to the appropriate person or team (for technical and policy issues). The majority of seller emails I receive in a week ask for help with a negative feedback situation, usually around a UPI.

I am also directly involved in several ongoing seller-facing projects which require several hours per week in meetings (these are the very meetings where I advocate for the needs, concerns of small sellers). This in addition to the regular staff meetings which are a staple of every big company (and for which I maintain a respectful but definite level of disdain).

I also create a bi monthly compilation of the most commonly posted issues and send this to the entire exec staff (and interested employees). I conduct several press interviews a week (each lasting at least an hour). I manage and prepare for each month's Town Hall, host a monthly series of training sessions for new Pinks, and finally, host and manage eBay Radio's twice-a-week broadcast, which require spending several per week in prep and broadcast time.

Finally, someone also asked whether or not I actually enjoy this project (the SC Ask Griff thread).

Yes, I do enjoy it, in fact, this ongoing thread helps keep me focused on your issues and concerns and although I admit that results are not always quick to site and I cannot deliver everything that you request of me or eBay, I do believe this thread is making a difference in how current policy and procedure is changed or created. If I thought otherwise, I would, out of respect for you, discontinue this ongoing thread.

Regards,

Griff
Jim Griffith
______________
eBay Inc

---

Posted by celt13 on Apr 24, 2009 6:56 PM

Private Auctions


Hi Griff,

You had just posted a reply to the-cash-man who complained about Private Auctions and who said how they would hit the back button whenever they saw one.

This person concerns about private auctions were:
“I get very skeptical of "private" auctions as I feel that they are a way to hide shill bidding. Their (sic) were legitimate sellers that were using these auctions to prevent fake second chance offers, and other spam from being sent to their bidders.

The purpose of Private Auctions was to protect the privacy of buyers who were buying in adult categories. It has recently been used by sellers to keep "Best Offer" prices from showing up on Feedback Pages.”

You replied to their post with: “Good point. I will forward to the appropriate team for their response.”

I strongly disagree with the poster‘s logic. Private auctions are not just to protect the privacy of buyers in the adult categories. Some people just don’t want others to know what they are purchasing, period. And sellers actually have legitimate uses for the private auction format.

I am one of those sellers that uses the private option for Buy It Now with Best Offer. Because I sell many repeat items, I use the private auction option so that any low ball offers I accept are NOT visible on mine or my Buyer’s feedback pages. This precludes other buyers from constantly giving me the lowest offer I had previously accepted. It makes good business sense.

My strategy is not against eBay policy, nor do I consider it immoral. Neither do my buyers. All buyers are free not to participate in a private listing if they so choose. Do you understand my rationale for utilizing the private option and would you please NOT forward the-cash-man's request “to the appropriate team for their response.” ?

Thank you.

Thanks for your input. I hadn’t thought of it from this angle. There are both adherents and opponents to this particular feature. I will forward your comment to the team as well.

---

Posted by ted_200 on Apr 24, 2009 8:27 PM

Temporary PayPal Echeck Issue


Where did you see this announcement? I cannot find it. The only possible explanation I can think of is for folks who already have a credit card on file and are sending eChecks.

It was still there two days ago, but it is gone now. It said there was an issue with people paying with eCheck if their PayPal account did not have a current up to date credit card attached to it - they were unable to check out and pay for their items. It said to abandon the checkout process and proceed directly to PayPal and do one of three things. Update the expiration date of the card, enter a second card, or update the card to one that wasn't expired.

You are correct. After my first response, I was informed by PayPal that this was in fact, a bug and it was subsequently fixed. They also confirmed that they did post an announcement but removed it after the fix was in place

---

Posted by ted_200 on Apr 24, 2009 8:33 PM

Coin Categories and Replicas

Your answer to vedave regarding replica coins and why they are not required to be listed in the "reproductions" categories within Coins and Paper Money was unsatisfactory. You replied:

"We can create a category for legal coin replicas and we can take reports of Miscategorized items and move them as appropriate but since we cannot rule on what is and isn’t a replica coin (we are not the experts, we don’t hire item experts and we don’t handle the merchandise so even if we did have item experts, they couldn’t rule on items they didn’t actually handle) we can only rely on reports from other members and even then, it can take 24 hours or longer to move items into the appropriate categories."

1. The categories already exist.

2. The current policies do not require these categories be used. So if someone lists a replica Morgan Dollar in the Morgan Dollar category, instead of the Dollars > Reproductions category, and it is reported, it will not be removed because it is a replica of a MORGAN DOLLAR.

3. What do you mean, "we cannot rule on what is and isn't a replica coin"? Here is eBay policy on replica coins:

I am obviously having a failure of communication here. These listings have been reported by the thousands over the years. They will not remove them or move them because there is no policy requiring they not be listed in the authentic coin categories. Unless the policy is modified as I suggested, there is no policy violation, and reporting the items is a pointless exercise wasting everyones time.

Again, when they added the "Reproductions" categories in C & PM, they DID NOT require the reproductions be listed there. They suggested this is where they belonged, but there is no requirement.

My apologies. I misunderstood your first post which I now understand to be a request to make this an enforceable poliy. I will forward this to the policy team in charge for their consideration.

---

Posted by robshelp on Apr 24, 2009 9:00 PM

iFrame Follow-up and Picture Manager


Hi Griff,

Thank you for your help investigating the new View Item page implementation. I just want to correct one possible misunderstanding regarding iframes and javascript. You wrote:

"No need to detect an iframe that's not displaying because of JS being diabled, since we'll serve a non-iframe version."

Well, it is possible for iframes to be disabled in a web browser without javascript also being disabled. So a separate test for the presence of the iframe during the rendering of the View Item page would be necessary to insure a shopper sees the item description. There's no way to make the iframe appear, I'm only asking if there will be a note put on the page to inform the shopper the item description is not showing (similar to the message appearing in My eBay that appears when javascript is disabled). Sorry, I'm feeling as though I'm being a pest about that!

No worries! I haven’t received a response back regarding this most recent question but when I do, I will post it separately.

Now, on a separate topic... Many sellers are confused about what they need to do to adapt to Picture Manager being retired. Because there are so many sellers effected and they may have been creative in their use of Picture Manager, some unusual questions arise like the following...

First, a little explanation: eBay stores up to 6 different sizes of each photo uploaded to Picture Manager: Original, Supersize (800 pixels), New Preview Size (500 pixels), Standard (400), Preview(200), and Thumbnail(96). And, it is possible for a seller to have used any of those sizes in body of their item descriptions. They may have either used the Picture Manager graphic icon on the Description editor toolbar, used the Copy Web Links button in Picture Manager (to get the necessary HTML), or have learned eBay's file naming conventions to construct their own HTML (for the 800 pixel or 500 pixel versions).

No doubt, some Picture Manager users have selected for eBay to display up to 12 different Picture Manager photos in the usual places, PLUS have used the methods above to display them in the body of their item descriptions. In other words, the same photos are appearing in both places, but, within the item description, potentially in one or more of the 6 sizes stored in Picture Manager.

If those sellers simply allow their active listing photos to migrate from Picture Manager to EPS, will those other versions of the same photos continue to display in their item descriptions?

Asked another way: If, at time of migration, any given photo is being used in the standard manner for an active listing, will all the size versions eBay has created and stored (including the original) for that photo also be migrated in a manner that does not change their URLs?

If the seller’s photos where used in the slots for URLs that eBay provides (the standard manner), then the answer is “yes.” All sizes, including the original size, if the seller opted to create a copy of the original image, will still be available.

---

Posted by wearitsatvintage on Apr 24, 2009 9:10 PM

eBay Resolutions Questions


Regarding the upcoming dispute process change from paypal to ebay:

I read that in cases of INR that ebay will determine based on sellers "promise" of shipping time (say 1-2 days) plus the post office delivery estimate (ebay says 3 days in most cases). It say that if the tracking shows that it will be delivered outside this timeframe that the seller would be held "accountable".

What exactly does this mean?

The CS reps that are facilitating Resolutions during this extended “test” phase of the project are being trained to use their judgment overall, but the template for the time required before a buyer can file a dispute reads like this:

Starting from the time and date of purchase, the time allowed for delivery = a seller’s stated handling time + a reasonable estimate of time to deliver based on the information provided by the carrier for the selected class of service + a 3 day buffer.

The buyer will not be able to file a claim with eBay until the above amount of time has passed. Once the buyer does file a claim, the seller has 5 days to address the issues on their own (during which time, a parcel that has been delayed past the amount of time allowed may arrive). For those instances where it is probable that the class of service and locations of the buyer and seller are responsible for a longer delivery time (i.e., Media Mail from a rural area to a distant delivery destination), the rep is allowed leeway to use their own judgment for a date on which the buyer can file the dispute. However, I should point out that this program is in a testing phase and during this phase, we are actively learning how to fine tune the program prior to a wider launch. So far, it is working well.

I'm taking it to mean that ebay will refund the buyer and then go after the seller for the funds.

Not necessarily. If we can determine that a seller was not at fault, we may refund the buyer out of our own pocket with no consequences for the seller.

And if this is the case and ebay refunds the buyer prior to the item arriving and goes after the sell for reimbursement of that refund. What happens with the item?, will and how would ebay force the buyer to return it?.

Or is their idea of "Holding the seller accountable" letting the buyer keep the item and ebay taking the money from the seller for the refund? So the seller is out the funds and the item?

There may be cases where eBay provides the refund and does not require the buyer to send the item back to the seller (where the item has been significantly damaged for example). It will depend on the particulars of the case but there are no plans to make any significant changes to the way SNAD cases are handled currently through PayPal which means that when a dispute and any subsequent appeals are decided in favor of the buyer, the buyer will, for the vast majority of cases, still be required to return the item to the seller before the seller (or eBay) issues a refund)

Could you please clarify this for me.

If you haven’t done so already, please take a moment to read the FAQ points for eBay Resolutions. If you still have questions after reading the FAQ, feel free to post them here and I will do my best to provide answers.

---

Posted by efavorbags on Apr 24, 2009 9:55 PM

International Shipping Settings Not Applying

Now I ask you:

Do you think I deserve a negative from these buyers?
Why does EBay want to force sellers to ship International against their will?
Why is Ebay not fixing the problem that is causing International buyers to buy items stated shipping within the USA only?
What else can I do to prevent International buyers from buying my items?

We do not want, wish or desire to ship International.

Then you need to set your Buyer Requirements.

Stating that you do not ship internationally does not alone prevent international buyers from bidding or buying. You must also use the Buyer Requirement for blocking buyers who are registered in countries to which you do not ship. (Click the link to read how.) ----------------

The above (in bold) is your response to ONLY one of my questions regarding International shipping posted April 19th

You have assumed that I am so stupid, thinking that just by stating in my listing that I do not ship international, it should prevent International buyers from bidding or buying!!!!

I know how to read and I have been around here for years

ALL associated preferences to sell within the USA only are and have been checked including:

Buyers in countries to which I don't ship

Block buyers who are registered in countries to which I don't ship.


Yet I am getting International buyers buying my items as detailed in my original post. Customer service are not responding to emails!!!!

So, I’ll ask you again based on the TWO specific cases I have stated in my original post (TWO buyers: UK and Latvia):

Do you think I deserve a negative from these buyers?

No and if you receive a negative from either buyer, it will be removed (I have verified this with Trust and Safety) And I apologize for not catching the “preferences” reference in your original post. I did not immediately infer it to mean Buyer Requirement.

Why does EBay want to force sellers to ship International against their will?

We don’t. Apparently, this is a bug and is being addressed. (Trust and Safety should have emailed you by now. Let me know if they haven’t.

Why is Ebay not fixing the problem that is causing International buyers to buy items stated shipping within the USA only?

We are working on it as we speak. (It is not widespread and thus, harder to nail down).

What else can I do to prevent International buyers from buying my items?

Keep doing what you are doing now. If an international buyer bids on the item in spite of your settings, email me directly at griff@ebay.com using regular email (not My Messages) and I will forward to Trust and Safety for their attention.

---

Posted by crlrmr78 on Apr 25, 2009 5:12 AM

eBay DC Time Stamp Bug

Hi Griff,
After reading posts and talking with my postal clerk regarding Delivery confirmation and how it's not actually a "tracking number", I no longer include that number in my email shipping notifications to my customers. Instead I refer them to the View Order Details page so they can see the status of their package.
I realized something after that.
I enter the DC# into the system the same day I ship. Let's say I shipped 4/20. When I go to the page it shows "Shipped 4/25" which is actually the CURRENT DATE , not the ship date. If the buyer doesn't know that's a link with more detail, they will think I shipped later than I did. We sellers need all the help we can get with shipping DSR's and this doesn't help.

I contacted Rich Matsuura (who heads up all things “Shipping” eBay) and one of his team members informs us that this is a bug and it is being addressed as we speak. The date that you are seeing is the last updated datePosted by notthe shipped date, however do to some formatting/layout issues on shipping status it appears as if the we are always reporting the item as shipped today. Needless to say this is a high priority issue, and our PD team is working to address it as soon as possible.

---

Posted by penguinsfan4life on Apr 25, 2009 2:37 PM

Half.com Support

I'm reasking my question because you did not answer it the first time. In hindsight, maybe I did not explain the issue clearly.

I wanted to contact a buyer of a book on half.com about an issue with their address. The buyer does not answer emails. I call half.com, they tell me they cannot help me, and that I must go through ebay.com to receive their contact information. I contact livehelp and they tell me they can't even find the transaction; when I provide the transaction number and member's name, they tell me they cannot provide their contact informaation. I emailed half.com, they continued to refer me to livehelp.

Why does no one from live help know ANYTHING about half.com rules? Why can no one from either site provide a buyer's contact information for me? Why, every time I go to live help they tell me their "half.com specialist" (ha!) is not there, but I should try back in a few hours. Translation-they just are trying to get rid of me. So, I ask again, why does live help not offer any support to paying members of the ebay community, when there is NO logical reasoning for it? Why doesn't livehelp know the rules of the sites they are providing customer support to? The total lack of customer support (sellers are ebay's customers) is why ebay is struggling.

Although eBay does integrate Half.com items into eBay (and feedback and user id’s are shared between the sites), the actual support infrastructures are kept separate. Not being an expert on Half.com support questions, I sent this to an eBay CS rep and they forwarded it to a Half.com specialist who informed us that at Half.com, unlike at eBay, they do not give out user phone numbers. This is why if a person enters a Half.com transaction number into the Request Contact Info box on Advanced Search, it returns an error.

All Half.com support is handled through email (Half doesn’t have Live Chat or phone support at this time)

---

Posted by austiners on Apr 25, 2009 2:53 PM

Final Value Fee Credit Needed


Griff

I need some help in getting my Final Value Fees back after a successful UPI dispute. The amount involved is very small, but it is the principle that I am concerned about. When we have an unpaid item, eBay should not profit from that event, now matter how small the amount.

I filed an unpaid item dispute for item 150303220015 for a purchase made on March 30, 2009.. The dispute was closed with no response from the buyer on April 20, 2009. I was credited with .87¢ in Final Value Fees when the actual Final Value Fees were $1.08.

I used Live Chat on April 23rd and again on April 24th and spoke with two different representatives. Both said that they credited my account with the additional .21¢ that I am due, but that credit has not shown up.

What do I need to do to get the entire $1.08 credited instead the partial credit I received?

---

Posted by austiners on Apr 25, 2009 5:46 PM

Final Value Fee Credit: Resolved


Well, 24 hours later I received email from one of the Live Help reps that a "technical glitch" had prevented issuing the .21¢ credit. This rep went below the ordinary and found another way to issue the credit and it is now showing up in my account.

I appreciate this extra effort that made me whole after the UPI incident, but it is a warning for everyone to watch any FVF credit they may be eligible to receive. It is not always credited to your account accurately.

Glad to hear it worked out!

---

Posted by the-cash-man on Apr 25, 2009 8:04 PM

Private Auctions and Best Offer Suggestions


> Hi Griff,
>
> You had just posted a reply to the-cash-man who complained about Private Auctions and who said how they would hit the back button whenever they saw one.
>
> This person concerns about private auctions were:
> “I get very skeptical of "private" auctions as I feel that they are a way to hide shill bidding. Their (sic) were legitimate sellers that were using these auctions to prevent fake second chance offers, and other spam from being sent to their bidders.
>
> The purpose of Private Auctions was to protect the privacy of buyers who were buying in adult categories. It has recently been used by sellers to keep "Best Offer" prices from showing up on Feedback Pages.”
>
> You replied to their post with: “Good point. I will forward to the appropriate team for their response.”
>
> I strongly disagree with the poster‘s logic. Private auctions are not just to protect the privacy of buyers in the adult categories. Some people just don’t want others to know what they are purchasing, period. And sellers actually have legitimate uses for the private auction format.
>
> I am one of those sellers that uses the private option for Buy It Now with Best Offer. Because I sell many repeat items, I use the private auction option so that any low ball offers I accept are NOT visible on mine or my Buyer’s feedback pages. This precludes other buyers from constantly giving me the lowest offer I had previously accepted. It makes good business sense.
>
> My strategy is not against eBay policy, nor do I consider it immoral. Neither do my buyers. All buyers are free not to participate in a private listing if they so choose. Do you understand my rationale for utilizing the private option and would you please NOT forward the-cash-man's request “to the appropriate team for their response.” ?
>
> Thank you.

I know this is Griff's thread but I just want to clarify. I am all for private listings. I am not suggesting that private auctions should go away, I'm suggesting that they should include the masked bidding ID's on the bid history page for private auctions. Nobody is going to know what the user ID is anyway so why not include them? This may or may not deter shill bidding but it would restore trust. If they displayed the bidding alias that show up on all other auction pages I would be much more likely to bid on private auctions.

Furthermore I also think it would be a great thing if the prices for "Best Offers" didn't show up on feedback on regular auctions. If I am selling an HDMI cable for $9.95, somebody wins it for $8 with a best offer. I don't see what the harm would be in displaying the $9.95 instead of $8 on the sellers feedback page.

In the interest of full disclosure, eBay has never hidden the final amount of a transaction. Best Offers are transactions. We would not hide the amount of a Best Offer transaction. If an item sellers for $8 on a Best Offer, we couldn’t display $9.95 as the final sale price because that would not be the amount for which the item eventually sold.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Apr 25, 2009 9:48 PM

eBay Resolution Questions


The competition eBay is so bent on copying has a firm limit of 5 LIFETIME claims. But the anecdotal evidence seen here shows us that certain buyers are allowed to abuse this process without any repercussions whatsoever.

That is not true. And in fact, if it is determined that a buyer actually defrauded a seller (“Rock in a Box “scenario), eBay will take action against the buyer.

I did not mention fraud, Griff. I mentioned using the SNAD policy to overturn a seller's return policy. Also known as filing a false SNAD claim for items that are accurately described.

If a buyer’s makes SNAD claim citing a reason that is clearly in line with the seller’s description (for example, the seller states the item condition as “used”, and the buyer claims the item is not in “new” condition) the claim is not awarded to the buyer. If you have had a SNAD complaint filed against you for this reason and you believe the outcome was unfair and was not reversed on appeal, please feel free to email the details to me and I will work on your behalf to reopen the case for reconsideration. If you know of someone who has been or is currently in this situation, you can also refer the seller to me. However, I trust you will understand that I cannot assist on hypothetical cases.

What is being done to rein in those buyers?

Each case is reviewed on its own merits. This includes the past filing history for both the buyer and the seller. A buyer who files an inordinate number of claims could face a more detailed inspection of their past history but if the buyer’s past history does not show a pattern of abuse (and filing claims alone is not evidence of abuse), there would be no consequences for that buyer.

Claims made for transactions over a certain value (undisclosed) or by buyers who have made previous claims are first investigated by a rep.

So a seller like myself who sells low ASP items will likely not have a rep look at any claims unless appealed, correct?

That is correct for the existing PayPal dispute process. However, when the process is ported from PayPal to eBay (eBay Resolutions), all SNAD claims will be reviewed by a rep.

Why doesn't Paypal/eBay put a FIRM limit on the number of times a buyer can file a SNAD dispute?

We don’t use a number. We use a percentage. Using a number wouldn’t make sense.

And yet, that's what the competition does. And I have seen articles where that other site has banned customers for excessive returns. We have no such media coverage of Paypal doing the same.

Non-eBay sites may have a completely different transaction model. We are not building a resolution process based on that of any one competitor. We are building one that fits what is uniquely eBay’s transaction model.

If a seller currently appeals a SNAD/INR claim decided against them and WINS, they are often told that they should 'recoup' the money from the buyer. As if the buyer would willingly return the funds??

Is eBay going to be fixing that issue as well? Will sellers be compensated by Paypal/eBay when appeals are decided in favor of the seller?

Has that ever happened to you? (Appealed a SNAD dispute where the buyer had already been refunded and was told by PayPal to “recoup from the buyer?”)

All of the current information regarding the upcoming eBay Resolutions program can be found Link here.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Apr 25, 2009 10:11 PM

More eBay Resolution Questions


I have further questions on the new "3 days then refund guarantee " for late orders eBay is adding to the INR dispute process once it migrates to eBay from Paypal.

I know where eBay got this extremely ridiculous idea. But eBay also cherry-picked details out of the alphabetical guarantee policy and failed to include the protections for sellers.

And it's not just that lifetime limit I'm referring to, Griff. I'm also talking about this beauty:

For example, a U.S. order sent using the standard shipping option would become eligible for a claim 21 calendar days after the ship date (14 business days + 3 calendar days).

that's 14 business days instead of the 9 currently provided on eBay to customers. YES, I'm aware that the 9 business days is a carrier estimate. I'm also aware that it is completely and totally NOT the average delivery time for Media Mail.

Standard U.S.: 4 to 14 business days after shipping (may take up to 21 business days)

Expedited U.S.: 2 to 6 business days after shipping

At least that other place helps set correct buyer expectations. Unlike eBay.

How is reinforcing unrealistic delivery expectations at all helpful to sellers--big or small??

As I stated above in another response, the current Resolutions process is in a testing (learning) phase and reps are given leeway to exercise judgment in deciding the particulars of each case. If during this phase of the program, it is determined that the estimate guideline (seller handling time + carrier estimate + 3 days buffer) is not sufficient, we will alter it.

One last point:

Colin Rule posted this on the special announcement forum:

The vast majority of claims are filed by buyers who only file a single claim each year. If a buyer files two or more claims then they quickly merit greater scrutiny from eBay and PayPal.

How does that mesh with your 'percentage' idea/method? Seems like even Colin is aware that someone filing more than an occasional SNAD should warrant a second look.

I'd say that any buyer who claims a significant percentage of their items arrive SNAD is guilty of not reading descriptions or is window shopping online at the seller's expense.

There is a difference between “merit greater scrutiny” and the immediate ban that you have proposed (based on a preset lifetime limit) or my statement about looking at percentages (the number of claims filed against the number of transactions a buyer has had). Given the unique eBay transaction model, we simply are not going to set in stone a pre-determined limit to the number of dispute claims any one member can report to eBay in their lifetime. As I pointed out earlier, there is a difference between five filed reports by a buyer who buys once or twice a year and five filed reports from someone who buyer 500 items a year. They are not equal and using a “one-size-fits-all” limit on the number of disputes for both cases would be grossly unfair.

---

Posted by ozzie3 on Apr 25, 2009 11:35 PM

Terms Of Service that Contradict eBay Policy

Gtiff, Your seller "smartbargains" say this in their term of usage:

" 9. Risk of Loss. The items purchased from our Store are shipped by a third party carrier pursuant to a shipment contract. As a result, risk of loss and title for such items pass to you upon our delivery to the carrier"

I thought you said that the seller had to deliver to the buyer at the buyer's location!


I did say that and it is correct (an eBay seller is responsible for delivering the item to the buyer’s location

If I put that in my auctions will it override Paypal and eBay?

No it won’t.

Or is that really what the user agreement says in reference to UCC 2401 (2) in the ebay user agreement? Which is it? PayPal's versions or eBay user agreement as shown by smartbargains statements in there agreement?

A seller’s stated Terms of Service do not trump the eBay User Agreement. The [eBay] User Agreement is pretty clear. It states sellers will not:

“…fail to deliver items purchased from you, unless the buyer fails to meet the posted terms, or you cannot authenticate the buyer's identity;”…

Further (my underline and highlight):

“… nothing in this agreement shall modify the governing provisions of California Commercial Code § 2401(2) and Uniform Commercial Code § 2-401(2), under which legal ownership of an item is transferred upon physical delivery of the item to the buyer by the seller. Unless the buyer and the seller agree otherwise, the buyer will become the item's lawful owner upon physical receipt of the item from the seller, in accordance with California Commercial Code § 2401(2) and Uniform Commercial Code § 2-401(2).”

It doesn’t state that the seller can pass the buck to the shipping carrier.

eBay will still hold the seller responsible unless they can prove physical delivery of the item.

We never support the seller’s terms - it is the seller’s responsibility to enforce their own terms. Currently, we don’t prohibit a seller from stating a TOS like this one. (That could change in the near future). However, we would not indemnify the seller just because they state in their listing that they transfer ownership once they deliver the item to the carrier. If a buyer filed an INR and the seller couldn’t prove deliver confirmation to the buyer’s address, the buyer would succeed in their INR claim.

---

Posted by etown99 on Apr 26, 2009 10:20 AM

Featured Listings Featuring Less-Than-Stellar Sellers


Another one....

I'm researching the price of an item. I look at active listings. There is one featured auction for this item.
The seller has 168 FB and is sitting at a cool 95.5% FB. He also has a 4.0 DSR. And naturally, he is placed at the Top of page one.

Question - How does putting a seller like this, with very poor business skills, and lousy customer service, above a ton of excellent sellers identical items (just because he spent the enhanced visibility bucks to Ebay) enhance the buyer experience?

It’s a good point. It’s why we are considering limiting Featured Listings to only sellers with high ratings and feedback. (some of us would like to eliminate featured listings altogether.) Any changes of this nature to Featured listings would come in the second half of this year at the earliest.

So.... I go to toolhaus to view exactly what his Negs are...and I receive this message from Toolhaus...

Error: eBay has blocked access to feedback. Toolhaus is unable to obtain information which is available only to registered eBay users. We're not happy about this.

Question - What is this all about? Just because Ebay doesn't want unregistered users perusing FB, you penalize ALL Ebay registered users?

The site referenced above is not an eBay site. eBay has absolutely no obligation to provide data to a third party site or company.

Question - Is Ebay going to replace or work with Toolhaus to enable Ebay registered users to view FB history?

No.

---

Posted by joyfull-one on Apr 26, 2009 10:34 AM

Negative Feedback Question


I am a small time seller who because of health reasons needs to take time off from selling so the quanity of Ebay feedback is not very high. I have 100% right now, but have just completed a transaction with a lady who did not comply with my auction payment terms which are 'payment, or contact within 2 days of the auction ending. So after 2 days I sent her a nice reminder asking her to remit payment or to contact me. She did neither. So I sent another reminder asking her to remit payment, or contact me with her intentions. She did neither. Meanwhile, I could see by the feedback she was leaving that she was on Ebay during that time. I sent another reminder and again, no response.

So after the 7 days I filed a claim. The same day I got a message from her that " it was discraceful to file a claim 2 days after sending invoice." I messaged her back giving her the dates of all three invoices.

Well long story short, the next day she paid and include a message saying

"FOR FEEDBACK
Please include your Ebay name and a copy of the invoice so I can leave you feedback."

I don't have to be a rocket scientist to know what that means. Will Ebay allow neg. feedback to stand in these circumstances?

Barring any other circumstances? Yes, we will allow it to stand. Leaving negative feedback for a case like this is not grounds for removal of that feedback.

And if so, how in the world can that possibly be fair? To me, or to other sellers who have no way of knowing how this woman conducts her affairs. Sure, she paid, but only because she didn't want a strike, and probably because she really wants to get back at me for filing a claim.

Feedback has never been prohibited or removed because it was judged “unfair.” Some may disagree with this but it doesn’t change the current feedback policy. (If a buyer eventually pays, they get to leave feedback).

Knowing this, and knowing that this feedback policy detail won’t change in the near term, sellers in this situation should follow a service strategy that helps to lessen the chance of receiving a negative feedback.

You didn’t reveal what your actual response was to her first email after the claim was filed but for what it’s worth, if I had been in your position, I would have sent polite email apology explaining that since I hadn’t received a response, (maybe the buyer’s email filters were moving my emails to a junk or spam folder) and that in order to relist the item, I had to file a UPI claim. I would also assure the buyer that her payment is appreciated, that I was relieved we were able to finally connect and that the claim was nothing personal. Maybe, I would phone the buyer. Would that work to help prevent a negative? Maybe. Maybe not. But I would definitely take the chance.

I have found that on eBay, as in most things, communication can solve most problems, including misunderstandings between online buyers and sellers.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Apr 26, 2009 11:16 AM

SNAD Claims from International Buyers


Griff,

Regarding Paypal SNAD appeals, what does Paypal do in cases of International buyer fraud?

Police reports are often not obtainable in cases where the other party is out of the country.

(I am asking on behalf of a seller who was defrauded last year by an international buyer and was told by Paypal that due to the international location of the buyer, there was nothing they could do).

Although I don’t have the details of the case you reference for a transaction that happened last year, we (eBay and PayPal) actually follow the same process for international users that we do for US buyers and sellers on SNAD Appeals. We have received police reports from all over the world and we have had US sellers provide police incident reports for transactions where the buyer is located outside of the US. Since we are not asking the seller or the police to take any action against the buyer, but rather just document the incident, this shouldn’t prevent the incident report from being obtained. If the item is valued at less than $199, the seller can still file a PayPal-provided affidavit in lieu of a police report. PayPal will take the same action against a buyer outside of the US as we would for a US buyer in cases of confirmed buyer fraud.

---

Posted by acetremendous on Apr 26, 2009 11:51 AM

Thanks


First of all, as you may know, I don't particularly approve of this thread and do not think that it is appropriate, or even acceptable, to have a special customer service person like you who can pull strings to do special favors for people who email him directly.

Because of this I have mostly refrained from posting here (though I do keep up reading it). People debate about your motives, but to me, how much of your "heart" is in it is irrelevant; I simply don't think a business should grant special favors on a personal basis.

I disagree of course. I don’t view my presence here or my efforts beyond this forum to be granting “special favors.” I try to provide resolution and assistance to all sellers (and buyers too) who find themselves in need. That could be helping resolve a dispute, revisit a Trust and Safety ruling, help with a seller’s listings and business strategy, help explain eBay policy and maybe provide a little insight into the “how” and “why” of eBay’s marketplace stewardship. And this is not a one-way process. I also take input and comments from sellers both here and from email and in person visits and bring it to the big table.

Anyone is free to email me. I offer this of my own volition. No one here at eBay, (And I mean no one) requires me to do this. It’s not part of my job description. I don’t work officially in customer support but I take my legacy as eBay’s first customer support rep very seriously and all of our customer support reps have my respect and appreciation for the job they do).

That’s why I am here.


However, that said, you are the only source of communication between sellers and Ebay corporate, so I thought it couldn't hurt to post here to thank the company for a few good things. I want to encourage more good things no matter how small, and I believe in giving credit where it's due. I hope you can pass the following along to the appropriate people/departments:

First, thanks for the minor improvements that have been made to My Ebay. It's still a lot clunkier and more annoying to use than the old version, but the following changes have been helpful:
* Thanks for replacing the total # of bids to the Summary
* Thanks for fixing whatever it is that creates the title of each page in my browser History - at first, all the History pages just said "My Ebay", now they say "My Ebay - Sold", "My Ebay - Selling", etc. That really helps in juggling multiple tasks.
* Thanks for adding "Messages" to the My Ebay tab at the top of each page
*Thanks for adjusting the stuff on the left hand side of the page, it wasn't displaying correctly for the first week or two (and kept reverting to default).
* Thanks for adding the Buyer Satisfaction/DSR chart to the Dashboard, so we can see if and when we receive sub-3 DSRs.

Unlike a lot of sellers, I feel OK about the new item page. It looks OK, and the new large picture is a bit bigger than the old large picture. I was initially concerned because the early versions did not have as many available options for the seller, and sometimes it is inconvenient to go back to My Ebay to make a change, relist, or whatever.
* Thanks for putting Revise Your Item back - in early versions, it was not there.
* Thanks for fixing whatever was wrong with Sell Similar. (In early versions of the page, that link brought you to a nearly-blank SYI form.)
* Thanks for making sure that Relist Your Item is there. It seemed to disappear and reappear a few times on the early version.

And finally, on a less important note, thanks for restoring FULL user IDs here on the boards. The truncated IDs were ugly and silly.

Thanks in advance for any further fixes of functions that don't work, or only work erratically.

(In case anyone is wondering, nothing about this post is meant to be sarcastic.)

Thank you for your thanks! I will share them with the rest of my team (Seller Experience) and with exec staff as well.

---

Posted by hawgryders on Apr 26, 2009 12:40 PM

Why Not My Messages?


Mr. Griffith

My question has to do with your insistence to only be contacted directly and not through the eBay message system

As a seller / buyer I am no longer given the opportunity to contact a trading partner in any way other than the eBay message system until after they pay, and then I am given the outside contact info by PayPal not eBay

So I was just wondering ...

[Why are we forced to use a message system that keeps the actual identities of other trading partners secret but you refuse to use this system ?]

I don’t refuse to use it… I use it everyday…as a buyer or seller. My Messages is intended for buyer-seller, and eBay-to-member communications. However, it was never intended for eBay-employees-to-eBay-member communications. It wasn’t built for that purpose. For example, I cannot forward My Message emails to another team member or department for assistance which means I cannot create or track topic threads. I cannot add screen shots or attachments. And finally, I cannot archive My Message emails in a format that works with the rest of my email (MS Exchange) So, in order to track, forward, add attachments and screen shots and archive email from eBay customers, I need it sent to me directly through our Exchange server via griff@ebay.com.

As for “keeping your trading partners identities secret” any buyer or seller in a completed transaction can request and receive the name and contact information (including phone numbers but excluding street addresses and numbers) through the Request Contact Information link on Advanced Search. In addition, a seller in a completed transaction receives the buyer’s complete name and address after the sale closes.

---

Posted by lurch-deeann on Apr 26, 2009 2:32 PM

Future eBay Seller Program

Even though I'm still awaiting a response to my other question re. SPP and the coming INR/lost mail time calculations, I have another topic as well.

Last week I did a survey on a new seller status that eBay is looking at. Specifically, "eBay Approved Seller."

I have a number of issues with what I was presented throughout the course of the survey. First off, the definition currently under consideration would consist of 3 things a seller would have to do (this is a copy paste from the survey):

In order to be included in the new eBay Approved Seller category on eBay, a seller must meet ALL of the following criteria:

* Maintain a sales level of 100 items per year; AND

* Maintain an average of 4.6 or better (1 to 5 scale) on each Detailed Seller Rating (DSR): Item Description, Communications, Shipping Time and Shipping Charge; AND

* At least 99% of buyer ratings on each Detailed Seller Rating are 3 or higher (1 to 5 scale)

First of all, I find the label offensive. It could easily imply that those who are not "approved" by eBay (which could simply be because they don't sell enough items) could be viewed as "disapproved" by eBay. Oh - and I'm sure Best Match will be a part of this, too...

I am not familiar with the details of this survey. However, I can absolutely guarantee that the final program will not be called “approved sellers.”

Secondly, I have a problem with the sales level. eBay would not "approve" someone simply because they sell 99 items? Or 77 items, even though they're perfect sellers?

The final sales volume qualifications have not been nailed down but they will most likely be 100 items per year. And yes, that means a seller with 99 sales a year won’t qualify. Solution? List and sell enough items to qualify. This comes out to 9 items a month or 2.5 items a week – well within the reach of a majority of small (consumer and hobby) sellers.

Third, if one does sell 100 items, it would only take a rating of 2 or lower in either two categories of DSRs (by one buyer) or 2 people rating a 2 or lower in one category of DSRs for the entire year for the seller to suddenly be "disapproved" by eBay.

No, that is not necessarily correct. We are also reviewing how DSRs might factor into the final program.

Given the fact that you state you always leave feedback for the buyer at payment, do you see the irony that it looks like you would not be an eBay Approved Seller if this went into place tomorrow? I counted 77 (plus or minus one, potentially) feedbacks you have left for buyers in the last 12 months. Your sales level would not be high enough (your listing level may be, but not sales level). Message to buyers: "Griff (on buyer/seller id) is a seller who is not approved by eBay."

Again, the program will not be called “approved sellers.” Second, any program of this nature will have eligibility requirements so I wouldn’t find it ironic or surprising. If I didn’t qualify and if I wanted to qualify for a program like this one, and my current annual sales volume is lower than the required amount of items necessary, I would simply list more items.

So my question is: as seller advocate, will you commit to advocating either abandoning this idea, or at the very least, change the label to something less divisive and revisit the qualification levels? I don't see this ultimately being something which will be helpful or healthy to the community or the marketplace. And now is the time for someone to lobby/advocate, given it is currently being considered.

I did advocate for changing the name. The final name under consideration will be released later this year (it probably won’t please everyone but it won’t be as onerous as “approved seller” which is not what the program will be called) The final decision regarding qualification criteria will be made in the near future but it will include a transaction volume qualification and it will probably be 100 transactions annually.

I am 100% for a program of this nature. Why? Because it will recognize first-and-foremost, seller quality, instead of quantity (customer satisfaction v.s. sales volume). In fact, sales volume in dollars will not be a factor for membership. This new program will will be attainable by any seller, small or large, regardless of category, with a high quality of customer service, and it will provide solid, tangible benefits to those sellers (said benefits will be announced upon launch of the final program in the future).

---

Posted by lurch-deeann on Apr 26, 2009 2:56 PM

eBay Listings On Shopping.com


Hmm - sorry about another issue, but this just came up. Prior to prepping some listings, I decided to look for tortilla warmers, preferably clay, something I've been meaning to get for awhile now. Only found one on eBay, so went to google. A search there served up this page at shopping.com (which I believe ebay owns):

Link

Right there on the page is a link to one on eBay (but not clay). I decided to check it out, and it takes me to:

Link

Now - a couple of things about this page (and I'm not familiar with the "itemlistings.ebay.com" level) - and this IS an active item:
1) I did not notice until *just* now when getting the tinyurl, that there is a link to "view full description" - not good;
2) It states: Shipping Cost: See Details - yet there are no details - you have to notice the "view full description" - so shipping cost is not displayed - just "buy now"
3) Rather than displaying the details, it shows other items from other sellers on eBay;
4) Below that, are off eBay links?!? Keep in mind, this is an active listing.

This can't be good for the seller of this item, and not displaying details OR shipping cost can't be good for buyers, either. In fact, I'm not sure *who* this is good for.

But if this seems as wonky to you as it does to me, can you forward it along to whoever should look into it? It really seems it should just give the active listing -- and in full -- when coming in from shopping.com

I also want to reiterate - I didn't see the "view full description" - I only initially found the details by clicking on their store, then searching for tortilla.

Thank you for you comments regarding the special Shopping.com eBay view item pages (available to any shopper who enters eBay through a Shopping.com search). I would be happy to forward them to the Shopping.com team.

I cannot promise that this will result in a change to either the current layout of this page or the format of the eBay items pages served up in Shopping.com searches. The page view you see when coming through Shopping.com is unique to this search path and only displays when someone clicks on an eBay listing in a Shopping.com search. The complete View Item page on eBay for a single eBay item on Shopping.com is accessible by clicking the “View Full Description” link.

---

Posted by 6141garyc on Apr 26, 2009 5:30 PM

Shipping an eBay Item to Someone Other Than The Buyer of Record.


I sold a bike to a registered ebay member.they had me ship it to a nonregistered member.am I responsible if they puncture an inner tube and want me to replace it?

Without knowing more detail, it would be hard to provide a definitive answer but generally, shipping an item to someone other than the buyer of record does entail the assumption of risk on the part of the seller. If the transaction was completed with PayPal and the buyer subsequently complains that the item never arrived and the address to which you shipped the item is not one of the addresses in the buyer’s PayPal account, you could be held liable if the item is not delivered of the buyer files an Significantly Not As Described complaint.

---

Posted by zboo2 on Apr 26, 2009 10:28 PM

Change That Darn Avatar!


Griff, this should be a pretty easy one to get done and get right.
If each month's AG thread is going to continue to be pinned to the top of SC, could you please come up with some different mug shots, something maybe to reflect time/season of the year?

I confess that I am not so sure any photo of this old mug will ever be palatable to all but we coincidentally, just had new corporate head shots taken of execs and high profile types. Once they are ready, I will replace the existing mug shot with one of them (they are not that bad actually. Amazing the imperfections a generous schmearing of Vaseline can fix.)

Thanks

---

Posted by celtictwo on Apr 27, 2009 1:58 AM

PayPal Notifications


Griff;

For almost a month I have had a PayPal problem. My notifications from PayPal (payment & shipping), have been arriving into my email up to 6 days after the transaction. I have had conversations with PayPal about this issue with the usual troubleshooting guidance - i.e my browser cache and cookies. I do not have this problem with other sites that send email notifications.

I think I can safely assume that if I'm having this problem, so are some others. So, my question is - What kind of intervention and/or support can I expect from eBay when a buyer dings my Communication or Shipping Time DSR's or leaves less than kind feedback. After all, concerning this issue, it is neither the seller's fault nor the buyer's fault. Blame rests squarely upon eBay!

Have your buyers complained that the notifications are delayed on their end? If so, let me know. Send me an email via griff@ebay.com using your regular email, not My Messages. I will have someone from PayPal take a closer look.

---

Posted by celtictwo on Apr 27, 2009 2:33 AM

A Search Question


Griff,
This isn't a question, just something I thought might interest you.

My wife was looking for a DVD set of The Tudors, season one. She did her search and only one result showed up. The price on the DVD set was quite high and certainly not a bargain, but it was apparently the only one available and apparently scarce. Not believing that only one set showed up, together we re-checked her search criteria (i.e. keyword spelling, format, etc). Everything looked OK, so we did the BIN on the item. After the purchase was completed and paid for, we got the usual box of "You also might be interested in these items"! There were further sets of these DVDs available from other sellers (a total of 34)! Over half of these were less expensive than the one we just purchased. Needless to say, as buyers, we weren't very pleased.

Without screen shots, there is no way I can duplicate what you saw. I searched on “the tudors” in DVDs and found the following:

Link

at the time of the search, there are 88 items.

Are you absolutely certain you searched on the keywords “the tudors”?

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on Apr 27, 2009 6:51 AM

Article About Resolutions


Griff, I have an article I'd like a response to.

It's from Ina (no groaning, please)

In particular is this quote:

"When going through the dispute process, both buyers said they explained the situation to an eBay representative by phone and were immediately refunded, and the sellers suspended. "

The bolded part is particularly worrisome to me. Immediate refunds without contacting the seller AND immediate suspension of the seller.

This directly contradicts what we've been told will happen with this new dispute process. None of the early reports of this dispute process have shown ANY delay between the phone call and the refund. Meaning that the buyer kept the item (if shipped), the seller was not allowed to tell his or her side of the situation, and in some cases the sellers were suspended!

I'm hoping you can reassure us that sellers will not be immediately suspended based on disputes where they are not contacted at all. Because that sure appears to be what happened here.

Although I certainly cannot comment on a situation relayed third-hand lacking critical details like user ids, transaction numbers, etc., I can assure you that no seller would be immediately suspended as a consequence of one dispute in the upcoming eBay Resolution program without previous or mitigating circumstances such as a chronic history of high customer dissatisfaction reports/disputes or a seriously egregious violation of eBay policy.

And I should mention one other piece of the Resolutions program that will be significantly different than the current process: Resolution reps will able to take into account a seller's past history and good standing with eBay when deciding a case.

Finally, all details of the program, currently under testing and not finalized, will be completely disclosed upon launch in mid year. I would strongly recommend that all sellers look first to eBay for accurate information and details regarding this and any eBay program, feature, policy or change.

---

Posted by ticeland on Apr 27, 2009 9:01 AM

Resolutions Staff Training


Hi Griff,
First, thank you for trying to help here.

This is a serious question, I am not being flippant here.

For years I answered questions on the AC. Time and again, we saw where live help gave marginal, irrelevant and out and out wrong answers. Email help is also famous for giving amazingly irrelevant answers. The idea that there aren't bots makes that even more amazing.

If ebay employees are going to be deciding a sellers fate when it comes to their disputes, is somebody going to give them actual intense training on policy? More training than is normally given. Or are they going to be given scripts, with black and white, no deviation flow charts and told to get to work?

I am very concerned about this change. and across two IDs I can count on one hand the number of disputes I have had since 1999. Why am i concerned? because as soon as people figure out that if the post office delays their package they can get it for free, I anticipate more disputes.

So I guess my question is how much training are these cs reps going to be provided and will we have an appeals process?

Resolutions will be staffed with fully-trained, highly qualified and monitored reps.

---

Posted by bikerhal on Apr 27, 2009 9:53 AM

Questions/Confusion about eBay Policy


You sometimes see on Discussion Boards page after page of discussion about a certain policy with knowledgeable people disagreeing, one of the reasons being is that the eBay policy is ambiguous or conflicting. Yet, eBay seems to ignore these issues and keeps them ambiguous. Here are some examples – will you please provide some guidance?

Sure. To be clear, I asked Brian Burke to provide a response to questions 1 and 2. The others I will answer myself.

1) Seller states payment must be made in 2 days or item will be relisted. Is this allowed?

(From Brian Burke) Yes. Sellers can set any terms they want regarding payment due dates and relisting. The seller can relist the item immediately after the item ends if they choose. When discussing this issue, sellers tend to misinterpret the UPI policy that requires the seller to wait 7 days to file a UPI claim and another 7 days to close the UPI claim. They view the 7 days as a restriction - it is not.

These UPI timelines (about to be shortened by the way) are to encourage the seller to communicate with the buyer. They don’t preclude the seller from relisting their item before the 7 day period.

Note: Having the policy doesn’t protect the seller from receiving negative or neutral feedabc. So if a seller wishes to have a policy like this they should be crystal clear in the item description so that all buyers understand if they are late on the payment, the seller will relist and file unpaid item against the buyer.

2) Someone with zero feedback snipes auction. Seller’s TOS has requirement that feedback must be at least 10. Seller refuses to complete transaction. Is this allowed?

(From Brian Burke) Yes it is allowed, but it is probably the wrong attitude from the seller unless there is other information about the buyer, such as the buyer states they are underage, the buyer doesn’t respond to email/phone, their contact information isn’t accurate, etc. Not all zero feedback buyers present transaction problems. Keep in mind that all buyers start with zero feedback.

Even though the seller can refuse to sell to the buyer in this situation, the buyer can also leave the seller FB - the seller receives no protection from eBay regarding their terms. They must enforce them via the courts if they wish.

If the buyer paid and the seller doesn’t refund the buyer (or ship the item) it is seller fraud, regardless of what the terms state.

The User Agreement specifies that sellers must “…deliver the item to the buyer who purchased the item, unless the buyer fails to meet the posted terms…” So a seller with terms where they refuse to sell to a 0 FB buyer would enable them to avoid such a sale, but it is a bad buying experience and a seller who receives a N/N, low DSR or INR may have be limited from becoming a PowerSeller (min 4.5) or receiving other benefits.

3) Seller pays someone to ship books. Average handling cost per shipment is $2 making the total S&H cost more than the $4 maximum even for a small paperback. Is this permitted? Or seller charges for his own time to ship that increases the cost to over $4. Is this permitted?

No. If the seller is using a flat rate shipping option (standard flat rate), the item’s shipping cost must be in line with the shipping limits for that category.

4) eBay does not explicitly state the reason for restricting a seller or cancelling a listing. Why?

Trust and Safety informs a seller whose listing is ended or whose selling is restricted exactly why, or at least they should. If you find that this is not the case, feel free to email the details to me. However, for privacy, we don’t reveal the details of any account action to anyone but the person against whom the action was taken.

5) eBay does not allow “like new” in a title but using that exact term as a Condition option in the Sell Your Item form. Why?

Title Search and Keywod realities. When searching using the keyword, "new" items that have the phrase, “like new” in the title (which by definition, means "not new") will also show up. There is no way to prevent this. So, to prevent not new items from showing up a keyword search of "new," we prohibit the use of the keyword phrase "like new."

However, as a separate data piece like an item specific or tag or condition term, which is not a part of the item title, the phrase "like new" is allowed because an item marked as “like new” in this manner will not be returned in a title search of “new.”

---

There are two questions posted by fromus2u on Apr 26, 2009 9:29 AM and on Apr 26, 2009 9:18 AM for which I still do not have a verified responses. When I do receive the information necessary for crafting responses, I will post it here.

The thread is now open for the weekend.

Regards,

Griff
Jim Griffith
_____________
eBay Inc

---

Posted by hawgryders on May 1, 2009 5:31 PM

My Messages


Your response is straight-forward and clearly spells out the limitations of the eBay message system as it is now configured. And herein lies the problem ...

When I get a question pertaining to an item I am selling there are occasions where an attachment, a link, or other documentations needs to be shared with a potential trading partner.

And as you are well aware ... that can't be done now. So the question now is

[Why does eBay feel it is necessary to hide the e-mail addresses of the potential trading partners even after they have made first contact?]

We don’t. We leave it up to the individuals (buyer and seller) to decide for themselves if they want the other party to see their email address. When contacting or responding, a member can select an option to hide their email address from the other party. If they don’t select the option, the sender’s email address appears in the header of the recipient’s message.

And before you tell me they can click to un-hide the address let me remind you most users assume the default settings are the only settings and don't know how, or where, to look without guidance (you know this is true because eBay depended on this when they instituted best match)

We had to make a choice as to what the default would be. We settled on having to actively uncheck the box (in the interest of privacy). Data shows that members have no trouble finding the check box and un-checking it if they wish. They do so tens of thousands of times a day.

My Messages is scheduled for an upgrade very soon. Without going into detail, the upgrade will allow for better email tracking and management, a more robust interface (with more editing and formatting options). And eventually, all eBay messaging, including surveys and marketing messages, will go directly to My Messages. However, for obvious security reasons, there will not be an option for attachments.

---

Posted by brucel64 on May 1, 2009 5:51 PM

Two Suggestions: Repeat Customer Indication & End of Auction/Listing Emails


Hi Griff, first time poster here. I two questions/requests that would help sellers provide a better experience for buyers.

First is a way to identify repeat customers. We all know the regulars but it would be nice to be able to recognize those that are infrequent, yet still repeat customers and address them accordingly in communication. It appears that most of the pieces are already in place to implement something like this.

That’s a very good suggestion; one that has been made before. I don’t know if it’s on the immediate roadmap but I know it is a planned enhancement for a future upgrade of My eBay.

Second, an option to turn off eBay's end of auction email. It appears to be an invoice and for those of us who rely on multiple purchases it's just another obstacle. I have seller instructions but they're burried a tthe bottom. I've had to refund a customer who paid based on those emails and overpaid for shipping. Additionally, I find the language in them less than customer friendly. Things like "Please pay now!" and "You committed to buy the following item" seem a bit harsh to me and at very least I'd rather use my own message.

Another good suggestion (and a popular one at that). I do advocate for making this a seller option completely. I cannot promise this will happen but I can say that the default text is up for review (and I agree: it could be worded better).

I'd appreciate if you could advocate for either or both of these. I look forward to your response.

---

Posted by catbooks1940s on May 1, 2009 7:05 PM

Zoom Photos


hello griff,

i have a question now. at the end of the syi form the other night i saw a link about changes coming in june. one of them said:

New item page rolling out to more buyers. New photo zoom coming later this summer. Get your listings ready now.

as is usually the case, there was no information. on exactly what photo zoom is (although i can guess), if this is going to be a pay-for option or a requirement, and if a requirement, what are we supposed to do to get our listings ready now it. so these are my questions: is this going to be a pay-for option, or required. and if required, exactly what are we supposed to do?

on a thread i posted about it someone found a quote about increasing photo sizes to 1000 pixels or larger. that's a HUGE file. most sellers do not use photos that large. if this is going to be a requirement there's no way i'm going to retake all of my photos, which is what i'd have to do.

Zoom will not be a requirement (but it will be pretty compelling). Zoom will be bundled with the Picture Pack feature, which is an existing optional feature costs either .75 or $1 depending on the number of photos. In some instances, Picture Pack might be free of charge depending on other services the seller uses.)

Zoom will be offered on any listings that have Picture Pack (known only as Supersize on international eBay sites). Also, Zoom will use the existing Picture Pack image requirement for large photos – 1000 pixels on the longest side. There will be no other special requirement. Most digital cameras today can easily take an image that is 1000 pixels on one dimension (height or width).

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on May 1, 2009 7:41 PM

Third Party Checkout Announcements and Plans


I would strongly recommend that all sellers look first to eBay for accurate information and details regarding this and any eBay program, feature, policy or change.

No offense, Griff, but eBay's communication skills and transparency are laughable. Always have been, always will be. I will never trust EBay as a company to tell me the truth without burying that truth in qualifiers and conditional language.

Case in point: the recent 3rd party checkout debacle. I read Mr. Lathi's AB post. I also know that eBay ANNOUNCED in January of 2008 that 3rd party checkout would be phased out. Go back and check the archives. It's there. So perhaps eBay should make sure that their information is accurate before claiming ownership on accuracy, yes?

Yes. I’ll clear this up now.

Here is the statement from the Safe Payments FAQ first published in August of 2008 and updated in January of 2009.

Is eBay planning to eliminate third-party checkout?
Yes. We realize that checkout services offered by eBay Certified Solution Providers are valuable services to our sellers. But they also require buyers to leave eBay.com to complete payments for eBay items. We are working closely with these providers to integrate the experience they provide buyers into eBay checkout in 2009, in a way that is not disruptive for eBay sellers. Ultimately, it's eBay's goal to have buyers always pay for their purchases within the secure confines of eBay.

We purposely did not commit to a date except to state that we would be working with Certified Solutions Providers during 2009.

Then in April, it was reported on several blogs that eBay was eliminating third-party checkout in June of 2009. This caused a lot of concern among sellers (understandably) The trouble was, the statement was untrue. Thus the AB post on April 15th to provide this clarification and set the record straight.

As for the long term future of third-party checkout, the original FAQ statement still holds. Through out 2009 and beyond, we will work closely with Certified Solution Providers to integrate their products into eBay’s checkout flow in a way that is not disruptive to sellers (my emphasis) so that we can provide a consistent checkout experience for all transactions on eBay.


If eBay is the most accurate place for information, why has nothing been posted regarding the recent changes to Military Policy, yet members are receiving warning emails? And if there is a policy change, why were sellers not given a 60 day lead time as promised?

First, this was not a policy change. It was an email alert about compliance to the existing policy. Policy changes that affect a category of items – that is, do not affect potentially all sellers - are not limited to the seller release schedule, and for good reason. This particular email that went out to sellers of Military item (about 20,000 sellers) was to alert them of the importance of compliance to the existing policy as it relates to US laws. We were contacted by and worked with several government agencies regarding the sale of certain types of military items and agreed to better educate and inform our sellers in these categories about the importance of compliance with US law (which is aligned with eBay policy). Thus the new policy page for this particular category of items.

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on May 1, 2009 7:48 PM

Resolutions


How is reinforcing unrealistic delivery expectations at all helpful to sellers--big or small??

As I stated above in another response, the current Resolutions process is in a testing (learning) phase and reps are given leeway to exercise judgment in deciding the particulars of each case. If during this phase of the program, it is determined that the estimate guideline (seller handling time + carrier estimate + 3 days buffer) is not sufficient, we will alter it.

That's not an answer to the question asked, Griff.

Let me rephrase: will eBay reconsider the way delivery guidelines are currently messaged to buyers? Because taking the carrier estimates at face value is harming both the buyer and seller experience.

This is a test period for all Resolutions processes, including the messaging used to inform buyers of delivery times. The messaging will, if warranted, be adjusted on the basis of what we learn during this testing period.

---

Posted by calc_man on May 1, 2009 8:16 PM

TurboLister Buyer Requirements List Update


When are TurboLister's Buyer Requirements going to be updated to match eBay's current Buyer Requirements? It is one of the few protections sellers have from deadbeat bidders.

This is TurboLister:

This is eBay:

When using TL their less comprehensive Buyer Requirements override those set in my eBay Site Preferences. So all my listings have to be revised manually after they are uploaded.

Revising the requirements by using Site Preferences after all the listing are live does not work.

Also, in the last couple of weeks all my listings uploaded using TL have had the Unpaid Item Strike requirement completely removed from them after they went live. Again, I have to revise every listing manually because using Buyer Requirements in eBay's Site Preferences does not update any live listing.

You’ll be happy to learn that both issues will be fixed as a part of the June Seller Release.

---

Posted by hawgryders on May 1, 2009 8:21 PM

eBay Employee’s Terms of Service


I recently ran a seller search for active sellers that are eBay employees and was amazed at some of the terms & conditions included in their listings ...

[How can we be expected to figure out what is allowed when your own fellow employees can't seem to follow the rules as you have stated them to us ?]

If you find any listing, including that of an eBay employee, whose terms of service violate eBay policy, report them using the Report This Listing link.

NOTE: although you did not provide specifics, there is a difference between my stating tips for good TOS and pointing out what is and isn’t allowed in a TOS (aka, “the rules.”). For example, any seller can state “No Returns.” Doing so is not a violation of “the rules.”

---

Posted by buriedbybooks on May 2, 2009 10:29 AM

SNAD Appeals Questions


Are ALL sellers who win SNAD claims on appeal given their money back 100% of the time?
I triple checked with PayPal and eBay: Yes, all sellers who win a SNAD claim on appeal are reimbursed, 100% of the time.

If not, why not. All (100%) sellers who win a SNAD claim on appeal are reimbursed, 100% of the time.

And does eBay recover the funds from the buyer.

It would depend on the particular case. We do monitor for potential buyer fraud and we do not preclude pursuing a buyer for recoupment. No matter. The funds for won appeals comes from PayPal’s coffers.

What is the mechanism for getting those funds back to the seller who was potentially defrauded?

When a seller wins a SNAD appeal, the funds are deposited in the seller’s PayPal account.

---

Posted by all*about*horses on May 2, 2009 10:55 AM

Resolutions Delivery Time for Standard Flat Rate Shipping


Regarding the Ebay Resolution Process:

Griff, you state:

Starting from the time and date of purchase, the time allowed for delivery = a seller’s stated handling time + a reasonable estimate of time to deliver based on the information provided by the carrier for the selected class of service + a 3 day buffer.

How will that estimate of time to deliver be arrived at if the seller chooses "Standard Flat Rate Shipping" or "Other" on the shipping calculator and then completes the final shipping process without entering any information into their My Ebay? Where will this "information provided by the carrier" be obtained from in those cases ... such as the seller shipping by FedEx or some other class of mail not readily shown on the Ebay calculator?

The current criteria used during this test phase of Resolutions for when a buyer can file a dispute claim for listings where the seller used Standard Flat Rate shipping is 7 business days + the seller’s handling time.

Keep in mind that this is when the buyer can file the claim, not when it is closed. And note that unlike the current process with PayPal, an actual rep will be facilitating the dispute claim and can, at their discretion and based on the seller’s past history, delay filing for longer than the guideline.

If it is determined during this test phase that the 7 business days for Standard Flat Rate is insufficient time, we will extend it. That’s why this is a test phase: to learn what works best and to change what doesn’t work.

---

Posted by di25535 on May 2, 2009 11:41 AM

Resolution Question: When Does the Clock Start?


Griff, I too would like clarification - you used the phrase "starting from the time and date of purchase".

I don't think the shipping clock should start on a purchase until it is paid for. If a buyer waits a week, then pays by e-check - and yes, I have had that happen - a priority mail shipment would be "late" before it's even sent.

I was not precise enough: The clock starts at the time of payment, not necessarily when the item is purchased.

---

Posted by grandmabaseball on May 2, 2009 11:48 AM

30 Day Limit for Combining Payment


The way things are right now, if someone waits for 30 days before asking for a combined invoice, I can't send them one because the items that have hit 30 days can only be invoiced separately, if at all. Why can't ebay make it so that if you have not sent an invoice yet, all unpaid items can be combined? I do try and avoid the problem by sending all combined invoices before the 30 day limit, but there have been times that even then, the older ones will not appear on the invoice.

The limit is in place for a good reason. The window for resolving transaction disputes (Item Not Received, Significantly Not As Described, Unpaid Item, etc) currently closes 45 days after the item closes. At 30 days, that reduces the first purchased items to only 15 days to receive the item with enough time to file a dispute claim if necessary. Extending the limit past 30 days would not provide an adequate enough time for a seller or buyer to obtain redress when necessary.

---

Posted by adrian44 on May 2, 2009 1:11 PM

Why “Buyer Feedback?”


Hello Griff,

I know this has probably been asked and answered a dozen times, but I have been ill and haven't got to read all of your past answers.

What is the purpose of buyer feedback? A buyer will have 100% positive FB but maybe they have been a non payer or any one of many things that would have gotten them a neg if it was allowed. Why would anyone even look at a buyers FB, you already know what you will see? So my question is "What is the purpose of buyer FB?"

I can name two: 1. Buyers are just as proud of their transaction history on eBay as sellers are proud of theirs. 2. Sellers, who are also buyers, benefit from the positives left by sellers on their feedback since all positives from both buying and selling count against a member’s positive percentage. Buying feedback can help mitigate the percentage effect of any left negatives.

---

Posted by mygift2u on May 2, 2009 6:38 PM

Disappearing Logo in Outgoing SMP Template Emails…Solved!


Posted by mygift2u on Apr 19, 2009 8:27 PM

Unusual eMail and Selling Manager Issue

Hi Griff

Another follow up to my problem which has still not been fixed: (I will recap that issue plus ask a new
-----

About 1 month ago, the emails I send through Selling Manager are wiping out MY logo and placing the ebay logo on the emails. The emails also say "eBay sent this message to (buyer's name)"

I have tried everything possible to get this problem fixed. But all i get is the usual form emails bla bla we are working on your issue and do not have any idea when it will be fixed and we cannot give you an update when it is fixed...

Am I the only one who cannot get my logo to come through? When I preview my emails before sending them, they DO show my logo but on the copy I get (that goes to my buyer), my logo is not there.... just the eBay logo.

It looks like I am not communicating with my customers.

I don't know if this is related to the problem or not but I would also like to know about the preferences setting "Payment from Buyers". I currently have it set to "use Checkout". That may not be related to my problem but what is the difference between "allowing customers to use Checkout" or "Not allowing them to use Checkout".

From what I have been told, this is not a shared issue (no other reports of it). I will email you later today and work directly with you to determine the cause on our end.

GRIFF

I am still waiting to hear from you on this issue that no one has documented. I can also forward you the email from tech support where they state it IS A KNOWN issue.

This one required a lot of digging deep into the code base to duplicate and uncover the source. Persistence paid off. One of our intrepid engineers found a little piece of code that was wiping the Stores logo from some (not all) seller outgoing email templates created in Selling Manager. (I followed up with you over the last week in emails). The last word was today: the fix is set to roll either today or over the weekend.

---

Posted by celtictwo on May 3, 2009 4:04 AM

Strange, Unduplicated Search Result


Griff;
Regarding my previous post on the search for The Tudors DVD set.

Yes, as stated in my previous post, both of us double-checked the keywords and other search criteria (i.e.- DVD,s) including the spelling. Otherwise we shouldn't have gotten the suggested other items. We even used the back button (history) to get to the original search to verify the results.

We have had some strange things happen with the eBay search, but this was the strangest. We also were not able to duplicate the error when we tried after our purchase. To be fair, this was the only instance we have found of this particular error, and we search a lot.

If it happens again, document it with a screen shot and send it directly to me.

---

Posted by unknown-shopper on May 3, 2009 4:12 AM

Resolutions Questions


Finally, all details of the program, currently under testing and not finalized, will be completely disclosed upon launch in mid year. I would strongly recommend that all sellers look first to eBay for accurate information and details regarding this and any eBay program, feature, policy or change.

If the details are not finalized and under testing but will be disclosed mid year, how will sellers receive 60 day notice if things change because of testing?

Are sellers told their transaction is in 'test mode'? Are sellers communicated with at all during the process?

You cannot disclose because of privacy...blah blah blah Unfortunately, right now based on published information sellers are not communicated with at all, buyers are refunded and nobody will communicate where the refund money came from. Bottom line with ebay paying out anything, all sellers pay for it ultimately but is the money taken away from the seller or where - exactly - does that money come from?

In some cases, the money will be recouped from the seller, for example, where the seller was clearly at fault. This could be where a seller did not obtain tracking or delivery confirmation for example. This is no different than the current process. In cases where no fault is determined, the money will come from eBay’s coffers. In making these decisions, a seller’s previous history with eBay will be taken fully into account and each case will be decided on a case by case basis.

---

Posted by celtictwo on May 3, 2009 4:12 AM

Annoying New Category Drop Down Feature


Griff;
A few weeks ago eBay apparently changed the Categories tab above from a "mouse click" action to a "mouse-over" action. I find this very annoying. Whenever I move the mouse cursor to the search input field or up to the browser back button, the whole page fills up with the categories list and can't be de-activated until you mouse-over again. It is extremely annoying if I need to refine my search. For instance if I am searching a book title and the results are too many, I will refine the search by choosing Hardcovers from the left column. But, I can't see the search refinement column because it has a very large Category drop-down covering it up. As I may have mentioned, this is very annoying!

I agree. Perhaps this could be refined to fill out over a less important space. I have forward this to our site design team for their attention.

---

Posted by bikerhal on May 3, 2009 6:52 AM

eBay Linking Policy Questions

"You may also link to a page in which information relating to your eBay or Half.com items is grouped in a picture gallery or similar format. As with the links to photos of your item, the page may contain discrete links to other pages that offer non-eBay items but may not describe or link directly to specific items on other sites."

Parsing
1. the page may contain discrete links to other pages that offer non-eBay items
2. but may not describe or link directly to specific items on other sites.

1. says a page can have links to another page that offers non-eBay items
2. says the page cannot link directly to specific items on other sites.

What exactly is the difference?

I have a link to a photo. On the page where the photo is I have a link that says Other Books. If someone clicks that link, it goes to a page that offers books for sale off eBay. Is that allowed?

The answer hinges on one defines the word “discreet.” If we assume that the link to the photo leads to a photo gallery-type page and based on my understanding of the definition of the word “discreet,” I would say the phrase “other books” seems discreet to me and therefore, your link would be in compliance. (A link has to have some sort of text in order to be viable.)

---

Posted by zboo2 on May 3, 2009 9:10 AM

Best Match Search Speed


Alrighty Griff, let do this one.

ebay.com is still in test? mode til June. EBM is not. There is long threads in EBM and Search about how slow and cumbersome searching has become. On a EBM thread I asked and received this reply from a pink:
> checkers, somewhere in this or the pinned thread you asked if we were having the same slowness on ebay.com as EBM. Well yesterday I went to .com and ran a search or two under the new format and yes it seemed identical to new EBM. However, I opted out of it and did the same search and guess what. Same, fast speed as the old EBM.
> Now what was it that is wrong with my computer, I forgot?

Thanks for responding zboo. Nothing wrong with your computer.
-checkers

I think his answer "nothing wrong with your computer" is correct.
We know EBM and .com will not be reversed, the opt out button will be gone from both.
The only answers from pinks on both threads is we're working on it, send us your specific search, etc.

Is ebay's answer to this nightmare to fix on a search by search, item by item basis?

Will anything that is being "worked" on bring search speed to at least what is was, it is advertised as faster?

I certainly hope so. The plan is not to slow down search. The reason for the pinks on that board is to take input from varied sellers in different locations and use the data to maximize speed, (else why would they be monitoring that thread?)

---

Posted by lindaspostcardsandmore on May 3, 2009 9:11 AM

Certified Seller Program Question


Griff:

Regarding the new "Certified Seller" or "Approved seller" or whatever it will be called, you said:


I am 100% for a program of this nature. Why? Because it will recognize first-and-foremost, seller quality, instead of quantity (customer satisfaction v.s. sales volume). In fact, sales volume in dollars will not be a factor for membership. This new program will will be attainable by any seller, small or large, regardless of category, with a high quality of customer service, and it will provide solid, tangible benefits to those sellers (said benefits will be announced upon launch of the final program in the future).

It will definitely not be called “approved seller,” (what an odious term!)


I also took the survey and it continued to stress sales of $1000 a month as a qualifying factor. I pointed out that that is more rigid than currently required since you can be a power seller with only 100 sales a month.

This survey didn’t announce the final features of the program. It asked for your opinion on or your rating for possible features of a program.

They did ask if I would like it better if there were "no" monthly qualifying sales figures. I replied yes.

Like I said…

So, are you saying the final program will definitely NOT require the $1000 a month is sales?

That is correct. One of the requirements for inclusion in the program will be based on a minimum number of transactions (roughly 10 per month), not a minimum dollar amount.

If not, I think it is a great program and the little certified logo looked great.

Glad you like it!

---

Posted by dans_auctions on May 3, 2009 9:20 AM

DSRs


I have a question for you Griff,

How does eBay differentiate Quickly vs. Very Quickly on DSR? Is this related to buyers at all?

We don’t differentiate it. Buyers do. We don’t leave ratings and we don’t advise buyers on which ratings to leave.

I am once again facing suspension for being below 4.3 on shipping time. I always list the shipping method and most items are shipped within 1 business day. Hence, they are SHIPPED very quickly. Arrival time is something else altogether.


This is a very deceptive practice, as most buyers probably think "Quickly" is quite good. However, with "Quickly" being a 4/5, it doesn't take too long for a seller to be beneath the 4.3 average.

Have you run a report in Seller Dashboard to determine if this is the case (more buyers leaving fours as opposed to fives?)

This was never a problem before when I would have huge sales/listings per month, but as business wanes on this site, I find myself using the BIN and selling about 10-20 items per month.

If something isn't done about this, one of two things will happen:
1) I will simply quit selling on eBay. (Not really even sure if eBay cares about this anymore)
2) I will have to explain in writing to all buyers about this deception and that if they wish to see more future listings from me, I simply must have "5" across the board or else face suspension of some sort.

I am also a buyer on eBay, as most sellers are, and have received packages from sellers that contain just that (#2). Some even have quality printed/laminated cards explaining the decption and why they need to have "5" on their DSR's.

Thanks for your time,

This is a much-discussed topic on this and many other forums. In the future, we may change this DSR to state “time to ship” to make it clearer. We may also remove the DSR entirely and rely on electronic confirmation of shipping as a record of when an item is shipped. In the meantime, sellers can mitigate buyer perspective on this DSR by choosing the best class of service for the item (weighing of course, the cost as well). Then the seller should 1. ship quickly and let the buyer know! (send an email confirmation with tracking or the Delivery Confirmation number if possible to let the buyer know that the item has shipped) and 2. Set expectations of estimated delivery time both in the item description and in all subsequent correspondence.

I notice that you use Media Mail for a lot of your items. Have you considered using other services like First Class or Parcel Post? Yes, the costs can be higher (though I suspect not always with First Class for single comic books) but the delivery times are shorter and shorter delivery times will result in a higher DSR for Shipping Time and as you are a PowerSeller, qualify you for final value fee discounts.

As for the inserts that many sellers are using to inform their buyers about the importance of DSRs, etc… initially I was 100% for them. If they work, then mazeltov! I am still in favor but with a caveat: any seller providing information to a buyer about the importance of ratings would be well-served by structuring this information in a way that focuses on the buyer, not the seller. Buyers are, for the most part, uninterested in the needs of a seller and some might become resentful if the gist of the parcel communication is how important it is for the buyer to help the seller. With this in mind, a good strategy would be to point out how important it is for you, the seller, that the buyer has had a good experience (and it should be important to you, else that buyer might not come back and shop for more of your wares). Let the buyer know that you strive to provide 5-star service with same or next day shipping. Provide a short handwritten note on the invoice, thanking them for their business. Express a hope that they will check out your eBay Store soon for more great stuff, etc. This approach is much more effective than begging for ratings or whining to a buyer about how you could loose your status if they don’t rate you all fives. I care of course. I care about all sellers. But the reality with most buyers is, they don’t and they could resent you for begging or alarming them with the very same low ratings you are trying to avoid.

---

Posted by tr8rjohn on May 3, 2009 9:57 AM

Best Match Search Speed


Hi Griff, me again

I'm still frustrated with the Motors Search which continues to be flaky at best, and useless at worst - as is well documented on these boards and especially the EBM board. I won't drag all that up again. My question is a technical question as it applies to Customer Service response to BM/Search.

(preamble): Given that we ('we' being the common ebay user) seem to be the only ones who have problems finding parts, and the eBay staff seems to have no problem at all, or they are unable to duplicate the issues on their computers . . .
(question): Are the computers at eBay (for the personnel's use) are already optimized, in some way, for eBay performance?

I assure you, no, they are not (I wish they were!)

(question): Re Slow searches and returns: does eBay personnel have some sort of an awesome broadband connection available that masks the page load problems such as those of us with inferior (DSL in my case) connections experience?

At most eBay locations, internet access is reached via a local network then to the outside world by a T1 line. Some smaller offices have DSL access

(post-amble): If this is true, it could go a long way to explain the glaring disconnect between user-search and CS/employee-search. These people who are trying to get SOMEBODY to listen are running into a brick wall. They are not newbies, they know how to do a search, they know what they want and they are not finding it even though it is most likely there for the taking. Somethin' aint right.

Except if the speed issue is due to the speed of a user’s connection, then it isn’t an eBay issue. (However, it appears some of the posters who have complained also have DSL or faster connections). I have a low rated DSL connection through ATT at home and I have not had any speed issues with the new Best Match search. I have had speed issues occasionally with loading a results page in the old format though.

---

Posted by certifiedba on May 3, 2009 10:45 AM

Dispute and Feedback Questions


Because I offer a no questions Money Back Guarantee and Always provide my buyers with excellent customer service I've found that I am sometimes taken advantage of and treated unfairly by some purchasers. For instance, I recently sold an item to a buyer and shipped the very same day (within 10 minutes of payment) to his paypal confirmed address. The buyer then sent me an email a day later instructing me to send it elsewhere because he had moved. I was forced to cancel the package in mid shipment and have it returned to me. My total shipping costs with insurance were over $30. After I reshipped to his non confirmed address (which I know is a dangerous thing to do) and paid another $30 somehow the package was "lost." I was able to speak t the buyer over the phone and told him I was very very sorry that this had happened and I immediately sent him a full refund even though I was already at a loss of $60 in shipping and a $125 product.

I then filed a claim with the United States Postal Service for my insurance money. About two weeks later I received a proof of delivery from the post office and a threatening letter that mail insurance fraud was a felony. I contacted the buyer by telephone and he told me it had slipped his mind to let me know that he had received the package. I asked him if he would please pay me for the original amount of the transaction that I had previously refunded him and he said he would mail me a check. It has been weeks and I get no answer from the buyer when I try to contact him and still no check.

My question is not directly in regards to recouping my money. My question is: How can I as an honest seller defend myself against a fraudulent or dishonest buyer without being scared that I might get a negative feedback out of spite from that buyer?

There is always a chance that you might receive a negative feedback from a buyer, regardless if they are fraudulent or dishonest in intent and action. In this particular case, I would have proceeded as you did up to the point where you say the parcel was “lost.” Did the buyer inform you that the parcel was lost? How much time had elapsed?

Since the parcel had Delivery Confirmation, I would have responded to the buyer that the best course of action under the circumstances, - unspoken of course, but those circumstances would be the failure of the first attempt to a buyer-supplied bad address – was to follow the Delivery Confirmation status online. I would have also shared the DC number with him.

(By the way, for shipments within the USA, ALL PayPal addresses are valid, even if unconfirmed, that is, if you ship to an unconfirmed address supplied by PayPal, you are still covered by Seller Protection.)

Then I would have waited and tracked the delivery through the DC number. The buyer of course, could file a dispute during this time, but as long as you had DC for the item (and required a signature if the item was valued over $250) then you would still be protected by PayPal.

Then, when the item showed as delivered, you could put the transaction behind you. Yes, the buyer could still leave you a negative feedback. There is no 100% failsafe strategy for avoiding this risk. But you can mitigate its possibility by the way you handle the situation from start to finish. And you wouldn’t be out both the money and the item.

Furthermore, if a buyer blackmails me because I have a flawless feedback rating, How can I leave him negative feedback?

You can’t. But if a buyer does use the threat of a negative feedback in an attempt to extort (blackmail?) services or goods beyond what was offered in the listing, you should immediately report the buyer to eBay using the Resolving Problems page.

I think other sellers should be aware of buyers who extort money and partial refunds from honest sellers on ebay.

I can go one step better. I (and eBay) believe that buyers who attempt to extort a seller should be removed from eBay. That eliminates the need to “report” them to other sellers using feedback (which is not an effective method btw. Most auction buyers bid in the last minutes when it is too late to cancel a buyer’s bids and for Fixed Price is would be impossible to rely on feedback).

In this case for instance, if I do get my money, over 2 months after the transaction, Why can't I leave him a negative feedback for paying me two months after the auction end date? Surely he would leave me a negative feedback If I had sent him the item 2 months after he paid.

Announced in January of 2008, as of May of 2008, sellers can not leave negative feedback for buyers.

---

Posted by jay_cor on May 3, 2009 1:58 PM

Terms Of Service


Griff, I've read time and time again that as long as sellers accept PayPal, eBay WILL NOT uphold their TOS if they contain no return policies, such as "ITEM AS IS - ALL SALES FINAL" or require mandatory re-stocking fees on returns.

Maybe you could please explain to me why these two sellers of high risk, high value purses (which are also eBay employees) are allowed to do exactly that.

Link

Link

There are many other such auctions, but these are just a couple of examples. These listings by eBay employees either flat out refuse returns for any reason (stating ALL SALES FINAL), or include mandatory restocking fees if a return is accepted.

Although not recommended, sellers are not prohibited from stating these types of return policies. That includes eBay employees selling on the site. And let me clarify how these types of return policies work when it comes to filed disputes.

If a seller describes their item in detail with accompanying high quality photos that show the item from all sides, and if the descriptions and photos call out all possible condition issues, and if that seller has a no returns policy, then if a buyer files a SNAD for a reason that is clearly refuted by the description and the photos, the buyer’s claim will be ultimately turned down. (In eBay Resolutions, this process will be more defined).

Of those that will accept returns, they fall under four conditions. First, the purse must be proven to be fake. In which case, the buyer must take it upon him/herself to have the purse seen by an authenticator, and he/she must deem it as not being authentic.

Second, the buyer must inform the seller within 48 hours of receiving the purse that he/she will be returning it and the purse must be returned back to the seller within 7 days. The timeline is strictly enforced and no claims will be honored after this time period (I would assume this means you are out of luck if the authenticator gets back to you on day 8 saying the purse is a fake).

Third, upon return of the purse, the seller's "security tag" must be in its original condition and show no signs of tampering. Otherwise, no refund will be granted.

Fourth, shipping costs are non-refundable, even if the seller makes an error in the description.

Again, PayPal is the only payment method accepted in these listings. Why are eBay employees seemingly allowed to do this, but "regular" sellers are endlessly chastised when we try to do the same. To say its hypocritical is an understatement.

“Chastised?” Excluding me (and I admit that I do advise sellers against unrealistic or customer-unfriendly TOS but that is because I believe a TOS should be customer-friendly and not written to the lowest common denominator buyer), who from eBay is chastising you for these TOS? Nothing prohibits a seller from stating any of the above in their TOS. Yes, in a dispute, the TOS may not be supported by PayPal but that doesn’t mean you cannot use them (and they could prove valuable in an appeal).

Even if you try to tell us that they can put that in their auctions but still must go through the same process of us "regular" people in the event of a SNAD, isn't that worse?

No, it’s fair. eBay employees do not receive some sort of special dispensation from the rules. Again, there is no rule that prohibits any seller from stating these particular TOS points in their listing.

Shouldn't eBay's own employees know that such TOS do not hold up to PayPal's TOS? By allowing eBay employees to include such TOS on their own auctions, it makes those terms look like the rule rather than the exception, and it is completely unfair to us other sellers.

One thing this does prove, though, is that the "bait and switch" routine of high priced eBay items is alive and well. You can tell us until you are blue in the face that this doesn't happen or only happens very rarely, but here's proof in the form of actual eBay employee auctions that they do infact happen.

.That's the sole reason that one employee requires that an untampered "security tag" be returned along with the purse in the event of a return. I'm glad she has the luxury of doing so, but us "regular" people get told "too bad" if we were to refuse a refund because our security tag had been tampered with.

The fear of a buyer switching out an item is much more common than the actual occurrence of switch outs. But I have never, ever stated that it doesn’t happen. Please do not misquote me on this topic. Thank you. No one is preventing a seller from providing protection against the possibility, including me! I have often recommended the use of tamper proof labels for high ticket items as they can discourage a dishonest buyer from targeting that item. As for the “luxury” of doing so, you have that same luxury as the eBay employee seller. Yes, there is no guarantee that yours or the employee’s TOS will cover them in a SNAD dispute (today at least), but the employee doesn’t get special treatment and you are entitled to create your TOS as you believe necessary. (and within the actual, not imagined or assumed, eBay rules which don’t prohibit anything posted above.)

.

---

Posted by ted_200 on May 3, 2009 3:20 PM

End of Listing / Auction Notices


With regard to the "automatic invoices", Griff said:

eBay doesn't send out invoices automatically for sellers. However, eBay End of Auction/Listing notices contain a Pay Now link or button. This has been the default ever since the eBay and PayPal End of Listing notices were combined last year. You do have options (Depending on what selling product you are using, you can edit the outgoing message, make it manual or shut it off completely)

If you are using the standard My eBay Selling pages (not subscribed to Selling Manager Pro), you can turn off the End of Auction notices (and by connection, the Pay Now button) by the following steps. Go to:

My eBay > (click the) Account tab > (select) Site Preferences
Click the Show link to the right of "Payment from buyers."
Click the "Edit" link
Uncheck the box for Use Checkout.
Scroll down and click "Submit."

This is incorrect. I did this, and the invoices still went out this week. All this does is remove the "Pay Now" button from the ended Item Listing Page. It has nothing to do with the End Of Auction Notice (invoice), which is now handled under "Marketing Tools", not "Preferences". There, in "Marketing Tools", there are options to customize it, but NOT to turn it off.

I VERY MUCH wish to have these "invoices" NOT be sent to my buyers. There is still no way to turn them off. We still need to be able to do that.

This has been a challenging topic for me to research but as stated above, I agree that sellers should be able to control all outgoing email to their buyers and I am advocating for that.

Regarding Replica coins and requiring they be listed in the "Reproductions" categories, Griff said:

I will forward this to the policy team in charge for their consideration.

There is overwhelming support for this in the coin community. You may receive additional emails in support of it, and I'd appreciate it if you could forward those on to the policy team as well. It would greatly improve the Buying Experience in the regular coin categories, and would benefit sellers of authentic coins as well. Thanks for your efforts on behalf of this proposal.
Yes, I did receive a lot of email this week on the topic which I have forwarded to the appropriate team for their consideration.

---

Posted by carcie on May 3, 2009 3:52 PM

The May Thread


Hi Griff, it's carcie from the Netherlands.
When will the May thread appear.
It is already a very recognizable Help board and it will get even better.

This thread should be called May 2009 but there are too many already! I will be consolidating all the past threads into one Master Thread over the weekend. (Maybe a First half of 2009 thread).

---

Posted by kittenkat22 on May 3, 2009 8:07

Resolution Questions

Hi Griff, I have had a lot of trouble getting this or any other question posted. The hours of this thread and the one concerning the new June rules are impossible to get on. I did e mail you directly (not through ebays system and I did put ebay problem in the header) a few months ago concerning another problem and you never answer it- neither did tech support. This is something new I need to ask about.

I need clarification on some of the new rules that will take place soon: I have three long winded questions:

Per the new resolution process:

"The seller will have five business days to do one or more of the following:
In cases where the buyer claims the item was not received, provide proof of delivery (using the same methods required by PayPal currently)
In cases where the buyer claims the item was not as described, provide proof that it was (using the same methods required by PayPal currently)
Or, refund the buyer "

" eBay will not contact the seller unless the buyer has received the item and believes it's not as described, or the buyer hasn't received the item after a reasonable amount of time. In cases where shipping time is clearly disclosed in the listing, eBay will encourage the buyer to contact the seller first and not seek resolution until about three days after the specified delivery date. "

QUESTION, what if the seller is away on business or a vacation. They have a store and set the vacation settings to "on." When they return from a vacation and turn off our vacation settings there is no way to proove that they were away on a vacation/business. Do we now have to put our stores on hold and bring in no income because of this new lame rule?

Of course not. If you have put your Store on Vacation Mode, we will take your word for it and in the case of a filed dispute, adjust the times accordingly

I cannot afford NOT to list while I am away. How will ebay handle this as far as being responsible for the time for shipping especially if a customer who buys an item while you are away (and obviously sees the notice)?

Like I said, if a buyer files a dispute for an item purchased while your Store was on vacation, we will take that into consideration and use the time you actually returned and shipped the item. I wouldn’t about this at all in fact. We will definitely not penalize a seller for putting their Store on vacation mode. And thank you for bringing this up. We can make sure this is codified into the process flow for resolutions as an alert to any rep facilitating a case (and btw, I am pretty sure we can easily track when a Store goes into and out of Vacation mode by site logs).

Part of the same question is, what if the seller is away on vacation/business for more than five days when a dispute is filed- are you going to immediately refund for a buyer complaint since the seller is not there to respond and has no idea that one was filed? I have no intention of stating that I am away on vacation in 600 listings when I pay for a store so I can set one simple message.

No, of course not! Like I said, we will take the Store Vacation mode into consideration and not penalize a seller for taking a vacation or going on a business trip.

From your question, I suspect that your business is your livelihood, correct? If this is the case, there are several points to consider. For one, have you considered hiring temporary help for those times that you are away? Someone you could train to pack, label, record and ship parcels? Depending on the scale of your business, this could be an excellent solution. If hiring help is not practical, and since you cannot afford not to have your items available for purchase (I assume you aren’t actually listing while away but if so, congratulations!), do you travel with a laptop or where there is internet access so that you can check your Store email on a regular basis? If so, then a good customer service strategy would be to check your email on a regular basis and respond at least once a day to customers who have purchased an item from you reminding them of the fact that, per your Store header and listing description header, you are away until x date and will ship their item immediately upon return.

My point: so much of what you fear in the announcement of the new Resolutions process you can actually prevent by a customer-focused, vacation or trip strategy. All it takes is keeping the lines of communications open during the time you are away. (If you are planning on vacationing where internet access is spotty or non existent, then hire help, or leave a family member behind, or close the Store entirely. The absolute worst thing you could do is leave the Store open with no means of contact for your customers. That will definitely increase the likelihood of an unhappy buyer.

Per the nule rules:
"What if the item is still in transit when the buyer contacts us?
If the item is still in transit, eBay will consider the delivery estimate in the listing. If tracking indicates that the item should arrive within the delivery estimate plus a reasonable amount of additional time (3 days in most cases), the buyer will be told to wait and the seller will not be held accountable. If tracking indicates that the item will arrive outside this timeframe or is lost in transit, the seller may be held accountable. The same proof of delivery criteria apply to cross-border transactions. "

QUESTION about being held liable for shipping times : Are you kidding? Are we to be held responsible for how the USPS or USP operates THEIR businesses? Are we to be held responsible for acts of nature like floods? You state "if tracking estimates the delivery date": I have NEVER seen an estimated date of arrival for delivery confirmation - which is all ebay/paypal requires- are we now responsible for paying for tracking too?

The FAQ response states, “"if tracking estimates the delivery date." For example, UPS tracking provides an estimate date of delivery. USPS doesn’t. For USPS, we will rely on the estimated delivery time for the class of service as provided by the carrier and use it as a reasonable guideline. And for UPS and FedEx, tracking is part of the service, you don’t pay extra for it. For USPS, Delivery Confirmation is either free or very small fee. This will not change with eBay Resolutions.

Note that the second referenced statement reads, “. If tracking indicates that the item will arrive outside this timeframe or is lost in transit, the seller may be held accountable.” Not “….will be held accountable…” As I have said in response to previous questions about how Resolutions will work, the overwhelming seller complaint about the current process through PayPal is the lack of human facilitation. For eBay Resolutions, a rep will facilitate every claim and will be trained to use good judgment in determining the next steps in a case.


Along the same lines, are we to be held responsible for foregin governments and how long they take to clear packages through customs? This is the dumbest rule ever. This will just make all sellers state they ship items within one WEEK after payment to account for lapses in the USPS and UPS delivery times. Is that what ebay wants, sellers to lie to buyers about when they ship? This will also make sellers stop selling to buyers in other countries. I know that I will revamp my shipping times and probably stop selling international completely- at least on THIS venue.

The FAQ response states, “…The same proof of delivery criteria apply to cross-border transactions…" If using UPS or FedEx, it is easily determined if a parcel has been delayed at customs. If so, the fact will be taken into consideration. For USPS, it is not as easy to determine but not impossible. Again, all three services offer online status of some sort for parcels shipped internationally. By the way, the delivery times for cross border transactions will be based on the estimated times provided by each carrier for each class of service.


QUESTION: In another section of the policy change you mention that you will refund in a case where the item is said to be authentic but is not. When I contacted paypal with problem last year as a customer and had proof that an item was fake, ebay/paypal did nothing and said they did not care because there was no exclusive deal with that company. They told me that I would have to take that seller to court myself or just send it back on my dime for a refund (which I did). Does this mean they now CARE? How do we or a customer proove to you that an item is fake? Are you now judge and jury over what is real and what is fake without an authentication process or does the person (customer) who is being shafted have to foot the bill for proof like I did or do you just take the persons word for it without any proof?

Yes, the issues around brand name products is not going to be cut and dry and each case will be considered on its own merits. To clarify, this particular section of the FAQ refers to counterfeit item (copyright and trademark infringement), not item authenticity.

I don’t have details on how each dispute regarding items claimed to be counterfeit will be facilitated but overall, in some cases, we may require the item be shipped back to the seller in lieu of a refund. We may require the buyer to destroy the item. We may refund the buyer and the seller. We may refund the buyer and not the seller. Each case will be judged on its own merits.

My advice to anyone listing copyright or trademarked brand items (for example, like luxury brand accessories) who does not have a established history of selling said items on eBay, is to first be certain that the item is not counterfeit (have it appraised if necessary) and to state as much in the listing description (provide photos of the receipts from first point of purchase or an appraisal.)

If a seller cannot provide the above, and the seller does not have an established history of selling examples of the same brand names items, then the seller is taking a risk selling them on eBay, plain and simple, and should reconsider doing so. What are possible consequences may the seller face? Possibly none. Or the items could be restricted from listing or could be removed by request of the brand name holder or, in a case where a buyer disputes the item’s authenticity, could result in a ruling against the seller.

If a seller has a good transaction history with eBay, especially with regards to selling brand name items, then their chances or prevailing in a SNAD claim regarding an item’s authenticity are far greater than otherwise.

---

Posted by lurch-deeann on May 3, 2009 11:43 PM

Resolutions Questions


Griff - thank you for giving the info you did. Unfortunately, it was all info I already knew. I suspect I may have not been concise enough in my question, so will restate it:

With the coming new INR claims through eBay:

I have read that if the seller ships within their stated handling time and the item does not arrive within the stated estimate (often a very optimistic estimate, depending on class and time of year) plus 3 days, eBay will cover the refund.

My question, more specifically:

If I state a 3 day handling time from receipt of payment, but something comes up and I ship on day 4 from receipt of payment which is still well within the 7 day timeframe stated by the Seller Protection Policy, will those refunded funds come from me? That is, will this "policy" trump the Seller Protection Policy, or will the Seller Protection Policy be changing once it is ported over to eBay?

If a seller ships on the 4th day instead of the promised 3rd, we will take that into account (of course!) We aren’t out to harm a seller. We are building a process that will rely on the verifiable information we can obtain regarding when an item was shipped and unlike today, there will be a human being (a trained rep) who can make proactive decisions based on that information.


Furthermore, it is good to hear that eBay will definitively NOT be adopting the term "Approved Seller." However, I need to ask you (and you may need to check on this), why did I receive the survey two days - yes, just two days - prior to my posting of this if this has already been decided it will NOT be this term? Is this not a waste of *my* time and eBay's time and money to send this out when, in fact, it has been definitely decided this is a term which won't be used?

I have no idea. I don’t know the answer. I don’t know why the survey contained that question. Maybe it is part of the overall structure of the survey. What I do know with absolute certainty is that the program will not be called “Approved Sellers.” Did I jump the gun on announcing this? Probably. Maybe it even might taint the results of the survey. I don’t know. But if I hadn’t made the assurance here, the volume on this issue would only rise and since I know for a fact that the name is not going to be Approved Sellers (the name is horrible), I decided to disclaim it once and for all. Don’t say I don’t ever tell you things before their time

I'm now left wondering why I spent the 20 minutes doing this survey....

Linda also mentioned this:

"I also took the survey and it continued to stress sales of $1000 a month as a qualifying factor."

This was not on the survey I did. I further have a problem with this level. I disagree overall - why is eBay insisting on having some kind of approval/certified process at all based on ANY kind of sales level? Message is - tell the buyers the seller is not trusted unless they list enough to generate enough income for... well, eBay? Shaking head...

I think this really needs to be scrapped.

And I trust you made your feelings clear in the survey? That is what surveys are for.

---

Posted by celtictwo on May 3, 2009 11:55 PM

PayPal and Email Notification Delays


Griff;

In response to my inquiry about the lag in time between PayPal payments and email notifications.

you asked -" Have your buyers complained that the notifications are delayed on their end? "

The answer is no, I have not received a complaint. However, my communication star took a nose dive until I started comparing eBay sales with PayPal payments several times a day. It is almost back up to my usual 5, but only because I have to take the time to compare the two sites in question and take action.

Also, keep in mind that with such a minor issues (for the buyer!), there is no reason to complain. With the complete lack of transparency, they just rate the DSR's lower than they normally would. And this was what my original unanswered question asked. How, exactly will eBay help the seller when the fault lies completely with eBay/PayPal?

I cannot say. First, we have to know or at least be able to determine if eBay/PayPal is at fault, thus my question back to you. Let’s take this to email. Send me any details to griff@ebay.com using your regular email, Not My Messages!

---

Posted by unknown-shopper on May 4, 2009 1:58 AM

Delivery Confirmation vs Signature Confirmation


Sorry, don't mean to be a board hog but I have more questions. You said:

And yes, Delivery Confirmation is not "tracking" per se. But, since it is all USPS offers at the moment, we use it to verify that an item was shipped and, though DC won't show a parcel's progress, it will provide verification that a package has been delivered. And in a Resolutions scenario where a buyer is claiming an Item was not Received, proof of delivery is crucial.

Except the post office does offer proof of delivery which they call Signature Confirmation - which costs $2.20. See Link

Proof of Delivery
Proof of Delivery is a letter that includes the recipient's name and a copy of their signature. You can request Proof of Delivery to be emailed, faxed, or mailed to you for no additional fee for Express Mail® and Signature Confirmation™ services.

And a related question - if Delivery Confirmation is all USPS 'offers at the moment' for proof of delivery, why is a signature required at $250+? Either something is delivered or it is not. I don't understand.

One verifies delivery to a location. The other verifies delivery to an actual person.

DC is either free on most services through PayPal or a nominal cost. Therefore, we (PayPal) accept DC for lower cost items as a form of protection for sellers. However, DC means the item was delivered to the location, not the actual recipient. A DC item can be delivered to the wrong address by mistake or left on a porch or in front of a door where it could be stolen. For lower value items, we’