# [eBay] - buyers can no longer receive negative feedback from sellers!



## Rodney

I signed into eBay today and I got saw a little notice that says buyers can no longer receive negative feedback from sellers.

That's an interesting move for ebay.

Buyers can leave positive, negative of neutral feedback for sellers, but sellers can only give out positive feedback to buyers.

They said it's to build buyer confidence and lessen the fears of "retaliatory feedback" (which actually makes sense)

What do you think?


Upcoming Changes to Feedback



> *No negative or neutral Feedback for buyers*
> The previous system prevented buyers from leaving honest Feedback since they feared retaliation from the sellers if they left a negative. This made it harder for buyers to distinguish between sellers while making bidding or buying decisions. In addition, when buyers received negative Feedback, they reduced their activity in the marketplace, which in-turn harmed sellers.


----------



## UglyCook

I think that's extremely appropriate! I certainly hesitate after my experience. I received a skirt that stunk to high heaven and I left a neutral comment and received a negative rating in response, even though I paid 2 minutes after the auction ended.


----------



## raise

As a buyer and seller on Ebay, I'm actually in favor of this. While Ebay started out as a place where the power balance needed to be even between the buyer and seller, I think it has evolved into a system that requires the more power be given to the buyer.

Watching auctions come up with .01 prices and $25.00 shipping and knowing that the seller was only responsible for refunding .01 was silly. The addition of reporting excessive shipping and handling fees was a fix but it just underscored that sellers on Ebay were willing to use shipping delays and anonymousness to seriously discourage buyers from getting fair value on the agreed upon prices.

Large sellers were also in the position to be able to bully consumers using feedback. A single negative against 1000 feeback didn't hurt the seller much but a retaliatory negative against a 25 or even 100 feedback buyer made them look unattractive to other sellers.


----------



## debz1959

I think that it should go both ways, or maybe that you must contact the seller to settle a problem before leaving neutral or negative.

There are many instances that the seller is really not to blame for a problem, but they are left neg/neu anyways...


----------



## raise

debz1959 said:


> I think that it should go both ways, or maybe that you must contact the seller to settle a problem before leaving neutral or negative.
> 
> There are many instances that the seller is really not to blame for a problem, but they are left neg/neu anyways...


While this is true, I think there are more sellers taking advantage of buyers on eBay at the moment than the reverse.

Maybe after this rule goes into effect for a few years there will be a backlash but I think the are still a number of appealing reasons to sell on eBay despite favoring the buyers a bit more.


----------



## jclynn67

I have mixed emotions about this ... I agree the seller shouldn't be leaving negative feedback just because the buyer was unhappy. But what about the buyers that deserve negative feedback? I think the seller should have to leave feedback first ... if they get their payment in the time specified they should leave feedback regardless if the buyer leaves it or not! Secondly, some buyers you just can't please! You could deliver it on a silver platter the next day and they would find a reason to complain! I personally have only sold one thing on Ebay and both parties were happy ... I am leary to sell on Ebay!

Just my thoughts!

Jody


----------



## mike2468

I think it is completely wrong on ebays part. They have made some major changes to their site in the last year or two which I don't agree with, but thats just my opinion. 

I could on and on but this is a t-shirt forum, not ebay.

Mike


----------



## TiD

jclynn67 said:


> I have mixed emotions about this ... I agree the seller shouldn't be leaving negative feedback just because the buyer was unhappy. But what about the buyers that deserve negative feedback? I think the seller should have to leave feedback first ... if they get their payment in the time specified they should leave feedback regardless if the buyer leaves it or not! Secondly, some buyers you just can't please! You could deliver it on a silver platter the next day and they would find a reason to complain! I personally have only sold one thing on Ebay and both parties were happy ... I am leary to sell on Ebay!
> 
> Just my thoughts!
> 
> Jody


I disagree. The customer is always correct, sure there's no pleasing some people but that comes when you run a business.

This move by ebay has made shopping there more like real life shopping. You can complain about the shops you buy from to other people but all the shop can do is refuse to serve you.


----------



## AustinJeff

eBay has tried many different approaches to "bad buyers" in the past. It looks like they have now decided that, as far as they are concerned, there is only one relevant bit of information about buyers -- whether or not the bidder pays. If they don't pay, sellers can file a "Non Paying Bidder" form. Final value fees are refunded, and the buyer can not leave feedback for the transaction. After a certain number (three, I think) the account is suspended. 

If I were still running auctions for very high price items, this decision would really bother me, because I used to monitor the auction and cancel bids by buyers with significant feedback problems. But when selling t-shirts, it's just not worth your time to try to catch the very rare bad buyer before the auction closes. It's just part of the cost of doing business.

On the other hand, I think that doing away with the "retaliatory neg" problem will make some people more willing to do buy on eBay.


----------



## Solmu

Personally I think it's yet another example of eBay not caring about their sellers. For the last few years they've been acting as if there's an inexhausitble supply... and so far, looking at their market growth, there has been. There are predictions that won't last though, and certainly if a big player (like Google) ever decided to move in on the online auction field they'd promptly lose a chunk of business.

Speculation is that eBay are moving more in the direction of corporate sellers anyway. Personally I think they're relying on two different income streams: casual eBay users who view the site as a garage sale opportunity to get rid of things they don't want anymore, and don't really care about the money, and VERY large shops who are prepared to come to the table and cut a deal. All the people in the middle who just want to make money are getting slowly squeezed out.

I don't know if it's happening in the US yet, but eBay Australia is also tightening up payment methods: they're going to _require_ that you pay with PayPal. An especially big change when you consider that pretty much _nobody_ in Australia used PayPal locally until relatively recently. I suspect if they try that in the US it will result in an anti-trust lawsuit (no doubt with Google right up front wielding the pitchfork and lit torch).

The eBay feedback system has always been broken, and I agree it needs attention - I just don't think this is the right solution.


----------



## Solmu

TiD said:


> I disagree. The customer is always correct



Like many truisms, I don't think people give enough thought before they claim this. Sometimes the customer is a petulant, recalcitrant so and so who costs the business money in the long run. I'm a strong believer in "firing" bad customers.

I also think eBay incorrectly identifies its customers: its actions show they consider the buyers their customers, but the ones who are actually paying their bills are the sellers. *Both* groups need to be happy if the site is going to be a success, but I they misidentify their corporate role.


----------



## reds

I've seen cases on E-Bay where the buyer leaves negative or neutral feed back because they don't like the amount of shipping and handling charged for an item, even though it was advertised.


----------



## Girlzndollz

Rodney said:


> I signed into eBay today and I got saw a little notice that says buyers can no longer receive negative feedback from sellers.
> 
> That's an interesting move for ebay.


:tipthank:




rodney said:


> Buyers can leave positive, negative of neutral feedback for sellers, but sellers can only give out positive feedback to buyers.
> 
> They said it's to build buyer confidence and lessen the fears of "retaliatory feedback" (which actually makes sense)


 
*No negative or neutral Feedback for buyers*
The previous system prevented buyers from leaving honest Feedback since they feared retaliation from the sellers if they left a negative. This made it harder for buyers to distinguish between sellers while making bidding or buying decisions. *In addition, when buyers received negative Feedback, they reduced their activity in the marketplace, which in-turn harmed sellers.*

I read this as: which in turn *hurts* *EBAY.*



rodney said:


> What do you think?


 
I have long disliked the way feedback was left. As a seller and buyer.

As a buyer: 
When I buy something and pay right after a win with Paypal, I expect that is going to be reflected in my feedback. But instead, I have to wait for my delivery, give the seller their feedback, and if I am lucky, they will remember to send me mine back. Often times I've had to write to a seller to say it's been 3 weeks since I left my feedback, can they leave mine for a instant payment?

As a seller:
If someone paid promptly, I was leaving feedback immediately, as part of the shipping process. (I was overwhelmed with emails from folks thanking me for this. They felt it was the way the system was initially established, and I agreed.) They paid, their part is over, they got their feedback for a job well done. My turn.

Feeback not reciprocated:
The problem was, many buyers were not leaving my feedback. I would spend alot of time requesting reciprocal feedback for past delivered items. Since the buyer had their feedback, the incentive was low. I flipped the policy and started to leave it after I got mine and the percentage of feedback received went up exponentially. 

I didn't like the way the entire process worked, and didn't like seeing that switching to leaving feedback after raised the number of times I got my feedback. I never got a negative feedback, so it wasn't like I got better feedback, I just got feedback more regularly bc folks wanted theirs back. Sad.


One thing I wished often:
Many times, I wished the system would require sellers to leave feedback for payment prior to being able to receive feedback from the buyer saying the package arrived. That would resolve all retalitory feedback from a seller. If an item is paid on time, a seller has no reason to leave anything other than positive feedback. If it wasn't paid on time, they have no reason to ship it.


Using negative feedback of buyers to evaluate them: 
I've had to leave negative feedback for buyers for non-response and non-payment, and was saved a few times from selling to a customer who's feedback showed they were non payers on other auctions. Sometimes taking a look showed that 5 feedbacks comprised 11 positives and 6 negatives. Once in a while, I'd see a high bidders feedback dropping during an auction, lol, that was always interesting, but a good way to spot them, cancel the bid and block them from bidding again, as they are current nonpaying bidders receiving negative feedback while bidding with me. For so many reasons, negatives for buyers will be missed, it is a powerful, valuable evaluation tool for sellers. Ebay is putting seller's interests at the bottom of the priority list with this move.

Ebay says there will be ways to block bidders with UPI's in the past from bidding, but I hope they make that setting easy to find. I used to block bidders with unpaid strikes, as well as bidders with less than 5 feedbacks, but those settings took some time to find. 

I don't think this move will make things easier on sellers, but I do think it will encourage bad behavior out of buyers, as well as help Ebay profit. 

Maybe the rules have changed on feedback, but what about Unpaid Item Credits? When I had an unpaid item, I didn't get full credit. Only credit for the final valuation fee. I still paid listing fees. 

Ebay made out just because the auction ended with a bidder, whether I got paid or not.

Ebay will make out like a bandit if they haven't modified their UPI credit system as well. What will buyers fear if they can't get negatives for not paying? 

A big problem I had was kids signing on to Mom and Dad's, or Aunties account and buying from me, either without permission, or buying the wrong sizes, and Mum's and Auntie's said "Sorry, didn't know she was on here." I'd email them the rules on protecting the password and being responsible for activities on their account. That usually worked to get them to send me the money it cost me for the listing, minus the final valuation fee, plus the Paypal fee for them to send me the $2-3 bucks that kid cost me. Those fees took money directly out of my pocket, so I tried to keep those losses to a minimum. Having the leverage of a negative feedback helped me work with the buyer. 

Feedback was a two way street, that was the beauty of it. Kind of kept everyone minding their manners on both sides. It was leverage to encourage folks to talk it out. This puts everything out of balance.

So that's what I think. Now I doubt I will go back to Ebay as a seller for next Christmas season. Between this and the new fee structures, the encouragement of buy it nows, and favoring of the Power sellers, which I was one, I think the face of Ebay is changing for good. Auctions on eBay: A Dying Breed

Sorry so long!!! I didn't realize it, but I guess I have some issues with Ebay and the new set ups. These are just my experiences with Ebay and thoughts on the past and new systems.

All good things must come to an end, haha, but please just don't do that with tshirtforums, Rodney... we wouldn't be able to take it!!


----------



## Phantom

I believe that sellers should be able to leave feedback, if nothing else, then for Ebay's review. Sellers can be ruthless. My brother bough a turquoise necklace that turned out to be fake (per a jeweler's inspection) even though it was advertised as genuine. When he contacted Ebay, they said that they had contacted the seller and that the item should be returned for a refund. Even though it was sent FedX with signature required, the seller refused the item and told Ebay that it was never sent. My brother just got it back in the mail today with a notice that the adressee was nonresponsive in attempts to deliver it. Ebay has denied a refund as a result. This seller definately needs to be pulled or at least given a hard negative. I myself have purchased half-assed packed items that come in mangled. Is the seller not responsible? Like the above post where the seller does not refund S&H. If the item is not as advertised, who gets stuck? There needs to be some sort of checks and balances in place.


----------



## Girlzndollz

Mike, if I'm hearing you right, that'll still be okay. Buyers can still leave negative for sellers. But now, buyer can't Receive negatives from sellers. Buyers are off the "negative feedback" hook. Ebay's taking the negative away to encourage buyers to shop more, without fear of feedback on their performance as a buyer. I really think this adds another level of wondering if you'll be paid for an auction when not paid right away. 

Maybe this will also increase the number of auctions using the requirement of "immediate payment required". Haha, that's it, that's what I would do to offset this new policy.

Has anyone used this? If someone uses buy-it-now, with immediate payment required, but the buyer doesn't complete the payment, is the auction still left in tact and open? Thank you for your help!!


----------



## AustinJeff

Girlzndollz said:


> Has anyone used this? If someone uses buy-it-now, with immediate payment required, but the buyer doesn't complete the payment, is the auction still left in tact and open? Thank you for your help!!


As you probably suspect, this is a flaw in the system. Last time this came up -- a few months ago -- I found that if the buyer abandoned the transaction after going through the "eBay" part of the transaction, eBay considered the auction complete. So immediate payment "_required"_ is stretching it.

In my case, the customer swore she had completed the payment. I asked her to send a copy from Paypal. I sent instructions for multiple ways to do this. She eventually sent the payment. Then about a month later, she emailed saying that she had paid twice and wanted a refund. We had to go through the whole process again. Annoying, but rare, at least for me.


----------



## Girlzndollz

No rest for the weary, and again, no help for the seller. Thanks for the answer, Jeff. It's better to know in advance. 

PS: Sorry to hear about that.


----------



## AustinJeff

Solmu said:


> There are predictions that won't last though, and certainly if a big player (like Google) ever decided to move in on the online auction field they'd promptly lose a chunk of business.


People were saying the same thing about 10 years ago. At that time, Yahoo, Microsoft and Amazon (certainly the 3 biggest players at the time) got into the auction business. All were huge flops.

There's a tremendous "chicken and egg" problem in establishing a new online auction site. People sell on eBay because there are so many buyers. There are so many buyers because there are so many sellers. 



Solmu said:


> Speculation is that eBay are moving more in the direction of corporate sellers anyway. Personally I think they're relying on two different income streams: casual eBay users who view the site as a garage sale opportunity to get rid of things they don't want anymore, and don't really care about the money, and VERY large shops who are prepared to come to the table and cut a deal. All the people in the middle who just want to make money are getting slowly squeezed out.


Right. And from what I've heard, the minimum volume to really be able to negotiate with eBay is about a million dollars a year.



Solmu said:


> they're going to _require_ that you pay with PayPal.


Yep. It solves lots of problems for them, makes them more money, and opens up a whole lot of interesting possibilities.


----------



## Solmu

Girlzndollz said:


> Many times, I wished the system would require sellers to leave feedback for payment prior to being able to receive feedback from the buyer saying the package arrived. That would resolve all retalitory feedback from a seller. If an item is paid on time, a seller has no reason to leave anything other than positive feedback. If it wasn't paid on time, they have no reason to ship it.


That's how I felt the system should work, although I now realise that's not really all _that_ different to how it now does work (which, obviously, I don't like).



Girlzndollz said:


> What will buyers fear if they can't get negatives for not paying?


Good point; too many strikes and your account will be penalised (or cancelled), but I've no doubt those would drop over time. Which essentially means every buyer has a certain amount of "freebies" toward bad behaviour. They can bid on three items and only pay for one... they just have to make sure they don't do that sort of thing too often.



Girlzndollz said:


> It was leverage to encourage folks to talk it out. This puts everything out of balance.


Exactly. As much as a buyer's part is done when they've paid... sometimes a buyer will be so completely unreasonable, that they deserve a negative feedback despite paying. That's a useful warning to other sellers; it means if the buyer is giving you grief, you know it's a pattern of behaviour and not just a one-off.

Plus if someone creates a new dummy account to commit fraud, some quick negative feedbacks give a clear indication to anyone who looks at their account that they're dodgy - whereas unpaid item strikes, etc. are hidden from public view.


----------



## Solmu

AustinJeff said:


> People were saying the same thing about 10 years ago. At that time, Yahoo, Microsoft and Amazon (certainly the 3 biggest players at the time) got into the auction business. All were huge flops.
> 
> There's a tremendous "chicken and egg" problem in establishing a new online auction site. People sell on eBay because there are so many buyers. There are so many buyers because there are so many sellers.


Yeah, I go back and forth a bit in my opinion on this one. I think there is more reason for a competitor to exist now (that is, more people unhappy with eBay), and the market is far larger so it would be more likely to support other companies. There are other auction sites already, and very few people use them... I think _maybe_ that could be different if a large player moved in... but maybe nothing would change.

I'm confident eBay would lose some business, but it might not be significant. I would at least like to see what would happen (although it might just split the markets enough for me to regret that).



AustinJeff said:


> Right. And from what I've heard, the minimum volume to really be able to negotiate with eBay is about a million dollars a year.


Whatever it is, I'm sure it's above most of our means 



AustinJeff said:


> Solmu said:
> 
> 
> 
> they're going to require that you pay with PayPal
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. It solves lots of problems for them, makes them more money, and opens up a whole lot of interesting possibilities.
Click to expand...

It'll be fantastic for eBay - more money, more control, and less insurance payments. The one advantage for buyers and sellers is that eBay will be more omniscient about the transaction (i.e. was payment truly made or not), but it's not really worth the trade off.

I get the impression direct EFT is less common in the US than it is here, but in Australia the vast majority of eBay transactions are (or at least were) paid with internet banking directly into the sellers account. It's something everyone is comfortable with, and it works well.

But not for eBay, who don't get (yet another) cut. Plenty of buyers won't want to sign up for a PayPal account (though it's not a big deal and most will), but more to the point sellers don't want to pay fees for a service that isn't at all useful, and will actually take them _longer _to receive their money.

In other words PayPal isn't an electronic alternative to cheques and money orders, it's a more expensive, slower electronic alternative to the electronic system already in place.


----------



## studog79

TiD said:


> I disagree. The customer is always correct, sure there's no pleasing some people but that comes when you run a business.


The customer is not always right. The only thing that thatwill do is drive you to bancruptcy. What if the buyyer comes back in 2 years and says I am not happy with the shirt I bought from you. Do you give them their money back?


----------



## Girlzndollz

Solmu said:


> 1. Good point; too many strikes and your account will be penalised (or cancelled), but I've no doubt those would drop over time. Which essentially means every buyer has a certain amount of "freebies" toward bad behaviour. They can bid on three items and only pay for one... they just have to make sure they don't do that sort of thing too often.
> 
> 2. Plus if someone creates a new dummy account to commit fraud, some quick negative feedbacks give a clear indication to anyone who looks at their account that they're dodgy - whereas unpaid item strikes, etc. are hidden from public view.


Lol, heres a kicker. Ebay members can ruin an account, abandon it, and just open a new one and start over. I had a bidder who had about 8 accounts. Only one she maintained with good feedback. 

She won an auction with me and never paid. I turn the auction in for my partial credit, and went to block her from bidding. I looked up her ID in community for some reason, rather than grabbing her id from the auction, and discovered variations on her user name, all in the same town and state. Of the 8'ish accounts, 7 were "wrecked" accounts and only one she maintained. 

I reported it to Ebay, so they could literally verify the personal info as her, since I could only speculate, and they never responded. 

I blocked each and every "heather" variation in her town and state, to protect myself from her coming back with a different account. 

I was miffed that Ebay allows users to just simply ruin an account, and turn around and sign back up with a new ID, just like that.

Think about it. With the new system, this girl wouldn't even have 7 wrecked accounts and 1 good one for me to use to evaluate her and discover her buying habits. I would be clueless and in completely in the dark as to who I am exposed to.

Oh, and real quick, Ebay says for the percent rating, it will only go back one year when calculating the number, not a lifetime anymore. The lifetime will still be viewable.

I know that I do wish there was an alternative to Ebay. Even if the audience wasn't as large as Ebay, that would be okay, just as long as there was enough customer base to sustain decent sales. 

I'd switch and grow with it. Have a good one, everyone...


----------



## Girlzndollz

Great.... guess what. I just went to look up some equipment on Ebay, and found something, but the person has no percentage rating for their feedback. Yet, they have 755 feedbacks. 

I click on the 755, and they haven't sold anything in one year, so now, with the new set up, they have no percentage rating displayed. Looking through their seller feedback, I see things like "wonderful, excellent, terrific".

But now, to evaluate this sellers history and try to see how they delivered on their sales prior to one year's calendar date, I have to read all their feedback and calculate it mentally myself. Gosh. 

My first instance with the "one year limit" on percentage rating isn't going well as a buyer. I wonder how far back I'll have to go before I feel comfortable with this members past performance. At least before, you could get a feel for how someone has conducted themselves in the past, regardless of how long ago it was.


----------



## Rodney

Girlzndollz said:


> Great.... guess what. I just went to look up some equipment on Ebay, and found something, but the person has no percentage rating for their feedback. Yet, they have 755 feedbacks.
> 
> I click on the 755, and they haven't sold anything in one year, so now, with the new set up, they have no percentage rating displayed. Looking through their seller feedback, I see things like "wonderful, excellent, terrific".
> 
> But now, to evaluate this sellers history and try to see how they delivered on their sales prior to one year's calendar date, I have to read all their feedback and calculate it mentally myself. Gosh.
> 
> My first instance with the "one year limit" on percentage rating isn't going well as a buyer. I wonder how far back I'll have to go before I feel comfortable with this members past performance. At least before, you could get a feel for how someone has conducted themselves in the past, regardless of how long ago it was.


That's interesting, because I only sell things on eBay occasionally, but I've been proud of the fact that my feedback percentage is 100% over my time on eBay (over 8 years).

So my past positive feedback will now be under question since I only have limited current feedback.

I wonder if that will encourage people to be more active on ebay?


----------



## greyhorsewoman

One of the problem's with Ebay's feedback system is that is was always VOLUNTARY ... no where was it written it was required or necessary to complete a satisfactory transaction.

Then Ebay started promoting it, giving stars, then power seller status and all kinds of things based on feedback. Sellers started looking critically at everyone's feedback, don't have enough? cancel your bid. Now everybody worries about feedback on every transaction. At times it seems more important then the transaction itself.

The system was/is flawed.  Before I never left feedback until the sale was complete. To me that is when the customer TELLS me he is satisfied. Getting feedback for paying on time? Aren't buyers SUPPOSED to pay on time? If they never leave feedback, I don't worry about it. When I buy something, I leave feedback when I am satisfied, and don't concern myself with whether the seller leaves me any or not. It's sort of cool to see that number go up, but I buy/sell THINGS on ebay, not feedback.


I've only sold a few things on ebay and currently have a store (am debating about closing it due to recent changes). I run it the same way as my two websites. There people buy from me all the time. I don't know if they paid for their last internet purchase, are hard to satisfy, or what. If the credit card is good, I make the shirts in a timely manner and ship. I don't count minutes ... I don't get overly concerned if it goes out Friday afternoon or Monday morning. If the customer is satisfied, I most likely won't hear from him/her until a reorder. If they are unhappy, I will get a phone call or email, figure what the problem is and fix it. My other customers don't know if I send the wrong size to someone and don't get to consider that when deciding whether to order from my site.

What to get an overview as to how good transactions can go wrong? Spend a day reading the 'ANSWER CENTER' on ebay. It's manned by voluntary ebay experts. You'll get a real eye-opener.


----------



## Sheepsalt

> I don't think this move will make things easier on sellers, but I do think it will encourage bad behavior out of buyers, as well as help Ebay profit.


That sums it up pretty well in my view. It's not the same as a shop on the corner. Sellers pay listing fees, and buyers end the listing by agreeing to purchase. If they change their mind you'll have little recourse but to pay another set of listing fees if you want to sell the item.

The reason for feedback is because of the two-way trust required to complete a transaction with someone across the country whom you know nothing about. I know we're all getting comfortable with on-line transactions, but a private buyer purchasing from a private seller online across country or even sea is just not the same thing as two people standing across a counter from each other.

Now there will only be a one-way trust, and that can be easily broken by buyers who know:
1. They are not accountable to whether they complete their commitment or not. If they fail to keep the terms and conditions of the sale, no other seller ever needs to know. If the seller had a condition of "payment required within three days of auction end", and they pay fourteen days later, Ebay is going to consider the matter closed. NPI will not stand.
2. They are not accountable for the feedback they leave. They can leave piles of negative feedback, warranted or not, and you never get to know, unless it's you that got burned. It's allot like someone bullying on forum boards and setting the system up to protect the bullies from the victims just to protect the number of unique visitors stat.
The only way this new system could work is if they buyer has to pay Ebay the listing fee when he commits to purchase.
I could be wrong, but I don't believe a one-way trust system can be successful in such a setting.


----------



## Catbox

I wouldn't buy anything over 50 bucks on ebay... even then it's a gamble... the dirtbag scammers have polluted ebay...what was once a great place to get rid of something you didn't need to someone who needed what you had... scammers s#ck lol


----------



## Girlzndollz

Rodney said:


> That's interesting, because I only sell things on eBay occasionally, but I've been proud of the fact that my feedback percentage is 100% over my time on eBay (over 8 years).
> 
> So my past positive feedback will now be under question since I only have limited current feedback.
> 
> I wonder if that will encourage people to be more active on ebay?


 
Yes, that was the same conclusion I was coming to as well. In a game of chess, I think Ebay would do well...


----------



## Girlzndollz

greyhorsewoman said:


> Before I never left feedback until the sale was complete. To me that is when the customer TELLS me he is satisfied. Getting feedback for paying on time? Aren't buyers SUPPOSED to pay on time?


Well, the way I saw it was I was going to leave feedback after payment, during shipping, because in most auctions, the only "job" they really have is paying. After that, they are pretty much done. Once I got to shipping, any address situations were handled. I didn't see anything left for them to do, except hopefully return the feedback. But that's just me, leaving feedback is a really personal choice... 



> If they never leave feedback, I don't worry about it.


It's all good, Grey, but there are valid reasons for wanting a higher number of feedbacks standing behind you. 

The more transactions you complete, the more comfortable customers are "buying" from you. It's that simple. 

It's as good as marketing as you get on Ebay. A 100% rating on 75 transactions just doesn't carry the same weight as a 100% rating on 500 or 1000, and so on.




> When I buy something, I leave feedback when I am satisfied, and don't concern myself with whether the seller leaves me any or not.


The same thing about feedback here. Seller's leaving positive feedback assures the people you buy from in the future that you will conduct yourself properly.

I also welcomed my customers to view my feedback. When they see excellent reviews about someone as a "seller" and ALSO as a "buyer", it helps instill a good deal of confidence in you overall. 

Being as Ebay can be poluted like a few others said, feedback is a way to stand out from the crowd, and show you are bonafide and on the level. It is a powerful tool.

It wasn't for me, about seeing a number go up, it was ALL about building a reputation in others eyes.

Like I said, it's all good, Grey, I just thought I'd mention a few reasons why an excellent reputation via feedback is so important on Ebay, IMO.


----------



## Solmu

Girlzndollz said:


> I reported it to Ebay, [...] and they never responded.


That's standard for pretty much any problem you report to eBay. If it's not *directly* related to one of your auctions, they won't do anything about it. For example, a while ago I reported someone for copying listings - they removed the one copied from me, but not the others.



Girlzndollz said:


> Oh, and real quick, Ebay says for the percent rating, it will only go back one year when calculating the number, not a lifetime anymore. The lifetime will still be viewable.


I actually thought given the other changes that that was a sensible move. If you can maintain good feedback for a year, it seems reasonable past transgressions are forgiven, and if you start going downhill fast it will be more quickly apparent - years of good trading will not save you. On the other hand, yes, a bad week or a few unlucky transactions and years of good trading won't save you _either_.

One of my biggest concerns is how long it will take for old buyers to create new habits: whereas previously anything less than 100% feedback was reason to be at least somewhat cautious, less than 98% was downright dubious, etc. _now_ we need to work out what the new numbers are. Seems to me that with no consequences for leaving negative, and therefore the possibility of getting to be honest (a good thing)... 98% becomes a pretty damn good rating.



Girlzndollz said:


> I know that I do wish there was an alternative to Ebay. Even if the audience wasn't as large as Ebay, that would be okay, just as long as there was enough customer base to sustain decent sales.
> 
> I'd switch and grow with it. Have a good one, everyone...


I'd at least try it. And who knows... maybe it could work. As an example: it wouldn't have seemed likely that Facebook would grow so large and so quickly with MySpace already so established (and where many larger companies had failed - even Google really), yet here we are.


----------



## Solmu

Girlzndollz said:


> I click on the 755, and they haven't sold anything in one year, so now, with the new set up, they have no percentage rating displayed. Looking through their seller feedback, I see things like "wonderful, excellent, terrific".


****. I hadn't thought of that. Speaking as someone whose selling account hasn't been used in over a year... that's not good


----------



## Solmu

Sheepsalt said:


> If the seller had a condition of "payment required within three days of auction end", and they pay fourteen days later, Ebay is going to consider the matter closed.


Good point.



Sheepsalt said:


> They can leave piles of negative feedback, warranted or not, and you never get to know, unless it's you that got burned.


Unless they change how the system works now, you can see what feedback someone has left, so you'd have a pretty good idea if they were doing that... but only if you had a reason to specifically check (no red flag of a poor rating).



Sheepsalt said:


> The only way this new system could work is if they buyer has to pay Ebay the listing fee when he commits to purchase.


Hmm, that's an interesting idea. Obviously listing fees need to be the responsibility of the seller, but it does create an interesting possibility: eBay charging a bond on each transaction that can be credited back to your PayPal account (since they make you use that anyway...).


----------



## greyhorsewoman

Did you know that if a buyer ACCIDENTLY leaves you a negative or neutral (you did know neutrals now work against your score), it CANNOT be changed. 

They also discontinued the 'mutual feedback withdrawal' if both parties come to an understanding after the fact. Too bad.

Also, now EVERY transaction from EVERY sale count, regardless of individual. So if someone bought 10 shirts from you, thought they were all crap (even if they weren't), didn't like your delivery time, or the packaging they came in and decided to NEG you on all 10 shirts, you'd get TEN NEGATIVES and it would topple most small sellers scores!

I really am not a fan of this new system. Personally, telling me that I can only leave one opinion is stupid. At that point, why leave an opinion at all? (I know, I know, there are other reasons.) But all buyers will now have pristine 100% scores anyway, so what's the point?


----------



## debz1959

Girlzndollz said:


> I reported it to Ebay, ... and they never responded.


If ebay doesn't answer your emails, CALL THEM!!!!

I had my 4D Professional Embroidery Software up a while back. I listed it for $1000, which is half the price I paid for it. I had registered it, so, according to the license, I could sell it, but I could not give out the registration info, therefore it was not eligible for the "Smart Updates".

At the last second, someone comes in and purchases it. The bidder and "0" feedback and wanted me to send it to an unverified address. He also asked me for the registration info. I promptly refunded his Paypal payment and told him I would only accept a check or money order and that I could not send him the reg. info., as was stated in the auction. 

Well, this guy was a real nutcase, and started threatening me through email if I didn't send him the item. I stood my ground and he finally backed off the threats and I thought the case was solved so I filed for a final value fee refund. He responds that he still wants everything, wants to still pay through Paypal, and will not agree to the cancel the sale.

Anyway, at this point I picked up the phone and called ebay. The matter was solved within an hour......

He never left feedback and neither did I.


----------



## COEDS

I'm gla you got this resolved. I had a issue where I purchased a item and the shipping ended up being twice what it should have been. I had emailed the seller and he ball parked the cost and after the auction ended he doubled the price. I emailed Ebay and the seller and in order to protect my 100% rating with over a 1000 transaction, I was forced to pay. I like this new rule. Good Job ebay. .... JB


----------



## AustinJeff

Girlzndollz said:


> But now, to evaluate this sellers history and try to see how they delivered on their sales prior to one year's calendar date, I have to read all their feedback and calculate it mentally myself. Gosh.


Try "eBay Negs" a free tool from Toolhaus.org. 

You simply plug in the user ID and it will show all negative and neutral feedback. And only negative or neutral. You don't have to weed through it.

Also, they have incorporated an interesting response to these recent feedback changes. It seems some sellers are leaving "false positives" in which the seller includes in the "positive" feedback text the word "negative" or "neg" to indicate the type of feedback they wanted to leave.

The "eBay Negs" tool can be set to look for these also.

Finally, they also provide a plugin for IE 7 and Firefox 2. You simply right click on the ID and the menu includes "check eBay Negs."

Vrane.com provides a similar tool, but they charge a bit for it. They also provide lots of other very useful eBay tools.


----------



## Girlzndollz

Wow, that is awesome information, Jeff. I thank you for that link. I could have used link so many times. Two thumbs up!!! 

Yep, it's a beautiful thing, just tried it and it's awesome. Great link, Jeff!


----------



## sunnydayz

I am kinda mixed on how I feel about this. The first thing that comes to mind is about 6 months ago I gave my daughter the art exposion 800,000 to sell on ebay because she wanted to make little extra money. So she sells it for around $70 and ships it to the winning bidder. She then recieved a message from the buyer stating it was not what he had thought and wanted his money back. so my daughter refunded and told him to send it to her. He sent it ups and had her sign when she recieved it back. Well after ups left she waited till the next day to open it and low and behold, instead of the 34 cds that should have been in there the box was filled to the brim with chinese take out cartons. yep thats right, the guy had taken the contents and replaced them with chinese take out containers. 

At first ebay said they wouldnt do anything because she signed the delivery slip. We googled the mailing address and found it to be a chinese takeout place, so we took pics of the containers that were stuffed in the box and showed sent the pics to ebay, along with the proof of them coming from a chinese takeout and they finally refunded her money. You know why they refunded it? not because she proved she had been scammed but because the address was business and not a residence. Had the mailing address not been a resturaunt she would not have gotten her money back. So I think that sellers should also have the right to leave feedback in these kinds of situations. You can get scammed either way.


----------



## Solmu

greyhorsewoman said:


> They also discontinued the 'mutual feedback withdrawal' if both parties come to an understanding after the fact. Too bad.


Yeah, that does really suck. I think the 'negative feedback as attention getter' was a sometimes valid (if overused) tactic.



greyhorsewoman said:


> Also, now EVERY transaction from EVERY sale count, regardless of individual.


Speaking as a seller who had a lot of repeat customers, and a buyer who makes many transactions with the same half dozen sellers (common enough in a collector's market), I think this has the potential to be a really positive change.

I didn't realise when the change was announced, but it was actually retroactive. My buying account f/b went up 18.5% and my selling account f/b went up 24%.



greyhorsewoman said:


> So if someone bought 10 shirts from you, thought they were all crap (even if they weren't), didn't like your delivery time, or the packaging they came in and decided to NEG you on all 10 shirts, you'd get TEN NEGATIVES and it would topple most small sellers scores!


I'm not sure what impact that has on the percentage (maybe that one), but I don't think it will affect your numbers that much. I think transactions made close together are considered the same, it's just ones that are made further apart can now count more than once (rather than once per person, they count once per *set* of transactions).

If it was one per transaction my feedback would have *tripled* (I'm very much a 'combined shipping' guy, both as buyer and seller).



greyhorsewoman said:


> But all buyers will now have pristine 100% scores anyway, so what's the point?


It does make the entire concept of a buying account and a selling account at least a little more redundant (and buyer feedback in general).

Maybe they're moving to a one-way system (like Amazon) with this as a transition. Maybe if it was completely one way there would have actually been less resistance though: the "you are free to leave whatever feedback you want... so long as it's positive" has a really unpleasant totalitarian feel to it. I think that's what people are responding to more than anything.


----------



## Solmu

AustinJeff said:


> You simply plug in the user ID and it will show all negative and neutral feedback. And only negative or neutral. You don't have to weed through it.


eBay _finally_ caught up with reality and added these filters as well (probably at the same time as all these other changes, though I wasn't looking too hard).



AustinJeff said:


> It seems some sellers are leaving "false positives" in which the seller includes in the "positive" feedback text the word "negative" or "neg" to indicate the type of feedback they wanted to leave.
> 
> The "eBay Negs" tool can be set to look for these also.


Excellent, I was hoping a system like this would evolve. And obviously that's the kind of thing eBay themselves are never going to support


----------



## greyhorsewoman

> It seems some sellers are leaving "false positives" in which the seller includes in the "positive" feedback text the word "negative" or "neg" to indicate the type of feedback they wanted to leave.


*From EBAY SITE :*

*Feedback comments containing any of the following are not permitted:*
Links or scripts.
References to eBay or PayPal investigations
Negative statements that conflict with a positive rating
So, if that becomes a 'trend' EBAY can cut you right off their site!



> I think transactions made close together are considered the same, it's just ones that are made further apart can now count more than once (rather than once per person, they count once per *set* of transactions).


You are correct. Feedback to the same seller within SEVEN days only counts as one. No where, however, is it written, that a disgruntled customer has to leave all feedback at the same time. If they are savvy, they could stagger their feedback over several weeks, still seriously impacting your percentage. 

* Also from Ebay site:

Buyers must wait at least seven days before leaving a negative or neutral Feedback for a PowerSeller who has been registered on eBay for at least 12 months.* 

That's nice for powersellers, but why not have a waiting period for all negatives? A lot of time people 'cool off' after thinking everything through, maybe decide to contact seller afterall, and get things worked out.


----------



## Girlzndollz

greyhorsewoman said:


> You are correct. Feedback to the same seller within SEVEN days only counts as one. No where, however, is it written, that a disgruntled customer has to leave all feedback at the same time. If they are savvy, they could stagger their feedback over several weeks, still seriously impacting your percentage.


Something you said in your other post refered to this, too, Grey, and it got me thinking.

Since negative feedback only counts for one year, unscrupulous sellers can maintain two accounts, and kind of work off of the one that is holding a higher rating until negatives fall off from the lower rated one. I've looked up some of my past suppliers... one of them, their rating has gone up now. The one year rule seems to be taking effect. 

It's still early, but it'll be interesting to see the new ways folks develop for trying to work around all the new rules and use them to their advantage. 

Then there will be folks like us, just going along with it all, letting it be. But it's still wise to try to figure out all the backdoors folks will be opening so one can understand how to protect oneself in the new environment. I know Jeff's link will def be a part of my Ebay tools from now on. (Thanks again, Jeff, I'd give you two thanks if I could.)



> That's nice for powersellers, but why not have a waiting period for all negatives? A lot of time people 'cool off' after thinking everything through, maybe decide to contact seller afterall, and get things worked out.


Kind of makes you want to be a power seller, doesn't it? 

(Oops, what did I just say? Did I think that on my own.. or was I lead here?) << That's the way I see it...


----------



## AustinJeff

greyhorsewoman said:


> *From EBAY SITE :*
> 
> *Feedback comments containing any of the following are not permitted:*
> Links or scripts.
> References to eBay or PayPal investigations
> Negative statements that conflict with a positive rating
> So, if that becomes a 'trend' EBAY can cut you right off their site!


Thanks for pointing this out. Clearly, putting the words "negative" or "neg" would be a violation then. I wonder if sellers will come up with a code word that in itself isn't negative -- something like "banana" -- that would indicate a negative. Probably not worth the risk of being banned.


----------



## Girlzndollz

I came across this auction for a cutter. Here is an example of a selling being "tanked" by Ebay's new one year limit rule. He doesn't look too good from his percentage rating, 94.1%, but out of 449 feedbacks, he has 1 negative. Under the old rules, his rating would be 99.7%.

If you run this guy through Jeff's "ebay negative tool" and you read the comments, this guy is alright in my book. But look, he slowed down in sales, and got whammed by one negative. 

It's going to be so hard to evaluate people now. The usual benchmarks we're used to eyeballing are going to be diluted and loss their meaning. 

Looks like it's Jeff's link for me, my new "Ebay Best Friend". 
Can I thank you three times, Jeff??? 

Vinyl Express Graphtec Q100 Series 42" Sign Cutter NEW - eBay (item 260249785500 end time Jun-16-08 15:17:43 PDT)

PS: Adding: Thinking real quick on it, I can't figure out if I can link to show what I saw??? If the link isn't allowed, the user id is aaron757, in case the link has to go byby.


----------



## MYDAMIT

i think this is not fair, i sell on ebay for 2 years and experience a lot of buyers that will give you a message that they will give you negative feedback if you will not refund their money. i have few buyers like that...they will scum you "they will say that their item is not been delivered and if you will not refund their money they will give you negative feedback" but if you check your tracking number it said it been delivered. Some also says that their item is damage and want refund if not they will give negative feedback. For me this is the advantage for scummers...


----------



## Girlzndollz

Yep, Roq, and how about the buyers that hit negative and write: "Great transaction, great product will buy from again." Sometimes they leave a follow up they hit neg by accident, sometimes they don't. Sometimes.. they even "forget" who they are really leaving the negative for... you'll see "Opps, wrong auction, this seller was great" in a follow up....


----------



## Susie

As an experienced buyer and mostly, seller, on Ebay I think the two-way system of feedback is vital. Buyers can be bad. I've had plenty of 'em. 

The new system will protect the buyer, not the seller. They are doing this to encourage buying. By what? Having lots of buyers who know they don't have to bother going through with the sale if they change their minds? That'll really pump things up! I know the seller can go through with the non-paying bidder blah, blah but there will be no record of this on the buyer. (unless they start advertising how many non-paying bidder items the buyers has - which must be necessary in the new system).

Paypal did this too. They protect the buyer, not the seller. Consequently many sellers stopped using Paypal. We did. We no longer accept Paypal for large purchases. This is an auction, damn it. Not, "oh my wife doesn't want me to have that so we've changed our minds"...crap. Or the guy who bids at the last second and says, "oh, you can't ship to Nicaragua - well I'm not paying". Do these people deserve bad feedback? Damn right they do!! 

Maybe it works for buyers. But it doesn't work for the people PAYING THE FEES, us the sellers. 

So what do we do? We move to Craigslist and other venues that work just as well without all the garbage.


----------



## Rodney

> Paypal did this too. They protect the buyer, not the seller


Just a side note, but most payment systems work this way to encourage commerce. Credit card companies are the same way (setup to protect the buyer with chargebacks, disputes, etc), but I wouldn't ever stop accepting credit cards.

The rewards are much greater than the risk.


----------



## Susie

It's a lot more difficult here in Canada to get your money back once you pay by credit card. You have to go through quite a process and frequently the charge will still remain unless you have a really strong case.

Paypal goes way too far in favour of the buyer. Ebay is an auction and is therefore governed by auction law.
Can you imagine you go to a regular live auction and bid and then don't pay? You bid, you buy. That's what it's supposed to be but people are wishy-washy. Sometimes they're bidding on several auctions for the same type of thing and pay for the one they got the cheapest and they screw the rest. That's just plain wrong. Auctions cost money, take time etc., especially to run the same thing 3 or 4 times. Buyers don't appreciate that because they don't have to pay any of the fees.

I kind of like the idea someone else mentioned earlier - where the buyer has to pay half of the Paypal and Ebay fees on the item he/she won. That's a great idea!!


----------



## Shuffy

Rodney said:


> Credit card companies are the same way (setup to protect the buyer with chargebacks, disputes, etc), but I wouldn't ever stop accepting credit cards.
> 
> The rewards are much greater than the risk.


yep the rewards are MUCH greater . . .

on the chargeback --- when I have a buyer using their CC in my store -- I always ask for their drivers lic . . and on the back of my copy of the rec't --
I put their drivers lic # -- just in case of a dispute of the charges . .

this pass February and May -- the CCards sales were up by 55% . . -- everyone was using their Income tax refund $$ and their government Free money before they got it

so, if you not taking CCards (google check out or Ppal) you are missing out . . 
I stopped taking personal checks -- I only accept business checks
if I have had repeat business more than twice with the company

Diane
;o)


----------



## Shuffy

Susie said:


> Ebay is an auction and is therefore governed by auction law.


ebay is a venue . . . they aren't governed by auction laws . . at least in the US . . as of yet . . there are a few states that are really pushing hard for ebay to be governed by auction laws . . 

ebay has been trying to prevent that from happening . .
if ebay is ever governed by the auction laws . . . everyone that list an item on the ebay site would have to have an auctioneer license

eBay Government Relations



Diane
;o]


----------



## studog79

Shuffy said:


> if ebay is ever governed by the auction laws . . . everyone that list an item on the ebay site would have to have an auctioneer license
> 
> 
> ;o]


Right now I can sell at an auction but the Auctioneer must have the license. This happens all the time so EBAY would have to have a license not the individual.


----------



## Rodney

studog79 said:


> Right now I can sell at an auction but the Auctioneer must have the license. This happens all the time so EBAY would have to have a license not the individual.


I think the argument might be that in the case of eBay, YOU become the auctioneer and not eBay, since you are the one holding, managing each auction. 

At least that's probably where the debate comes in. I don't know the technicalities, but I can see how that might be a point of contention.


----------



## debz1959

Etsy.com is getting a lot of attention from the wholesale referal sites now...

Maybe it's time to give ebay the boot and give it a try...


----------



## Girlzndollz

I've heard of Etsy.com, Debz. Heard good things about it. Do you think it's the next best thing if looking to leave ebay? There are some folks on here swear by it, say they love it there. I think I would go there, but I also don't know who Ebay's competition is.... could be because... they might not have any... lol.


----------



## wormil

I know it's controversial but changing the feedback system is long overdue. The truth is that the people who will be harmed the most by the new changes are the crappy sellers and there are plenty. I've been buying and selling on ebay for years and I've had plenty of bad buyers but far more bad sellers, despite having sold more than I buy. I didn't give any of the bad sellers a negative because I didn't want an undeserved negative on my own reputation especially since I mostly sell.

Long ago I moved most of my stuff to half.com (now owned by ebay) for several reasons... one, payment is instant and they collect it for you; two, once a month they deposit the money in my account; three, they assume much of the risk - if a buyer is fraudulent and I have proof of shipping then they eat the cost not me (this has saved my butt a few times); four, the cost to me is about 15% which is the average I was paying in ebay + paypal fees before the price hikes. Buyers on half.com never leave feedback, probably not one in fifty buyers has left me feedback.

The downsides are that you can only sell in certain categories and they set the shipping price. On some items you make some on the shipping and on others you eat some.


----------



## AustinJeff

debz1959 said:


> Etsy.com is getting a lot of attention from the wholesale referal sites now...
> 
> Maybe it's time to give ebay the boot and give it a try...


Etsy is cool and it is great for "crafters" selling stuff as a hobby. 

It's easy to review the number and value of sales each seller has made. I have yet to find a seller who is making more than a couple of hundred dollars a month selling T-shirts. Most -- even many selling really nice designs -- are making less than $100. Of course, Etsy is growing, so that could change.

Also, it appears that buyers there tend to be looking for higher end "artsy" type stuff.


----------



## Girlzndollz

May I ask a favor of anyone selling in places other besides Ebay? Will you please look at this thread and add whatever you can to it? It's a thread on Ebay Alternatives, who you like and why. 

I am trying to figure out, if not Ebay, then where's the next best place. Based on all of the changes with Ebay, who is there to turn to? 

Thanks so much for your help. Here's the link: http://www.t-shirtforums.com/general-t-shirt-selling-discussion/t51145.html#post302183


----------



## debz1959

A Message from Lorrie Norrington: Updates on Feedback


----------



## Solmu

Both of those changes are good, and will help the new system be more acceptable in general, but they were also both obvious to begin with. I sometimes wonder if eBay implements these sweeping changes on purpose, so that they can throw people the bone of slight improvements to try and appease them.


----------



## debz1959

Oh, boy 

I need suggestions!

I had an auction end on 07/15 & buyer never contacted me. On 07/22 I filed a non-paying bidder disbute & today he pays me...

Anyway,since I can no longer leave negative or neutral feedback, what do I do???

I really don't feel right leaving positive, but if I don't leave any he might leave negative/neutral??? Remember, there is up to 60 (or even 90?) days to leave feedback.


----------



## UglyCook

I'm kind of in the same dilemma, but I was the buyer. I bought a 20% discount coupon for Seaworld, only to find out the tickets could only be purchased through the sellers website, with higher prices than I could have gotten them elsewhere. In the end, I saved only a little over a buck per ticket, but did recoup what I spent for the "discount". I'm choosing to not leave any feedback at all, but then I have no fear of recourse anyways.


----------



## wormil

debz1959 said:


> Anyway,since I can no longer leave negative or neutral feedback, what do I do???
> 
> I really don't feel right leaving positive, but if I don't leave any he might leave negative/neutral???


Waiting for payment is one of the reasons I stopped using ebay but seven days isn't that long. I wouldn't leave a negative for that in any case. Just don't leave feedback, that's all you can do. If I were going to sell shirts on ebay I would require instant payment.


----------



## NESBOW

i really don't agree fully, but the only 2 negative feedbacks i've ever gotten are from 2 sellers that screwed me over so i gave them negative. so at the same time it would have been nice at that point


----------



## coolnammy1

I think its actually a pretty good explanation due to the fact that sellers usually wait for payment and/or feedback from buyers and base their decision off of that. i must say, as a seller, i am guilty of this too );


----------



## debz1959

I leave feedback as soon as I receive payment, but there have been a few times that buyers have been difficult after payment and I've regretted that. 

I agree, 7 days is not that long, but there was no communication at all from the buyer, so I filed the non-paying bidder. I know it's summer time, and he might have gone on vacation, but some sort of communication would have been nice. Seems kinda irresponsible to me.


----------



## Girlzndollz

How about: Auction paid in 7 days. ? 

That's not positive or negative, it's just what happened. If you normally have 3 day terms, a future seller looking at the feedback might pick up on the odd wording and click one of your auctions to see your normal terms, and it will be clear why you wrote the number of days it was paid in. That's more of a seller thing, and the buyer, if not also a seller, should have this go *whoosh* right over their head. Maybe. I don't know. It's just a suggestion to try to stay within the wiggle room allowed. Good luck, Debz.


----------



## debz1959

My policy stated in listing are must make contact within 3 day or sale might be cancelled. 

I was going to put "Transaction Completed" but I though that sounded rather harsh and I might regret the reprecussions(sp?). 

Also, I'm pretty sure that ebay's new feedback rule says that you can't leave anything even negative sounding in the buyer's feedback. You better check...


----------



## Girlzndollz

I think you are right - I think they say you can't bypass the "no negative" by saying "Negative experience" and things like that. Do you think "Paid in x number of days" sounds negative? I thought it was ambiguous. But, after I posted I realized it didn't really "hit on" what you were trying to relay anyway... was it that they only you after you filed a NPB complaint?

Just took a peek at your post again... yeah, the buyer was farrr out of the terms... at 7 days you filed the NPB, and they paid 3 days After That! I don't know, Debz... you'll be amoung the first to handle a bad buyer with the new rules. I'm not liking the whole thing for the exact situation you are having right now...


----------



## debz1959

I don't know if he even acknowledged the non-paying biider dispute, because I had to clear it.

Though it's not my own usual personal feedback policy, I'm going to wait for his feedback before I leave mine, that way I know he can't leave me a neg/neu.


----------



## Jhound44

The feedback system was created to keep buyers and sellers honest. Buyers who get negative feedback are worthless any way and if they stop using ebay they only save other sellers time, money and aggrivation. Ebay is has evolved into a corporate beast only concerned about shareholders rate of return. I think the changes they made to digital downloads is a bigger travisty.


----------



## Girlzndollz

Wow, I sorry it's this difficult to find something that's neutral enough without sounding offensive in anyway. This new system reeks of inequity... good luck, Debz, I think you are taking the right road. Let him make the first move -- you don't need his positive as much as you need him to Not leave a negative or neutral. Hope it all works out for you.


----------



## wormil

I'm not clear on the logic here... the seller can only leave positive feedback so how does withholding feedback insure the buyer won't neg you? Seems to me they can neg you with no repercussions. The thing is the old feedback system was broken as 99% of sellers had 100% positive feedback but from personal experience I can guarantee you that 99% of sellers aren't great, they weren't getting honest feedback because buyers were afraid of retaliatory negs. I think the current system is fair but it needs a few modifications... NPB should show up automatically on a person's feedback. There should be ways to prevent buyers with NPBs from bidding on your auction. This would be a great incentive for people to pay on time.


----------



## Solmu

Girlzndollz said:


> Do you think "Paid in x number of days" sounds negative? I thought it was ambiguous.


It's simply factual, and an unvarnished fact can't be positive or negative except in the mind of the reader. Which means eBay have nothing to get upset about... but the buyer might.

No-one actually _reads _feedback anyway, until there's a problem, or if it's their own. There's not much point leaving a 'soft positive'; you risk the buyer getting annoyed at you, without really warning others of a problem.


----------



## Solmu

wormil said:


> NPB should show up automatically on a person's feedback.


I agree. Now that there's no negative feedback, NPB should be a matter of permanent public record. It's not fair on the *good* buyers that we have no way of telling good from bad; it means we have to treat everyone with suspicion.



wormil said:


> There should be ways to prevent buyers with NPBs from bidding on your auction.


You can, but only if they exceed what eBay thinks is excessive. If their NPBs are in the past, you can't block them.


----------



## Girlzndollz

solmu said:


> It's simply factual, and an unvarnished fact can't be positive or negative except in the mind of the reader. Which means eBay have nothing to get upset about... but the buyer might.


Thanks, Solmu, I agree. I really was asking Debz opinion on it, tho, maybe I should have pm'd her. Sorry! 

I know my own opinion, and that is as you stated, it's simply a fact, not an opinion or a rating one way or another. But I think in Debz case, she is doing the right thing, and I may likely follow that route as well, when the time comes. I'm still waiting to see how it pans out over there and starts to develope.



solmu said:


> No-one actually _reads _feedback anyway, until there's a problem, or if it's their own.


I did and I do, I read the feedback!  When I am buying, I almost spend more time reading feedback then I do shopping the item. On the flip side, I did read feedback on a bidder if they had below 10, or they bid on multiples, or if in general I had some time, I'd find out who the high bidders were. I've cancelled and blocked bidders for poor past performance. One girl was so bad, when I found her bidding on a competitors auction, I warned the competitor. The other woman cancelled and blocked her as well. Within two weeks, that bidder had 10 brand new negatives from unpaid auctions. I was saved, and so was the competitor. The other seller, the competitor, wrote to me and thanked me again. You know, I like to sell as much as the next guy, but will call over to someone else's house to help them out if I see something bad, and I only saw it because I really did watch out over who my bidders were.

I realize, tho, you do speak for most peeps when you make that statement. 




solmu said:


> There's not much point leaving a 'soft positive'; you risk the buyer getting annoyed at you, without really warning others of a problem.


I agree with you. That's why I think Debz is taking the right road by not leaving any feedback. If she can't leave positive, it is most likely the most viable way to deal with a less than good transaction. Is that what you mean, too? Thanks.


----------



## Solmu

Girlzndollz said:


> I agree with you. That's why I think Debz is taking the right road by not leaving any feedback. If she can't leave positive, it is most likely the most viable way to deal with a less than good transaction. Is that what you mean, too? Thanks.


Yeah - there's no point rewarding negative behaviour, or leaving positive feedback if you don't think it's deserved. If we can't leave negative, all we can do as sellers is not leave positive  Frustrating, but we play by the rules of the system we have.

I've occasionally seen buyers get annoyed at sellers for not leaving feedback, and now that they can leave negative feedback with no repercussions I'm sure we'll start seeing negative feedback left for that reason in future, but it's rare.


----------



## AustinJeff

UglyCook said:


> I'm kind of in the same dilemma, but I was the buyer. I bought a 20% discount coupon for Seaworld, only to find out the tickets could only be purchased through the sellers website, with higher prices than I could have gotten them elsewhere. In the end, I saved only a little over a buck per ticket, but did recoup what I spent for the "discount". I'm choosing to not leave any feedback at all, but then I have no fear of recourse anyways.


I don't understand why you would choose to NOT leave feedback on a transaction like that. 

This is exactly the type of thing that the new system is supposed to address. If, as a buyer, you have a negative experience you are able to tell others about it. So why would you choose not to share that information?


----------



## AustinJeff

Girlzndollz said:


> On the flip side, I did read feedback on a bidder if they had below 10, or they bid on multiples, or if in general I had some time, I'd find out who the high bidders were. I've cancelled and blocked bidders for poor past performance. One girl was so bad, when I found her bidding on a competitors auction, I warned the competitor. The other woman cancelled and blocked her as well. Within two weeks, that bidder had 10 brand new negatives from unpaid auctions. I was saved, and so was the competitor. The other seller, the competitor, wrote to me and thanked me again.


I used to do that when I sold high dollar items, but I've found it is just not worth it to spend time analyzing the record of every person who bids on a T-shirt auction. Also, when I've had trouble with this before, it was often with people who bid at the last minute.

Moreover, now the vast majority of my sales are through "Buy It Now" so there's no opportunity to review.

For all the sellers who are complaining about this change, I wonder how often they actually cancel bids because of a bidders feedback. I'm pretty sure that the most sellers never do this. And if you don't, then what does it matter if the bidder has negs or not?


----------



## leisure

TiD said:


> I disagree. The customer is always correct, sure there's no pleasing some people but that comes when you run a business.
> 
> This move by ebay has made shopping there more like real life shopping. You can complain about the shops you buy from to other people but all the shop can do is refuse to serve you.


I sold a shirt to a gentleman who needed it very fast because he was going to an event, so I made sure he had it in time. 1 week later he emails and said he didn't like it and wanted a refund. I told him no problem as long as it was unworn and unwashed just mail back which he did.But guess what he had worn it, there was hairs and the smell of smoke and cologne all over the shirt, so I contacted him and told him I couldn't refund so he filed a chargeback with paypal and left me neg feedback and I was out my money and shirt because it was unsellable now, so I think the feedback should go both ways because he will do this again to someone elsa and they won't know that this is the way he operates.
Oh by the way paypal agreed with him because he had proof that he mailed back they didn't care it had been worn that was my word against his.


----------



## Girlzndollz

Sorry to hear about getting burned like that, Brenda. That's one of the kickers, and I totally agree that you should be able to note that in the feedback of the transaction. 





austinjeff said:


> I used to do that when I sold high dollar items, but I've found it is just not worth it to spend time analyzing the record of every person who bids on a T-shirt auction. Also, when I've had trouble with this before, it was often with people who bid at the last minute.
> 
> Moreover, now the vast majority of my sales are through "Buy It Now" so there's no opportunity to review.
> 
> For all the sellers who are complaining about this change, I wonder how often they actually cancel bids because of a bidders feedback. I'm pretty sure that the most sellers never do this. And if you don't, then what does it matter if the bidder has negs or not?


I hear you, Jeff. Most of the time, bad buyers were automatically filtered out by the options I chose in the settings that prevented bidders with negatives, or less than X number of feedback. But for me, here's one seller for you that did cancel bids. Not only that, added them to my "Block bidder list". I didn't need the headaches. Still had some anyway, can't avoid them all like you said, they come from nowhere sometimes.


----------



## wormil

*Re: [eBay] - feeback solution*

The only way I can see of making feedback fair is this...

neither party can see feedback left for them by the other person until both parties have left feedback or the time limit for leaving feedback runs out. That would be fair and would prevent retaliatory negs.


----------



## Girlzndollz

But you could still read the "past feedbacks" during the auction, right? Just cannot read the feedback of the current transaction between the parties... is that what you mean?


----------



## AustinJeff

*Re: [eBay] - feeback solution*



wormil said:


> The only way I can see of making feedback fair is this...
> 
> neither party can see feedback left for them by the other person until both parties have left feedback or the time limit for leaving feedback runs out. That would be fair and would prevent retaliatory negs.


Rick, that is really a fantastic idea. It makes the system more fair, but also makes it more accurate. I wonder if eBay has considered anything like that.


----------



## Solmu

AustinJeff said:


> For all the sellers who are complaining about this change, I wonder how often they actually cancel bids because of a bidders feedback. I'm pretty sure that the most sellers never do this. And if you don't, then what does it matter if the bidder has negs or not?


I don't recall ever having had to cancel a bid due to buyer's feedback, and I think I've only ever blocked a couple of bidders. I rarely check feedback before the sale.

In my case, the reason I like the profile to indicate this sort of thing is so I know how to proceed if I have a problem. If the buyer has a history of poor performance, I won't cut them any slack on my auctions. If they have a clean record, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt if something goes wrong.


----------



## Solmu

A blind feedback system is fairer in some ways, but it doesn't really address one of the core problems (just like this new system), namely: unreasonable buyers. There are two reasons for a seller to leave negative feedback: non-payment, and the buyer being a prat. Sometimes retaliatory feedback is actually justified.


----------



## wormil

Solmu said:


> A blind feedback system is fairer in some ways, but it doesn't really address one of the core problems (just like this new system), namely: unreasonable buyers. There are two reasons for a seller to leave negative feedback: non-payment, and the buyer being a prat. Sometimes retaliatory feedback is actually justified.


If its deserved then it isn't retaliatory. Retaliatory feedback is leaving an undeserved negative feedback because the other person left you justifiable negative feedback.

Sorry but the only cure for unreasonable buyers is to get out business.  You'll find them in brick & mortars just as you do online.


----------



## Solmu

wormil said:


> If its deserved then it isn't retaliatory.


If you respond to an attack with an attack that's retaliation, whether it's justified or not. And a blind feedback system prevents this - the unjustified occasions (good) and the justified ones (bad).

Maybe the benefits of such a system outweigh the drawbacks, maybe they don't. I'm conflicted.


----------



## Chasethisbear

As a seller, I found feedback from sellers helpful. Experienced sellers can read through tit-for-tat negative/neutral feedbacks. I was actually able to solve some mysteries by reading feedbacks and also reading feedbacks buyers left for others. 

Right now, I wait for payment and wait, open a dispute and hope they do not leave negative in the mean time. (which does happen). In the old days, I could tell if someone was not going to pay rather quickly, open a dispute, move on and relist the product.

Europeans have picked up on this and have been scamming the hell out of me. There is no tracking available for International on first class shipping, so this guy last week simply opens a dispute on day 14 and leaves negative feedback if you do not respond. He has left 14 negatives to other sellers in the past month and somehow eBay does not catch this. There is no way for sellers to communicate with other sellers about the ethics of buyers.


----------



## leisure

Chasethisbear said:


> As a seller, I found feedback from sellers helpful. Experienced sellers can read through tit-for-tat negative/neutral feedbacks. I was actually able to solve some mysteries by reading feedbacks and also reading feedbacks buyers left for others.
> 
> Right now, I wait for payment and wait, open a dispute and hope they do not leave negative in the mean time. (which does happen). In the old days, I could tell if someone was not going to pay rather quickly, open a dispute, move on and relist the product.
> 
> Europeans have picked up on this and have been scamming the hell out of me. There is no tracking available for International on first class shipping, so this guy last week simply opens a dispute on day 14 and leaves negative feedback if you do not respond. He has left 14 negatives to other sellers in the past month and somehow eBay does not catch this. There is no way for sellers to communicate with other sellers about the ethics of buyers.


I feel it should be both ways one sided isn't fair.


----------



## CUSTOM UK

Picture this scenario. Someone hasn't paid for an item they've bought. You send them a polite message after a couple of days requesting payment. Still no payment. After five days you send them another reminder, still no payment. Aften ten days you advise that as you have received no payment, you will have to refer the matter to EBay. At this stage they pay and you post off the item.

You find a few days later they have left you petty negative feedback, for no other reason than you chased payment for the money you were owed. You cannot complain to EBay and the customer has done this act in the full knowledge that the feedback system has changed. *Is this change fair?*

Although this scenario hasn't happened to myself, I know other sellers that have had unjustified negative feedback left. One seller I know, actually took EBay to court to have malicious feedback removed.

Ebay should state to all buyers that if they leave fraudulent or misleading feedback, their accounts will be terminated. They should certainly have a profanity filter in place that stops people using certain words.

I have always maintained 100 percent positive feedback, but how many of us will there be left under these pointless changes. If customers are unhappy, they have direct recourse to EBay and PayPal. They have the legal right to send things back to the seller. PayPal now actually witholds money for up to six weeks, or until positive feedback is received, so it might be suggested, that there is no need for the negative feedback system to even exist anymore.


----------



## debz1959

DREAMGLASS said:


> Picture this scenario. Someone hasn't paid for an item they've bought. You send them a polite message after a couple of days requesting payment. Still no payment. After five days you send them another reminder, still no payment. Aften ten days you advise that as you have received no payment, you will have to refer the matter to EBay. At this stage they pay and you post off the item.
> 
> You find a few days later they have left you petty negative feedback, for no other reason than you chased payment for the money you were owed. You cannot complain to EBay and the customer has done this act in the full knowledge that the feedback system has changed. *Is this change fair?*


A similar scenario happen to me, but it wasn't that bad. 

I had no payment or communication from a buyer for over a week, though I had sent several polite emails, so I filed a non-paying buyer with ebay. Well, he paid on the 10th day, but with still no other communication. So, he gets the item and waits about a week to leave feedback. He leaves me positive, BUT he leaves less than perfect scores in my DSRs for communication, shipping time & shipping/handling charges.

Excuse me...

I sent several emails before filing the non-paying bidder and he did not respond.

He paid at 9:30 on a Friday morning & I shipped on Monday. 

My shipping charges were clearly stated in the auction, if he didn't like them, he shouldn't have bid. 

This was just not fair. He was irresponsible and I had to pay the price???


----------



## wormil

Actually the problem was with the old feedback system that created the false expectation that sellers should maintain 100% positive feedback and gave an incentive to buyers to not leave negative feedback. Under the old system it was so easy to have 100% feedback that only the bottom 5% or so of sellers (and a few really unlucky ones) had less than 100%. This created the situation where buyers couldn't tell good sellers from bad. The change is better for both buyers and sellers, losing those 100% scores will sting at first but over time the crummy seller's scores will sink to a more honest level.

Payment timing is a completely separate issue. There is an option to require instant payment, if you want to give your customers the option of waiting then you have to have patience. I agree, there is no reason why anyone should take longer than a day or two at the most, to pay, but some will and that is a weakness in the system that needs to be addressed separately.

I still think blind feedback would eliminate most of the problems. That being when feedback doesn't show up until either both buyer and seller have left feedback or until time runs out for leaving feedback.


----------



## CUSTOM UK

Sadly the flaw with instant payment, is that it is impossible for a purchaser to buy multiple items to get shipping discount. Another offshoot of that being you could end up paying multiple PayPal transaction fees, if the customers buys multiple items separately.

I definitely don't agree with DSR's reflecting on how high up in the search results your listings appear. Sellers can give you four out of five stars, meaning they are totally happy with your product and service, but it's enough to drop your place in the listings. If your customers are happy, it shouldn't mean a seller getting penalised. Most sellers shipping DSR is lower than the other categories, as many buyers on EBay are naive enough to think that shipping charges should only be the actual postage cost and not include any packaging materials.


----------



## debz1959

DREAMGLASS said:


> Most sellers shipping DSR is lower than the other categories, as many buyers on EBay are naive enough to think that shipping charges should only be the actual postage cost and not include any packaging materials.


I had NO extra charges for shipping. It was shipped USPS priority for $4.80. Yes, shipping charges could have been lower if I had sent it Media Mail (it was a DVD), but I don't think you can put delivery confirmation on media mail so I stick to only priority or express. 

Somebody else asked if I could send a T-shirt via 1st class. It would have been a little over $3.00 (with delivery confirmation) + what ever the packaging cost (yes, I would have charged for the packaging!) to ship, so $4.80 isn't that much more!


----------



## Solmu

wormil said:


> Actually the problem was with the old feedback system that created the false expectation that sellers should maintain 100% positive feedback and gave an incentive to buyers to not leave negative feedback.


I strongly agree. While I think the new system is completely broken, the old system was completely broken as well. The need for customers to adjust to new feedback percentages was one of my concerns with the new system though; eBay is so established now that plenty of people will just never make that adjustment.

Still, you can't please everyone all the time, so the idea that all sellers _should_ have 100% feedback is just silly. It's also detrimental to the seller: the bigger the feedback rating, the more they get invested in that notion of 100%, and the more important it is to protect. Which means the more concessions they'll be willing to make under the threat of negative feedback to protect something that shouldn't really be all that valuable in the first place.


----------



## CUSTOM UK

Solmu said:


> Still, you can't please everyone all the time, so the idea that all sellers _should_ have 100% feedback is just silly.


I think Solmu is correct that maintaining a 100 percent feedback, should not be a criteria that allows buyers to attempt to manipulate sellers. I am just as happy to deal with someone that has a 95% positive feedback, as I am with someone that has a 100% feedback. If someone had lots of negative feedback for non supply, that would of course be a totally different thing.

What does concern me though, is when buyers leave negative feedback for other sellers, when there is no valid justification for it. Often these buyers will have left multiple negative feedback for numerous sellers. Just because someone has had a bad day at work, or fell out with their girlfriend, that shouldn't enable then to tarnish legitimate business enterprises. If EBay want a fair and balanced feedback system, then they should remove those buyers accounts.


----------



## Rodney

> I still think blind feedback would eliminate most of the problems. That being when feedback doesn't show up until either both buyer and seller have left feedback or until time runs out for leaving feedback.


I think this would improve things as well. It's actually done this way at rentacoder.com, and when I first used it years ago, my first thought was "why doesn't ebay use this".


----------



## cwoodburn

I agree with Girlsndolls. As a seller, I used to leave feedback immediately once payment was received. Now, I wait until they give me feedback before I leave their feedback so that they will do it. Otherwise, I wasn't getting feedback from my customers. I have not ever received negative and fortunately have not had a reason to give negative, however, I do not like that they did away with negative feedback for buyers. It makes ratings almost worthless. Someone might have 50 positives, but maybe they would've had 10 negatives to cancel out some of those positives if they had been allowed. I agree that sellers should not be able to retaliate and I think those sellers should be given warnings and eventually kicked off of ebay if they do give retalitory feedback. But sellers should be able to give honestly deserved negative feedback to warn other sellers. ie) I have a friend who found out by feedback that a customer who had requested a refund for a smaller $ item had actually been doing the same thing to other sellers repeatedly. She reported that buyer and the buyer got kicked off, but she wouldn't have known that if there had not been feedback from before the negatives were eliminated.


----------



## taurusndixie

A recent post said " Ebay has made shopping there more like real life shopping."

Humm, real story, woman buys item on Ebay and 12 months later changes her mind. Paypal robs sellers account and refunds money back to buyer. 
Customer keeps product and gets money back too. Does not seem like " Real Life Shopping " to me. Try taking your TV or car back after one year and ask for a refund.
Paypal Sucks and so does Ebay for using it.

I agree with the post that said Ebay needs to look after the sellers more because it is they who pay the bills for Ebay.

Glad many are happy with Ebay, but I won't sell there and hopefully never have to use paypal.


----------

