eBay to Drop Negative Feedback on Buyers

Trip Ericson writes "ArsTechnica is reporting that eBay plans to drop negative feedback on buyers. It's just one of a number of changes eBay will be making in the near future. 'eBay's data shows that sellers are eight times more likely to retaliate in kind against negative feedback, a figure that has grown dramatically over the years. In an attempt to mollify sellers, eBay will initiate a handful of seller protections to offset the inability to speak ill of a buyer. Negative and neutral feedback will be removed if a buyer bails on a transaction or if the buyer has his or her account suspended. Buyers will have less time to leave feedback, and won't be able to do so until three days after the auction ends. eBay is also pledging to step up monitoring and enforcement of its policies around buyers who behave very badly.'"

Comments

Re:What about non-paying buyers?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is already a way to report a non-paying bidder. If you go through that process and the buyer doesn't respond and show that they paid, then a mark goes against them on the account. Feedback is not needed for this.

Re:Simple Solution

[EllisDees]

Have a time limit of 60 days to leave feedback. If you haven't left any by that point, all feedback left will show up and you can't retaliate.

Honestly, what the hell is Ebay thinking with these changes?

Re:Well Duh

[macdaddy]

You might want to actually *read* the article. It's a novel idea, I know.

"In order to clamp down on the practice of tit-for-tat feedback, eBay will begin preventing sellers from leaving negative feedback on buyers."

I was going to summarize this but that one sentence is about as basic as it gets.

Re:Buyers are just as big a problem

[Dr. Smoove]

Dude, I think your problem is you're being far too nice. You need to be a prick on Ebay. Ebay is full of dickheads and mentally handicapped people. I love the offers that come to you like "il pay u $STARTINGBID 2 inclood shiping rite now". What do I look like fucking Wal-Mart, free shipping and shit? Eat a dick, if you want it bid on it. You give people the slightest leeway or the slightest indication that you are a nice guy, they will abuse you. When this guy whined about not being able to use the camera, you should have posted him a link to the manual. Maybe find an instructional course on photography and give him a link to that. Instead of saying "I will be forced to leave negative feedback", leave negative feedback. I sell a decent amount of Sun equipment on Ebay, and have had responses from people who clearly didn't read the whole description. I paste a link to the original auction and say "please re-read the description." That's all. Also, with PayPal, withdraw to your bank account immediately after receiving payment (always require immediate payment for buy it now too). If someone tries to activate the "buyer protection" shit to scam on you, you call your bank and tell them to cancel the transaction -> paypal. Your bank will listen, PayPal won't.

Re:What about non-paying buyers?

[EggyToast]

And any feedback they left is removed, meaning that bidders who don't pay can't influence the system. It's a nice touch, if you ask me, and one of the things that most sellers complaining about the change are ignoring.

Uh...no...

[msauve]

it is not "eBay legal," except in very rare cases (such as a fragile item where there may be significant packaging cost).

Sellers may charge reasonable shipping and handling fees to cover the costs for mailing, packaging, and handling the items they are selling...Sellers who want to be sure they are in compliance with this policy may charge actual shipping costs plus actual packaging materials cost (or less).

In addition to the final listing price, sellers are permitted to charge:

Actual Shipping cost: This is the actual cost (i.e. postage) for shipping the item.

Handling Fee: Actual packaging materials costs may be charged. A handling fee in addition to actual shipping cost may be charged if it is not excessive.

- http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/listing-shipping.html

Unfortunately, this policy is commonly ignored. It is quite common to find an item which is $1, shipped by first class mail for under $1, in an envelope costing under $1, which took under 2 minutes to pack, but which the seller wants to charge $12 or more for shipping/handling on. $10 for stuffing an envelope is excessive.

What it is, is a scam by sellers to significantly reduce their "final value fees" by moving dollars from item cost to shipping. The "shipping and handling" is a profit maker for them, in direct violation of eBay policy.

Re:Huh?

[unitron]

What reason does a seller have for charging more than the actual shipping costs...

It allows them to have an artificially low selling price for the item. eBay charges them a percentage of the selling price (before shipping), so the lower the selling price the less the seller has to pay eBay.

Re:Screw that; get rid of BUY IT NOW!

[GodfatherofSoul]

There's a filter option for that.

Payment is just the beginning

[sjbe]

If I walk into a brick and mortar store do they have the right to investigate my background and decide to tell me that they do not want to sell their goods to me because I did something they do not like in my past? Wrong comparison. Try going to a high dollar Southeby's auction without getting pre-qualified as a legitimate bidder. Trust me, you aren't going to be allowed to bid on the Monet painting without proving you can pay for it. Even in low dollar auctions if you don't pay you won't be allowed back to the next auction. Furthermore, a bricks and morter store can see you and that provides information about your trustworthiness. If you are behaving in a suspicious manner they have every right to refuse the sale. Lots of retailers keep track of problem customers and refuse them service if they step over the line. The whole reason for the feedback system is so buyers AND sellers can have information about the other party in the transaction. If this information is asymmetrical (favoring the buyers in this case) then the sellers are going to get screwed more often. Trustworthiness information should be transparent.

There are only 2 relevant ratings, they paid or not. Bullshit. I've had buyers give me a negative feedback complaining about my shipping speed literally 1 minute after the auction closed and before they had even paid. I'm not supposed to be able to respond to that? There are lots of crappy things a buyer can do besides not pay.

Re:Well Duh

[pbhj]

>>> "do they have the right to investigate my background and decide to tell me that they do not want to sell their goods to me because I did something they do not like in my past?"

Yes actually. It's called a credit reference check. Of course if you pay cash for most transactions you're fine. There are other restrictions like having age ID, having a driving license (hiring a vehicle), etc..

Also displaying goods is known (IIRC, in the UK) as an "offer to treat" and doesn't obligate the retailer in anyway to sell you the goods (but if they do sell them then they are obligated to do it in the proper manner, eg at the right price, etc.). This issue often arises when selling to children - no matches and paraffin, no eggs and flour, you get the idea.

If I don't like the look of you I won't let you in or will quickly usher you out of my store. If I've just seen your picture in the paper associated with anti-social behaviour then I'd be even more inclined to do that. Larger stores in most cities have a "store watch" or similar that bars people who have been caught shoplifting or which ensures suspected shoplifters are escorted around the store. So, this sort of thing does translate from/to the web/traditional retail environments.

Buyers of course have ample opportunity too to know about who they are buying from. There are lists of registered companies (with details of directors and other personnel). Also there are established mechanisms (trademark law and other consumer rights laws) that protect buyers at traditional retail outlets.

Basically I think your whole argument is pure bunkum.

My $0.02 (frequent buyer, occasional seller)

[Crazy Man on Fire]

I consider myself to be a good eBay buyer and seller. I always leave honest feedback. Most has been positive, but some has been negative.

I've received no negative feedback as a seller, despite several disputes that I eventually resolved with the buyers.

The biggest problem I've had with eBay is that they don't enforce their policies on the seller. I've won several no reserve auctions for high value items at a fraction of the items' value. Just as a winning bidder has an obligation to pay, a seller has an obligation to sell to the winning bidder. Lame excuses abound when the seller finds that the item didn't fetch what they were expecting. I've heard "my apartment was robbed, sorry" or "I can't sell for such a low price" despite winning auctions.

Aside from sellers to bid up their own auctions, sellers who refuse to sell at the close of the auction are the worst part of eBay. I've filed complaints with eBay in each instance, and then nothing. eBay won't discuss the complaint with me for privacy reasons. I doubt the seller even got a slap on the wrist. I've never won an auction and refused to pay, but my guess is that there are much more serious consequences for buyers in this situation than for sellers who refuse to sell.

Re:Well Duh

[orcus]

As frequent buyer on eBay, I heartily agree that it seems the new trend is sellers will only give positive feedback if I give them positive feedback first.
I use paypal on 99.9% of the auctions I win - so I have usually paid for the item before the seller even knows it has sold.
What really gets me though, is on eBay "neutral" is a dirty word - and in most peoples eyes the same as "negative".
If I win something on ebay, promptly pay, and it takes 4 weeks of me asking via email where my item is - and finally having it arrive way later than promised - why the heck should I give that seller the same degree of feedback (positive) as I give someone who is very prompt with his packages - and is quick to reply to email queries.

I feel that NEUTRAL feedback should be the most common type given out on ebay - and POSITIVE or NEGATIVE reserved for the extreme cases.

Why bother giving feedback at all - if the seller demands positive in order for you to receive positive?