Slashdot Mirror
eBay's Plan to Force PayPal Rejected Down Under
Jm_aus writes "eBay's plan to force all users to use PayPal only has been rejected by Australia's competition regulator, the ACCC. This followed 650 submissions from eBay users as well as from Australian banks, other payment services, the Australian Reserve Bank, and (anonymously) Google, which aired a lot of dirty laundry about PayPal's unresponsiveness and failure to sign up to the local banking code of conduct. Apparently the public benefits from eBay's 'Bad Buyer Experience' elimination program are likely to be 'minimal.' There is a period for appeals."
I think it's because PayPal is fairly undefined. It does seem like it's a bank and so people unthinkingly treat it as if it is one, but of course it has no actual bank foundation. And, of course, they have no imperative to become a bank, because then they'd have to follow the rules.
I'm just hoping that all countries everywhere enact similar rulings. Paypal gets on my damn nerves.
Nobody does a cash discount anymore because it's against eBay policy. eBay is all about making the seller unable to get around eBay's exorbitant fees in any way possible. That is their entire basis for forcing PayPal.
To give an example of their total fee structure: after selling a small item for $30, you're only going to see around $24.50 for it after fees, and then you still have to pay to ship it.
Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
I sort of enjoyed bidding for things on eBay back when it was new and there were deals to be had, but now nearly everything is at a fixed price and the only purpose it has for someone like me is to buy/sell used computer parts, which I can do elsewhere without the risk or hassle. I feel like the new eBay is mostly for soccer moms who don't know of alternatives, or for people who have very specialized interests with no other options (usually there are other, cheaper, safer options).
On the other hand, I never liked Paypal. As far as I could tell its sole purpose was to make it easier for sellers to scam buyers, since the only protection given to buyers is something on the order of $100. I know some people who bought Apple laptops on eBay, never received them, but were unable to get all of their ~$2000 back. If it happened to me, I'd do what another poster said today and stop the payment to Paypal from my credit card, but if it were me I wouldn't have made the purchase in the first place.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Ofcourse if you pay through PayPal, PayPal will also take a fee, this time depending on the total amount (item price + shipping).
With eBay & PayPal being 2 hands on one belly, making PayPal compulsory is something I read as an attempt to double the standard eBay fees, and grab a bit of the shipping costs as well.
Not that I care much. Read carefully what you sign up for if you sell items through eBay. Read even better what you sign up for when you open a PayPal account. Use both for what they're good for, not for everything. PayPal is just a payment option. I'd quickly drop eBay if that was not the case.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
As I've said in other posts: They knew the rules of the game before signing with a CC clearinghouse.
If they feel they can't profit on taking a CC transaction below a certain amount, they should either: Find a processing provider with better rates, not take CCs at all, or raise their prices such that larger purchases offset some of the cost.
Their profit margins aren't my concern, and it's silly to be expected to carry cash to make small purchases.
If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
"One of the principles of the social contract that one becomes a part of in a theoretically democratic society..."
... anarchy...
When did I sign this contract? When I was born? Am I agreeing to this contract every second (since birth) that I do not quit my job, take all of my property on a plane, and spend my life savings moving to another country? Is that how the contract works in a "democratic society"? If so, where is this explanation written down, and how does it justify the violation of everyone's natural rights as rational beings?
"Your argument cuts both ways, one could as easily say that one who advocates less government are risking the overwhelming violence of
I am not advocating no government or even less government. I am advocating that the government only function according to its original intended purpose - to uphold the rights of the citizenry; this is done through the use of force, when necessary, by the courts and the military/police. Whether such a move results in more or less government is of no concern. What the government has become instead is a rights-violating machine.
I get the feeling that you've never lived in a rural area. The situation is considerably more complex than you assume.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
And you do not own a business obviously. THERE ARE NO BETTER TERMS. Everybody has that clause. You want the business owner to take it up the ass so you dont have to carry around a few dollars? You want the business owner to lose money on the transactions that are less than $3 or whatever arbitrary amount they set? Get in touch with reality, I am in business to make money, and if I am not going to make money doing business with you, YOU can go do business somewhere else. The minimums in the CC acceptance contracts are there for the CC company benefit, so THEY make money on every transaction. NO SLIDING SCALE, they make some base fee plus a percentage on EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION. How are you upset with the small business owner for protecting his profits and not with the CC clearinghouse for doing WORSE? get called a hypocrite much?
Chuck
Good ol' French. When you need somebody to say, "Fuck you all, we do our own shit," they can always be counted on.