Canada Post Government Study

"The House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates (OGGO) would like to invite you to appear before the Committee in Winnipeg on Friday, October 21 from 8:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. in view of its study on Canada Post."

 

I get five minutes for a presentation and then they ask me questions.

 

Input. I need input. I really do not care what it is as I want all angles.

.
.
.
Photobucket
Message 1 of 222
latest reply
221 REPLIES 221

Canada Post Government Study

Which seller and how did lack of tracking kill their business?  Are you saying they lost trs....went below standard or.....?

Message 61 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@pocomocomputing wrote:

 

 

 

This system works fine. Much better than the parcel left on a doorstep for anyone to take and much better than going to a post office to pick it up.

 

 

 


That may be true, but whether or not community boxes are more or less safe than the way packages are getting delivered now is not nearly as important as buyer perception.

 

I dislike the idea of having expensive items left in a CB regardless of which end of the transaction I'm on.  I don't know, but there is a good chance that other Canadians would feel insecure with that as well.

That is, the introduction of CBs for parcel delivery probably won't encourage Canadians to be more comfortable with buying on line and it may make many less inclined to shop on eBay etc. than they already are.

Message 62 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

Community Boxes are not being "introduced" they have been the common way mail is received for millions of Canadian and have been for many years.

 

They really are very little different than the cluster boxes used in multi-unit residential buildings found within the boundaries of the major cities where single family homes are the last bastion of door to door delivery.

 

Probably half of all ecommerce deliveries in Canada are already delivered to "boxes" of one sort or another be it Community Boxes, Apartment cluster boxes, Post Office/private boxes or Parcel Lockers.

 

 



"What else could I do? I had no trade so I became a peddler" - Lazarus Greenberg 1915
- answering Trolls is voluntary, my policy is not to participate.
Message 63 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

Any seller shipping from a rural, northern or remote location will be at a steep disadvantage when shipping untracked and left to the mercy of the buyer answering The Question because eBay does not account for traveling time between any remote locations in its delivery estimates.

This is despite the buyer's ability to enter their postal code into a field and eBay-provided text on the listing page which states delivery estimates are based on seller and buyer location plus seller handling time.

I have demonstrated on several occasions how the Expedited Parcel delivery estimate says one thing (for me shipping same-day it's one to seven business days) when Canada Post says another. Like 13 business days. Twice as long.

Any seller shipping from a remote location is then obligated to lie about their handling time (to pad that delivery estimate) if they want to provide buyers with a realistic delivery estimate.

eBay is aware of this major deficiency but continues to state the delivery estimates 'work for amajority of users' and therefore it's not a priority to fix.

That's no way for eBay sellers to do business.
Message 64 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@recped wrote:

Community Boxes are not being "introduced" they have been the common way mail is received for millions of Canadian and have been for many years.

 

 


Yes, I understand.  I received my parcels that way for 26 years so I'm very familiar with Community Mailboxes.

 

I only meant that they're being introduced to areas where mail is normally delivered door to door.

Message 65 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

image.jpeg

I found this on my Facebook newsfeed today. 

Message 66 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing. 

 

They wouldn't need to look at every acceptance scan.  All eBay would have to do is agree that a cash receipt (which already has a unique ID number) is sufficient as an alternative to an input tracking number.  The seller uploads the scanned receipt, inputs the receipt ID # as if it were a tracking #, and the system recognizes it as an acceptance # within the seller's handling time.  Any discrepancy or claim by the buyer could be handled as it is now, by CS looking at the scanned receipt.  Really the only aspect of this that is missing is eBay's willingness, not the technical feasibility of the concept.   

 

Regarding your other comment about switching to tracked packet and paying for it yourself.....it was your choice to do that rather than wait and see if the late shipment system was going to cause you a problem.   I still see many sellers sending items without tracking here so I don't think that it was as big a problem as some have suggested.

 

Well, you have such a kind way of putting things, thank you for your empathy.  But yes, I decided to protect myself rather than rely on eBay's assurances that the on-time delivery metric would be unlikely to cause problems.  You may see "many sellers" still sending items without tracking, but that is a far less risky decision for sellers living in urban areas, or sellers with bigger volumes who can absorb more black marks.  

 

I'm in a very rural location, and I know it takes 2 to 3 days for any parcel except Xpresspost just to get out of the province.  Add a snowstorm, and that becomes 3 to 4.  Add a snowstorm or other unforeseen "event" on the receiving end, or a delay through U.S. Customs, and that adds another 2 or 3.  I'm extremely reluctant to increase my handling time beyond 2 days in order to counter eBay's policies.  Tracking -- whenever I can justify it -- is the only insurance against the odds.  

 

By the way, I'm not saying I use tracking exclusively.  I still use Light/Small Packet selectively, for example if I know the weather is decent, the distance is reasonably short, and there is unlikely to be a Customs issue.

 

Please read 'mjwl's' Post #64 here -- her points are very much my thoughts on the subject too. 

Message 67 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing.

 

-:-

 

There is no bar code on light packet labels so they can't be scanned.  Small packet can be scanned but It seems to be for internal purposes only.


To have someone look at each scan would be impossible, I agree.  UNLESS it could be used to halt a false INR claim.  As it is someone has to look at everything now except if the seller just refunds without question.  If a seller could PROVE the item was mailed that should count for something, the way a chargeback can be won with proof of shipment.

 

I agree that a buyer should absolutely get their item.  Its just that once a seller puts it in the mail there is absolutely nothing they can do about it and it is not right that the seller is held responsible once the item is out of their hands.  Its like tossing a homing pigeon into the air and hoping a hawk doesn't get it before it reaches its destination.

 

I also firmly believe that it is very rare for an item to get lost in the mail and that almost all INR claims are false.

 

When I first said early on in the thread that I would like some sort of scan, preferably a delivery scan, I was not thinking of it having to be up and ready RIGHT NOW.   I am thinking of the future, and I am guessing the committee meeting is going to be future-focused at least in part as well.

 

Here is how my daydream fantasy plays out but any similar version will do.  Let's say I have a $20 video game.  With the CHANGES that will be made by Canada Post in tandem with eBay to improve postal services and better seller protection, what happens is I print off a label even if it is for $1.80.  There is a bar code on it.  I can enter the number where tracking goes and it immediately says the label has been printed.  I take my game to the postal counter, hand it over where the clerk scans it.  I haven't worked out where I pay for the scan, at the counter or when I print the label.  Probably the PO counter.  Also, if this were to provide seller protection against false claims I would gladly pay $1 for it.  I always have the option of not using it.

 

Now if the item doesn't get scanned on delivery that's not great but in my daydream fantasy once the item is scanned on entry it shows that particular item was mailed to that particular buyer and it acts as proof of shipment.  It shows the seller did their job, short of driving the item to the buyer and hand delivering it.

 

The whole point is that there needs to be CHANGES and IMPROVEMENTS, not just  can we console ourselves with just getting by the way it is now.

Message 68 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

We can see from reading everyones comments is that some sort of cheap tracking is needed.  The sense I get from others is that we are used to so little there is a hesitation to insist on full tracking so its as if something, anything, would be better than being told "No can do", which almost seems to be what people expect.   Its as if people are afraid to ask for too much for fear of getting nothing. 

 

All these views are worth mentioning because "The Chosen Ones" are expected to represent ALL Canadian sellers in a BALANCED way, not just put forward a personal wish list of their own.  I think its a good idea to hash it about here a bit to narrow and clarify, but just because anyone loudly disagrees about something does not mean it is without merit. 

 

The committee must be expecting something substantial or they would not have called people to show up and "testify" in this whole convoluted play.  They must be anticipating a good deal more than a combined 10 minutes of  Lower prices, Cheap tracking.  Our "ambassadors" still have a couple weeks to put together their proposals and prepare their speeches, but time goes quickly  and who knows when or if anyone will again pretend to be interested in hearing from real sellers. 

 

I would like to see further integration of eBay and Canada Post.  I believe absolutely that it will come in time, the way people can now watch little movies on a little phone that 30 years ago would have been denounced as impossible science fiction.  Not sure exactly how it will all unfold, but further connectivity between Canada Post and the US postal system, and also Canada Post and eBay would make selling in the future so much better.

Message 69 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing. 

  


I'm puzzled by that comment.

 

Since when do actual humans physically look at scans let alone make the types of comparisons your suggesting?  

 

It's all computerized and why would this be any different?

A bar code on each and every label allowing for routine scanning makes sense.

It should be routine and there should be no extra charge for it in the same way that every item gets scanned, recorded, and registered when you buy at Walmarts or wherever.

That's true for every single item regardless of cost.

 

If Grocery stores, Walmarts, etc. can do it at no added cost, so can the PO.

Message 70 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


rose-dee wrote:

 


pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing. 

 

They wouldn't need to look at every acceptance scan.  All eBay would have to do is agree that a cash receipt (which already has a unique ID number) is sufficient as an alternative to an input tracking number.  The seller uploads the scanned receipt, inputs the receipt ID # as if it were a tracking #, and the system recognizes it as an acceptance # within the seller's handling time.  Any discrepancy or claim by the buyer could be handled as it is now, by CS looking at the scanned receipt.  Really the only aspect of this that is missing is eBay's willingness, not the technical feasibility of the concept.   

 

 

I doubt that it is that simple unless eBay already has the capability to recognize each number entered as a functional CP receipt number for an item mailed. Otherwise, I could make up and enter a number.  Plus, I am sure that they would have to make some programming changes which may not be as simple as you suggest.

 

Regarding your other comment about switching to tracked packet and paying for it yourself.....it was your choice to do that rather than wait and see if the late shipment system was going to cause you a problem.   I still see many sellers sending items without tracking here so I don't think that it was as big a problem as some have suggested.

 

Well, you have such a kind way of putting things, thank you for your empathy.  But yes, I decided to protect myself rather than rely on eBay's assurances that the on-time delivery metric would be unlikely to cause problems.  You may see "many sellers" still sending items without tracking, but that is a far less risky decision for sellers living in urban areas, or sellers with bigger volumes who can absorb more black marks.  

 

I can be very empathetic but I think that you misunderstood my point.  You are assuming that you would have problems if you hadn't made any changes.  Maybe you would....I don't know for sure but then neither do you.

 

I don't doubt that it is much harder for some to meet the standards but based on the limited knowledge that I have....which is based on posts in the last year....the late shipment system has not affected sellers as much as we (including myself) thought it would.  Do I think that it is set up in the best way that it could be....no.    I just don't think that is proven to be the evil thing that some suggest.  

 

 

It does seem that those who complain loudest about it are more focused on what might happen rather than on what has actually happened in the past year. 

 

Anyway.....I don't think that the way eBay rates sellers is going to be of any concern to the people at the Canada Post meeting.

 

 

I'm in a very rural location, and I know it takes 2 to 3 days for any parcel except Xpresspost just to get out of the province.  Add a snowstorm, and that becomes 3 to 4.  Add a snowstorm or other unforeseen "event" on the receiving end, or a delay through U.S. Customs, and that adds another 2 or 3.  I'm extremely reluctant to increase my handling time beyond 2 days in order to counter eBay's policies.  Tracking -- whenever I can justify it -- is the only insurance against the odds.  

 

By the way, I'm not saying I use tracking exclusively.  I still use Light/Small Packet selectively, for example if I know the weather is decent, the distance is reasonably short, and there is unlikely to be a Customs issue.

 

Please read 'mjwl's' Post #64 here -- her points are very much my thoughts on the subject too. 


 

Message 71 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

Hmmm sorry....my reply type font looks larger than I thought it would be.....I'm not yelling.  

Message 72 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


To have someone look at each scan would be impossible, I agree. UNLESS it could be used to halt a false INR claim. As it is someone has to look at everything now except if the seller just refunds without question. If a seller could PROVE the item was mailed that should count for something, the way a chargeback can be won with proof of shipment.

I agree that a buyer should absolutely get their item. Its just that once a seller puts it in the mail there is absolutely nothing they can do about it and it is not right that the seller is held responsible once the item is out of their hands. Its like tossing a homing pigeon into the air and hoping a hawk doesn't get it before it reaches its destination.

I also firmly believe that it is very rare for an item to get lost in the mail and that almost all INR claims are false.

 

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

 

You said an acceptance scan should count for something with an inr claim.....what should it count for? 

Of course it isn't the sellers fault if a package gets lost but that isn't the buyers fault either.  I agree that very few packages do get lost but it isn't fair to assume that the buyer is lying when they say they didn't receive a package.  

If you had tracking and the item was not delivered, the seller would be responsible. How would that be different if you had an acceptance scan?   

 

I believe that when there is an unauthorized use chargeback and we have proof of shipment, that PayPal(and sometimes the cc company)  is usually the one that will cover the cost.  It's unlikely that eBay is going to cover the cost whenever there is proof of shipment but no delivery scan.

 

 

 

 

  

 

Message 73 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@sylviebee wrote:

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing. 

  


I'm puzzled by that comment.

 

Since when do actual humans physically look at scans let alone make the types of comparisons your suggesting?  

 

It's all computerized and why would this be any different?

A bar code on each and every label allowing for routine scanning makes sense.

It should be routine and there should be no extra charge for it in the same way that every item gets scanned, recorded, and registered when you buy at Walmarts or wherever.

That's true for every single item regardless of cost.

 

If Grocery stores, Walmarts, etc. can do it at no added cost, so can the PO.


I was replying to rose dee's post about entering the receipt numbers instead of a tracking number.  As it stands, that receipt number by itself wouldn't mean anything.

 

You are suggesting something different. Anything  is possible but at the moment there is no scan code on light packet so would CP be willing to add it to all of their  light packet labels just so that an eBay seller has an acceptance scan?  Maybe...I don't know.  Would they be willing for eBay to access that acceptance scan?  Right now this acceptance scan for small packet doesn't  show up online so I doubt that eBay has access to it and it is probably just for CP internal use right now.

 

I don't doubt that what you suggest can be done but I do wonder why CP would make those changes with no benefit to them.  There would be a cost and time factor for them to set it up and maintain it. 

 

 

Does anyone have a link to the thread where the meeting with CP was first discussed and  we were asked if we might want to go there to speak?   I will look again for it later on if no one has the URL handy.  

 

 

 

Message 74 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

It's earlier in the thread.
Message 75 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

I think it's inevitable that in the very near future each and every label will be scanned just the way tracked packet is now and it will be routine.

 

Everything in our world is computerized and every little item sold is documented, and there is much more valid reason to do these things with the mail than with almost anything else.

The fact that mail has been overlooked for so long defies logic.

 

Rose dee suggested that it would be a good idea to provide at least one scan.

 

I agree that it would be a good place to start.

 

Also, mj suggested that the PO might be resistant to that type of documentation because it could make them liable for loss, and I think she nailed it.

 

Message 76 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@pjcdn2005 wrote:

 

You said an acceptance scan should count for something with an inr claim.....what should it count for? 

Of course it isn't the sellers fault if a package gets lost but that isn't the buyers fault either.  I agree that very few packages do get lost but it isn't fair to assume that the buyer is lying when they say they didn't receive a package.  

If you had tracking and the item was not delivered, the seller would be responsible. How would that be different if you had an acceptance scan?   

 

I believe that when there is an unauthorized use chargeback and we have proof of shipment, that PayPal(and sometimes the cc company)  is usually the one that will cover the cost.  It's unlikely that eBay is going to cover the cost whenever there is proof of shipment but no delivery scan.

 


It was POST 23 where I said,

 I would like to see emphasis on affordable mailing options to keep postage costs as low as realistically possible and affordable tracking for little things like CDs or at the very least an entry scan even if the item never gets a look after that.  Ideally a delivery scan, but even an entry scan might be helpful if eBay would ever accept proof of shipment.

 

 

Keep in mind I am looking to the future not expecting an announcement to be made early November about all the great new programs and services Canada Post is now offering.

 

What should an entry scan count for?  Proof of shipment.  Seller protection.  Proof that the seller did everything possible a seller can do to get the buyer the item, short of not risking any delivery service and hand delivering the item themself to the buyer. 

 

PayPal extended the claim time to 6 months like credit card chargebacks.  Then IMO eBay/PayPal should go all the way and accept proof of shipment.  Again this is because too many people have stated that once they shipped only with tracking their INR claims vanished.  Parcels don't vanish, but false claims do if they are not made easy. 

 

If you yourself want to believe most INR claims are legit you might have better buyers than some like the dvd and game guys.  I just don't.  Not when so many sellers say that as soon as they changed over and used only tracked services they had no more INR claims.  If parcels went missing then just as many would go missing tracked or not.  It is only the ones where the seller "can't prove delivery (not shipping, delivery)" that the scammers can get easy freebies.  This needs to stop.

 

If a seller uses a tracked service and the buyer says it never arrived, the seller can enter the tracking number in the claim and it shows DELIVERED so the seller does not have to refund.  The claim is closed in the seller's favor.  This is necessary because if all it took was every scammer SAYING the parcel never arrived then tracking would be as useless as none at all. 

 

Porch theft is a reality, as my postal clerk told me all about it.  If Canada Post continues to leave packages alone on doorsteps then it is CP and not the seller who MUST be held accountable.  A seller can put an item in the mail but is powerless to stop the delivery service from being careless after that. 

 

Message 77 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@rose-dee wrote:

@mjwl2006 wrote:

Proof of shipment (acceptance scans) would help eBay sellers meet their on-time shipment commitment to eBay but it would never (and should never) replace paypal's proof of delivery. For a buyer's protection, that is imperative. If someone has paid for something, they are absolutely entitled to receive it. It shouldn't matter to the buyer whether the seller messed up or if the postal system did, if its an Item Not Received, it's INR. And only a sender can claim that loss back from the shipper so it must remain a seller's problem if the order never reaches its destination. So. I can't see any alternative to tracking metrics on both ends.


I think you misunderstand.  What 'sylviebee' was referring to above was an idea I mentioned to Raphael when the "on-time delivery metrics" were first announced.  I wasn't suggesting that it take the place of ordinary tracking or proof of delivery.  Not at all. 

 

Specifically, I brought it up in only in relation to USA and International Small and Light Packet services (and presumably also lettermail within Canada), i.e. services that do not currently have any online tracking. 

 

To reiterate what I said at that time, my suggestion to Raphael was that eBay work with Canada Post to agree on some form of acceptance scan for those services that don't have tracking, in a format that would be acceptable to eBay as proof the item had been dropped off.  As we know, presently eBay's on-time delivery policy states that as long as an item gets an acceptance scan within the seller's handling time, it will not be considered late. 

 

I'd noticed that my local P.O. was able to generate a digitized receipt (with some sort of scan on it), so it seemed to me it would be a relatively easy step to allow sellers to upload that scan somewhere on eBay (either in a note to the buyer in eBay Messages, or in a place in Selling Manager designated by eBay) to prove the item had actually been accepted at the Post Office.  

 

As I said then (and now), I'd be willing to pay CPC a reasonable fee (say $0.50?) for such a scan or receipt, to be able to escape the terrors of the on-time delivery policy, yet still be able to use Light Packet and Small Packet USA/Int'l (or lettermail within Canada), at the lower costs those services offer in comparison to fully tracked services. 

 

Of course, Raphael said he'd take note and pass the suggestion on.  That was months ago.  

 

I brought it up again here for 'Mr. Elmwood' to consider presenting because I think CPC has much more of a stake in attracting and increasing business from small online Canadian sellers than eBay has in accommodating those sellers.  I'd love to see CPC come to the point of being willing to pressure eBay on this point -- all eBay has to do is agree to accept a scan of a document/receipt that is already available in the CPC system.  It would serve both companies' purposes to have Canadians selling more to the US and overseas using the lower-priced CPC parcel services. 


I agree with everything you have said here Rosedee except the part about paying for the acceptance scan.

 

I really don't think tracking is necessary except for very expensive items, and that I would gladly pay myself for my own protection. In my opinion the idea for everyone, sellers, Canada Post and eBay should be to keep costs down to encourage more business.

 

The issue here is not that we need tracking, the issue is that we need eBay to honor and acceptance scan as proof that we the sellers have shipped out items on time and to protect us from getting a late shipment strike. That is the issue that I would like resolved and that issue was created by eBay when they changed the feedback system. eBay has made tracking a necessity, but tracking really is not a necessity and it's not all it's cracked up to be, in fact a lot of times the tracking information is a bit wonky. I've received a tracked item at my door when the computer told me it was still in transit.

 

I can see where there would be an extra charge for tracking, but not for a simple acceptance scan. That is done anyway when I take my parcels to the Post Office. We just need eBay to honor that as proof of shipment.

 

Mr. Elmwood: If Canada Post could start thinking more in the lines of volume rather than increasing costs because volume is down I think that would be a good thing for everyone concerned.

 

 

 

Message 78 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study

 

pjcdn2005 wrote:

It is unrealistic to expect eBay to physically look at each acceptance scan and compare it to the handling time on each particular listing. 

 

rose-dee wrote:

They wouldn't need to look at every acceptance scan.  All eBay would have to do is agree that a cash receipt (which already has a unique ID number) is sufficient as an alternative to an input tracking number.  The seller uploads the scanned receipt, inputs the receipt ID # as if it were a tracking #, and the system recognizes it as an acceptance # within the seller's handling time.  Any discrepancy or claim by the buyer could be handled as it is now, by CS looking at the scanned receipt.   

 

pjcdn2005 wrote:

 "I doubt that it is that simple unless eBay already has the capability to recognize each number entered as a functional CP receipt number for an item mailed. Otherwise, I could make up and enter a number.  Plus, I am sure that they would have to make some programming changes which may not be as simple as you suggest."

____________________________________________________

 

 

Well, I suppose I take more of a "glass half full" approach to problem-solving.  I think willingness by eBay to cooperate with CPC could make this a reality, perhaps not specifically as I've imagined it, but along these lines.  

 

If eBay/Paypal/Canada Post can collaborate on creating an entire label system, surely together they can think up some method to validate a number as an acceptance scan.  As for programming, eBay seems to have no trouble forever tweaking and re-programming the site.

 

The point I was trying to make is that full tracking for currently non-tracked parcel services is not absolutely necessary (unless eBay changes its rules).  If they could simply allow us to confirm acceptance of Light/Small Packet, that would be sufficient for a lot of us. 

 

******************************

 

"You are assuming that you would have problems if you hadn't made any changes.  Maybe you would....I don't know for sure but then neither do you."

 

Actually, I do know, pretty much for certain.  I ship over 90% to the U.S., most of the rest to overseas destinations.  Prior to the on-time delivery policy, I used Light and Small Packet almost exclusively.  After the introduction of on-time delivery, I made a calculated decision: with the normal 2 to 3 day delay involved from my location at the best of times, I needed to be careful about which service I use for which destinations.  With my current volume of transactions, I simply can't afford to squander my permitted annual allotment of late deliveries by playing Russian Roulette.  

 

*************************** 

 

"It does seem that those who complain loudest about it are more focused on what might happen rather than on what has actually happened in the past year."

 

 

With all due respect, this is an easy thing to say for sellers located in an urban or suburban area.  My posts were simply a statement of the reality of selling on eBay from a remote or rural location, how I decided to protect myself from unnecessary late deliveries, and what I'd like to see Canada Post do if they're interested in supporting online sellers throughout Canada.

  

************************* 

 

"Anyway.....I don't think that the way eBay rates sellers is going to be of any concern to the people at the Canada Post meeting."

 

 Oh, I completely disagree.  I think CPC would be very wise to pay attention to how eBay rates its sellers, since eBay's rules directly relate to the type and volume of parcel services used by those sellers.  

 

It stands to reason that if CPC could accommodate eBay's on-time delivery metrics, whether with full, affordable tracking on currently non-tracked services (such as our U.S. counterparts enjoy), or an acceptance confirmation of some kind, they would see an increase in usage by eBay sellers.  

 

This would doubtless have an impact on Canadian sellers' sales as well -- eBay-viable shipping options competitive with U.S. rates would help to boost our businesses, and in turn increase our use of Canada Post's services.  

 

Actually, I can't see how CPC can afford to ignore this factor if they are at all interested in increasing their volumes with small eBay sellers. 

 

 

Message 79 of 222
latest reply

Canada Post Government Study


@around_again_records wrote:
The issue here is not that we need tracking, the issue is that we need eBay to honor and acceptance scan as proof that we the sellers have shipped out items on time and to protect us from getting a late shipment strike. 

That's exactly the essence of it.  

 

I have no doubt this would be a great solution for Canadian sellers -- and for CPC.  Being able to offer lower-priced but less eBay-risky shipping options to our buyers would help increase our sales while also increasing Canada Post's volume of sales of such services.  Also, incidentally, might help many sellers retain their TRS/Power Seller status, and help boost sales.  Nothing but win-win all around.  

 

If I could pay Light/Small Packet prices plus or minus a reasonable surcharge for an acceptance confirmation, I'd use it on all my lower-priced items.  

 

Full tracking will always have its place to verify delivery on more valuable items or more problematic destinations, but it is not mandatory for compliance with eBay's on-time delivery policy.  

Message 80 of 222
latest reply