Hello Canadian eBayers,
I thought the format from last week worked really well, let's try it again this week. Please start posting at your convenience, I'll be with you on & off until sometime in the afternoon.
@pierrelebel wrote:
"item numbers from sellers who see this happen, so I can try for myself."
OK - here is a different type of problem.
Take a look at:
Whenever I attempt to "relist" or "sell similar" eBay gives me a message that the image does not meet eBay's standards!
Why?
It keeps happening, from time to time.
You're going to love my answer. 🙂
This happens because the image on your original listing did not meet the minimum size standards (500 pixels on the longest side). See for yourself: Click the link you provided me with, scroll down to the picture and inspect the image element on the page (you may have to view the page code to achieve this, depending on your browser). The image on the original listing was only 372 x 314, which really doesn't meet eBay's standards.
Here is the page source code as I view it on Chrome for Mac:
That is too funny.
It is a postage stamp. It is just that big. And, like most stamp dealers, I use a scanner, not a camera.
All stamps are scanned the same way, uploaded the same way with the same software. Yet only one in 100 maybe will come up with that problem and only on a relist, never the original listing.
@pierrelebel wrote:
That is too funny.
It is a postage stamp. It is just that big. And, like most stamp dealers, I use a scanner, not a camera.
All stamps are scanned the same way, uploaded the same way with the same software. Yet only one in 100 maybe will come up with that problem and only on a relist, never the original listing.
If you raise the resolution on your scanner for these smaller stamps, or even for all your stamps, you should avoid this problem entirely. Out of curiosity, what settings do you use? Could you raise the DPI setting on your scanner? This may or may not be relevant but the industry standard for hi-res scans is 300 DPI I think.
@afantiques wrote:
Assuming that the return did in fact, and without any gross misuse, amount to more than the seller's shipping costs. exactly how would ebay reimburse the seller, and from whose funds?
eBay would reimburse the buyer from its own money and later recoup that money from the seller. This is specified in the eBay Money Back Guarantee terms.
I would add that the best way for a seller to avoid this situation would be to ensure that the items they ship are, in fact, as described.
@afantiques wrote:
In case of a return on an item that was not as described, the seller is instructed to make arrangements with the buyer for the return. As such, it is up to the seller to instruct the buyer on which shipping service should be used for the return
What if the seller is non-co-operative? If nor specific instruction is given.
What happens if the seller has no idea what shipping services are available for tracked shipping from North Ruzakistan?
Again, the eMBG dispute resolution is a conversation between the buyer and the seller in which the seller is expected to make it right for the buyer. If the buyer is in North Ruzakistan (could you please show me that on a map? ;)), the seller would then have to ask the buyer about the various shipping options and then instruct them on which to use.
Here is the image from the relisted item
Here is the enlarged image from the tool above
@mjwl2006 wrote:
There is a 'bug' with the feedback system when applied via mobile device in that it automatically reiterates the exact text from a previous transaction to following transaction(s) when the same 'positive' feedback button is selected.
I recently had a very happy buyer who left me positive feedback and glowing DSRs with a less-than-flattering textual comment that was copied verbatim (by ebay, not the buyer) from the previous transaction that he/she had experienced from another seller entirely. Nothing could be done in so far that I could not apply to have it 'revised' because it was positive, not negative. The buyer was appalled afterwards to see that they had left the wrong comment for me when they had been so very happy with the experience. (You don't have to take me word for this, you can check ebay Messages.) Do you understand what I mean? The buyer selected positive for me and the left DSRs accordingly but 'didn't even see the spot where text went' before hitting submit; it was auto-filled from the previous feedback left for someone else entirely. If you've ever used an iPhone and the ebay app to leave feedback, you'll know exactly what I mean.
If you go to to Discussion threads, you'll see this kind of thing happens to other sellers on a regular basis. One can only speculate the involvement of mobile devices here.
Is this on ebay's radar to fix?
First time I hear about this. Luckily I'm well acquainted with the iPhone team, I'll let them know immediately. Thanks for reporting!
Again, the eMBG dispute resolution is a conversation between the buyer and the seller in which the seller is expected to make it right for the buyer. If the buyer is in North Ruzakistan (could you please show me that on a map? 
), the seller would then have to ask the buyer about the various shipping options and then instruct them on which to use.
This assumes at least a degree of competence and application on the part of the seller (plus possibly some fluency in North Ruzakistani, an unusual form of a Finno-Ugric language with Igpay Atinlay loanwords) which is uncommon. If the seller does not co-operate the case will be closed in the buyer's favour. I am assuming then the the buyer would not be required to return the item, is this correct.
If it is incorrect, and the buyer has to spend possibly twice,or even the same amount, returning the object that they paid to receive it, the case is closed, so how can the buyer be recompensed for this expenditure.
@afantiques wrote:
Apologies, I was guilty of the seller/buyer muddle.
eBay would reimburse the buyer from its own money and later recoup that money from the seller. This is specified in the eBay Money Back Guarantee terms.
I was asking if, with the best will in the world, it was impossible to return the item for the same or less in shipping costs. The buyer's money would not be adequate to cover the refund, all they paid was the cost plus shipping to them.
I appreciate you would have to go after the seller for all the return costs. It also appears that the seller has an open ended responsibility here. Despite the original announcement saying their outlay would limited to no more than they spend sending the item.
I monitor several countries discussion boards for international shipping topics. This question of 'how to get returns paid for' is perennial and as far as I can recall, without a satisfactory answer.
Theoretical ebay solutions often seem to run aground when it comes to the difficulties, some of which I have mentioned, of their application in practice.
Thanks for clarifying.
Here is what I can say: in your scenario the buyer is fully indemnified on the return shipping cost, as that's the promise we make via eMBG. It's impossible to put a cap on that return shipping cost, since even if we take out the possibility of buyer abuse/misuse (eg. the buyer choosing the most expensive shipping service out of spite), the actual cheapest return shipping with tracking may still be more expensive than the original shipping, as you outlined.
In extreme cases where the discrepancy is too great eBay remains fair to the seller and will only recoup from them up to a certain point (apologies if I can't disclose more details on what that threshold is).
@afantiques wrote:
Again, the eMBG dispute resolution is a conversation between the buyer and the seller in which the seller is expected to make it right for the buyer. If the buyer is in North Ruzakistan (could you please show me that on a map?
This assumes at least a degree of competence and application on the part of the seller (plus possibly some fluency in North Ruzakistani, an unusual form of a Finno-Ugric language with Igpay Atinlay loanwords) which is uncommon.
I always assumed the North Ruzakistani international trade laws required importers, both private and commercial, to know the local language for any country they buy from. But my intel may be dated on this particular subject. If I'm wrong, you're totally right that it's a long shot to expect a US or Canadian eBay seller to brush up on their ancient Finno-Ugric prior to making sales in that part of the former Soviet Union.
But back to our scenario.
@afantiques wrote:
If the seller does not co-operate the case will be closed in the buyer's favour. I am assuming then the the buyer would not be required to return the item, is this correct.
If the seller truly did not cooperate and the case is decided in the buyer's favour, that outcome would be possible. However things wouldn't end up this way if the seller attempted to make it right but in good faith, was unable to due to a language barrier or failure to help the seller make it right on the buyer's part.
@afantiques wrote:
If it is incorrect, and the buyer has to spend possibly twice,or even the same amount, returning the object that they paid to receive it, the case is closed, so how can the buyer be recompensed for this expenditure.
I have addressed this on my previous response to your other post.
Thank you pocomo for the information.
My problem is not to get an image to meet eBay's standards (that's easy enough) but the fact eBay is so inconsistent in allowing an scanned image for a listing, allowing it for relisting for a while and then... pooof!
