English is my second language... so maybe this is why I don't understand some of those changes 😞
I see a lot of sellers getting upset over those changes but eBay is ignoring us 😞 but maybe you could take a few moments and try to explain some things to us?
1.
Why accurate item description is bad? I always thought that it was good if I describe my item accurately 😞 so what is the difference between accurate and very accurate?
2.
Why eBay think that is bad if my customer is satisfied with communicating with me? Again I always thought that if my customer is satisfied I did a good job.
3.
I do my shipping every day... but my ratings are below quickly 😞 should I start shipping 3 or more times a day? Seriously what should I do to be considered very quick ?
4.
And this one I'm not getting at all... if I offer free shipping, why my customers are asked if my shipping charges are reasonable? and if they find free shipping reasonable, why my ratings go down?
5.
I did check in English dictionary, and according to it neural is not the same as negative If you don't believe me you can check it by yourselves... or maybe I was looking in wrong dictionary? please help me understand why neutral is same as negative?
I hope you VIP in eBay will not ignore me...
I see a lot of sellers getting upset over those changes but eBay is ignoring us 😞 but maybe you could take a few moments and try to explain some things to us?
1.
Why accurate item description is bad? I always thought that it was good if I describe my item accurately 😞 so what is the difference between accurate and very accurate?
2.
Why eBay think that is bad if my customer is satisfied with communicating with me? Again I always thought that if my customer is satisfied I did a good job.
3.
I do my shipping every day... but my ratings are below quickly 😞 should I start shipping 3 or more times a day? Seriously what should I do to be considered very quick ?
4.
And this one I'm not getting at all... if I offer free shipping, why my customers are asked if my shipping charges are reasonable? and if they find free shipping reasonable, why my ratings go down?
5.
I did check in English dictionary, and according to it neural is not the same as negative If you don't believe me you can check it by yourselves... or maybe I was looking in wrong dictionary? please help me understand why neutral is same as negative?
I hope you VIP in eBay will not ignore me...
Ok Miriam. I have a suggestion regarding non-paying bidders, negs they leave & the UPIs .
- check is in the mail
- item condition or usage mentioned in the UPI
Do NOT and I repeat do NOT allow a non-paying bidder's negative to stand. I want/need/expect an educated, higher-up customer service rep in eBay to review a complaint by any seller that receives a neg from a non-paying bidder. Why? This affects a sellers ability to sell so it's just a little important. <--note the sarcasm!
I've read the eBay Ink and basically you guys blow that smoke again about a non payer that responds to a UPI will be removed. blah blah blah
Know what? It's CRAP! There are reports out there that you holes believe the old check is in the mail story and thus will not remove a neg from a non-payer. That is an abomination!! You guys are believing what these non-payers say over sellers. That is NOT right. If a seller waits weeks for the mailed payment to arrive, it doesn't, they file UPI, bidder responds saying it was mailed, seller waits longer, still no pay & closes UPI. Non-payer negs and you schmos believe the non-payer.
Sorry but that's WRONG a million ways to Sunday. What do you do if a seller actually does get payment and files wrongfully? Well first of all the non-payer MUST provide proof of the cancelled check or money order signed by the seller & showing the account number it was deposited to to eBay to be believed. The help files say you need that but you don't. It's lipservice. And if they can prove such then suspend the seller for a week. That'll teach them to not file false reports.
But then again, got any stats on how many actually do that? I don't believe its very many at all. I do believe that there are TONS of buyers out there lying in UPI disputes about the check being in the mail and making up crap about the item or seller to let their neg stay on record.
The other thing I read is that if the non-payer makes any sort of reference to the item's condition then you bleeps! take that as a sign that the item was paid for, shipped and received and thus allow a neg to stay. Buyers got wind of the loophole they could make any type of response in a UPI to let their neg stay, like aldhfnldsfndsf. Don't you think they're going to get wise to making false claims about an item they never received in the first place in order to neg a seller?
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
- check is in the mail
- item condition or usage mentioned in the UPI
Do NOT and I repeat do NOT allow a non-paying bidder's negative to stand. I want/need/expect an educated, higher-up customer service rep in eBay to review a complaint by any seller that receives a neg from a non-paying bidder. Why? This affects a sellers ability to sell so it's just a little important. <--note the sarcasm!
I've read the eBay Ink and basically you guys blow that smoke again about a non payer that responds to a UPI will be removed. blah blah blah
Know what? It's CRAP! There are reports out there that you holes believe the old check is in the mail story and thus will not remove a neg from a non-payer. That is an abomination!! You guys are believing what these non-payers say over sellers. That is NOT right. If a seller waits weeks for the mailed payment to arrive, it doesn't, they file UPI, bidder responds saying it was mailed, seller waits longer, still no pay & closes UPI. Non-payer negs and you schmos believe the non-payer.
Sorry but that's WRONG a million ways to Sunday. What do you do if a seller actually does get payment and files wrongfully? Well first of all the non-payer MUST provide proof of the cancelled check or money order signed by the seller & showing the account number it was deposited to to eBay to be believed. The help files say you need that but you don't. It's lipservice. And if they can prove such then suspend the seller for a week. That'll teach them to not file false reports.
But then again, got any stats on how many actually do that? I don't believe its very many at all. I do believe that there are TONS of buyers out there lying in UPI disputes about the check being in the mail and making up crap about the item or seller to let their neg stay on record.
The other thing I read is that if the non-payer makes any sort of reference to the item's condition then you bleeps! take that as a sign that the item was paid for, shipped and received and thus allow a neg to stay. Buyers got wind of the loophole they could make any type of response in a UPI to let their neg stay, like aldhfnldsfndsf. Don't you think they're going to get wise to making false claims about an item they never received in the first place in order to neg a seller?
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
I have another issue re UPIs.
Your wording on the subject referring to Mutual Cancellation. The wording 'Unpaid Item' needs to be removed from a mutual cancellation offer. It scares buyers & they think there's going to be a blackmark on their record if they accept a sellers offer.
Examples:
I had someone buy two single sets of a 10 item lot instead of one 20 item lot. They're bird toys. I offer 10 & 20 beause people have different needs. It's cheaper for the 20 than it is for two 10s. I explained this to they buyer and offered to mutually cancel so I could get my FVF back and they could get the 20 cheaper.
I didn't have to. I thought it was good customer service to do so & in the interest of that and wanting a repeat customer I made the offer. I fully explained the wording and that it would have no effect. She declined because she was afraid of what eBay would keep on her record in the background. I didn't refund the difference in cost but I did throw in some extra product to more than make up for the difference she paid.
Now, you guys spew you want a good buyer experience. Buyer this & buyer that blah blah blah....how's it good to confuse them and make them afraid of something that will have no negative effect on them?
Bring that to the table!
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
Your wording on the subject referring to Mutual Cancellation. The wording 'Unpaid Item' needs to be removed from a mutual cancellation offer. It scares buyers & they think there's going to be a blackmark on their record if they accept a sellers offer.
Examples:
I had someone buy two single sets of a 10 item lot instead of one 20 item lot. They're bird toys. I offer 10 & 20 beause people have different needs. It's cheaper for the 20 than it is for two 10s. I explained this to they buyer and offered to mutually cancel so I could get my FVF back and they could get the 20 cheaper.
I didn't have to. I thought it was good customer service to do so & in the interest of that and wanting a repeat customer I made the offer. I fully explained the wording and that it would have no effect. She declined because she was afraid of what eBay would keep on her record in the background. I didn't refund the difference in cost but I did throw in some extra product to more than make up for the difference she paid.
Now, you guys spew you want a good buyer experience. Buyer this & buyer that blah blah blah....how's it good to confuse them and make them afraid of something that will have no negative effect on them?
Bring that to the table!
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
Another UPI issue:
Seller issues a refund to the buyer.
You guys say we should be using the UPI mutual cancellation option. OK but what if the buyer, to be a prick, refuses? Too bad for us? We've lost on the sale, possibly the product and the FVF too? That's wrong.
Why can't you guys make an option for getting FVF's back that the seller has refunded the buyer? And the seller has to provide transactional proof of the refund through PayPal that can easily be verified.
I had a case where I sold a set of kids PC games to a buyer. This guy was a PITA from the word go. Too many details to get into but if you want them I'll give you them at Live. He claimed it did not work with XP and demanded a refund. In the sole interests of avoiding a neg I did so upon receipt of the returned goods. He did & I did.
I can't guarantee what will or won't work with your system because everyone has different specs. That's why you're supposed to read the system requirements. Open games are useless to the next person & to me. I can't sell them.
I refunded this guy & I wanted my FVF back from eBay. My only option to do so was the UPI mutual. I opted not to use that because I had really good indicators that this guy would refuse and I felt he deserved a strike for his behaviour so I filed regular UPI. He opened, installed & copied the disc then fraudulently demanded a refund.
We need a buyer was refunded in full option to get our FVF's back.
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
Seller issues a refund to the buyer.
You guys say we should be using the UPI mutual cancellation option. OK but what if the buyer, to be a prick, refuses? Too bad for us? We've lost on the sale, possibly the product and the FVF too? That's wrong.
Why can't you guys make an option for getting FVF's back that the seller has refunded the buyer? And the seller has to provide transactional proof of the refund through PayPal that can easily be verified.
I had a case where I sold a set of kids PC games to a buyer. This guy was a PITA from the word go. Too many details to get into but if you want them I'll give you them at Live. He claimed it did not work with XP and demanded a refund. In the sole interests of avoiding a neg I did so upon receipt of the returned goods. He did & I did.
I can't guarantee what will or won't work with your system because everyone has different specs. That's why you're supposed to read the system requirements. Open games are useless to the next person & to me. I can't sell them.
I refunded this guy & I wanted my FVF back from eBay. My only option to do so was the UPI mutual. I opted not to use that because I had really good indicators that this guy would refuse and I felt he deserved a strike for his behaviour so I filed regular UPI. He opened, installed & copied the disc then fraudulently demanded a refund.
We need a buyer was refunded in full option to get our FVF's back.
When you find doing what's right hard to do - you've got a problem.
Miriam,
I'm not as disturbed by the feedback issues as others. Compared to Best Match it is a minor inconvenience.
Best Match is set up in such a way to completely favor scammers which in no way improves the buyer experience. A fraudulent seller simply has to develop a user id with questionable feedback via small purchases, then they can begin to sell and find themselves advantaged in Best Match.
Sellers with YEARS of proven reliability can easily find themselves at the bottom of search because of a low shipping DSR in the past 30 days. eBay has set it up to completely disregard years of reliable selling.
When Best Match was first implemented I was thrilled with it. It was based solely upon the listings that had attracted customers and sold with positive results in the past. It actually favored reliable sellers who had proven themselves through sales over the years. Then eBay introduced DSRs into the equation and it all went to h*ll in a hand-basket.
Prime example:
Item 310051440288
I have been selling salt lamps for years. This seller has been getting away with fee avoidance for just as long. I can GUARANTEE you that regardless of how many you buy or how they are shipped you CAN NOT get a 5 pound, finished salt lamp from Pakistan (where they are ALL mined) to North America for 99 cents each. Have a look at his shipping charge...$131.02 via USPS ground within the United States. It is obvious that this person is making his profit ENTIRELY off shipping charges and avoiding ebay fees.
He sells the same items under multiple id's with different pricing structures and shipping charges set up for each id. None of his id's has been as successful or rated FB as positive as mine over the years. When regular search and the original Best Match were in place my items rose to the top above all of this as buyers had been much more satisfied over the years with my honest sales practices and quality products. Since the implementation of DSR's into the equation ALL of his listings are ahead of mine. Why? Because I have a 4.5 shipping charge DSR for the past 30 days despite the fact that I subsidize shipping and offer 60% off the actual cost of UPS Ground service to my customers.
eBay is effectively shoving his listings, which have historically not resulted in a great deal of satisfaction down the throats of buyers, while my items...which have been received very well over the years languish on page 10 of search.
Please explain how this is a positive experience for
a) eBay, who are losing FVFs due to fee avoidance,
b) Buyers, to whom ebay is promoting products sold by people with a less than stellar history of product and customer service, or
c) Decent Sellers with years of proven FB and customer satisfaction who are now selling very little.
I'm not as disturbed by the feedback issues as others. Compared to Best Match it is a minor inconvenience.
Best Match is set up in such a way to completely favor scammers which in no way improves the buyer experience. A fraudulent seller simply has to develop a user id with questionable feedback via small purchases, then they can begin to sell and find themselves advantaged in Best Match.
Sellers with YEARS of proven reliability can easily find themselves at the bottom of search because of a low shipping DSR in the past 30 days. eBay has set it up to completely disregard years of reliable selling.
When Best Match was first implemented I was thrilled with it. It was based solely upon the listings that had attracted customers and sold with positive results in the past. It actually favored reliable sellers who had proven themselves through sales over the years. Then eBay introduced DSRs into the equation and it all went to h*ll in a hand-basket.
Prime example:
Item 310051440288
I have been selling salt lamps for years. This seller has been getting away with fee avoidance for just as long. I can GUARANTEE you that regardless of how many you buy or how they are shipped you CAN NOT get a 5 pound, finished salt lamp from Pakistan (where they are ALL mined) to North America for 99 cents each. Have a look at his shipping charge...$131.02 via USPS ground within the United States. It is obvious that this person is making his profit ENTIRELY off shipping charges and avoiding ebay fees.
He sells the same items under multiple id's with different pricing structures and shipping charges set up for each id. None of his id's has been as successful or rated FB as positive as mine over the years. When regular search and the original Best Match were in place my items rose to the top above all of this as buyers had been much more satisfied over the years with my honest sales practices and quality products. Since the implementation of DSR's into the equation ALL of his listings are ahead of mine. Why? Because I have a 4.5 shipping charge DSR for the past 30 days despite the fact that I subsidize shipping and offer 60% off the actual cost of UPS Ground service to my customers.
eBay is effectively shoving his listings, which have historically not resulted in a great deal of satisfaction down the throats of buyers, while my items...which have been received very well over the years languish on page 10 of search.
Please explain how this is a positive experience for
a) eBay, who are losing FVFs due to fee avoidance,
b) Buyers, to whom ebay is promoting products sold by people with a less than stellar history of product and customer service, or
c) Decent Sellers with years of proven FB and customer satisfaction who are now selling very little.
