eBay

mr.elmwood · ‎10-03-2016

"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.

.
.
.

rose-dee · ‎11-10-2016

hlmacdon wrote:

"Reducing taxation barriers is the effective way of doing this, but to the detriment of domestic sellers. They have essentially backed themselves into this corner by destroying the auction marketplace model."

You make some very cogent points on this subject, which I agree with, including both of the above. I would add that eBay has for the most part abandoned its vintage/OOAK/unique product producers and sellers, in favour of competing with other online marketplaces selling the same mass-produced consumer "stuff".

As you point out, the problem is eBay is not in the same position to compete with these products because of the structure of their platform. They have effectively gifted away large segments of online selling, including auctions, digital products, and OOAK/vintage articles to other sites through destruction of the models for those items here on eBay. Those sellers (and more importantly, their buyers) won't be coming back to eBay. So if eBay's calculation fails, and they can't compete with other online marketplaces selling modern consumer goods, what will they have to fall back on?

At the very least I believe eBay should have divided itself into two streams several years ago -- one to handle new, commercially-produced goods, and a "vintage eBay" for everything else. Why they turned their back on that marketplace, allowing others to make a success of it, is mind-boggling, particularly since eBay had a firm hold on the brand to begin with. But now that's all water under the bridge, and eBay, as you say, has painted itself into a corner and invested everything in trying to look like a combination of Sears and Best-Buy.

"The flip side of that is you as a seller are probably subsidizing that loss by paying for uncompetitive outbound rates. Canada Post is profitable when outbound volume increases, not inbound volume."

That is absolutely correct, which is why eBay should be taking more of a partnership approach to Canada Post rather than pushing for changes that are patently not cost-effective from CPC's point of view, nor truly helpful for Canadian sellers.

I haven't read through all of eBay's presentation on the subject, but if the principal benefit for sellers being pushed around is the idea of a slower tracked service to the US and saving some paperwork then I just have to laugh. Acceptance scans for any barcoded mailings should be what is being pushed for. That goes along way to giving buyers some reassurance their item has been sent and solves the gong show that ebay has created with seller defects. The rest is UPU issues that ebay won't be able to effect.

Again, I agree, although I think the rationale wasn't so much a savings on paperwork as hoping that Canada Post will agree to lose even more money for eBay's benefit. There was no a mention of an acceptance/input scan by Ms. Stairs during her presentation. Its omission makes her presentation all the more laughable and transparent.

In any event, those of us who sell primarily to the U.S. know that our buyers aren't going to be happy with slower delivery than they already get from Canada. I've had buyers asking me where their parcel was after 5 business days. That's what they've come to expect.

As I said earlier, eBay itself created the mess with its on-time defects and the way those metrics impact Canadian sellers. Why should Canada Post (and, by extension Canadian taxpayers) be solving it? There are some simple solutions eBay could implement to lessen the burden of the on-time metrics for Canadian sellers. They just don't want to have to do it. I suspect the reason is a fear of backlash and cries of favouritism from their U.S. sellers.

pjcdn2005 · ‎11-10-2016

Be careful what you wish for. Also keep in mind the grass is not necessarily greener elsewhere. You keep mentioning how horrible the defect system is even though as far as I know, you have never received one. Yet there are many many US sellers that I've read about who have received late shipping defects even though they have tracking just because their packages did not receive an acceptance scan in time.

Many of us do not present our items at the post office/outlet counter because of the time involved and because it is more convenient to use an outside mail box. If there was an acceptance scan available on all packages, I don't know if I would be willing to wait in line to guarantee a scan in order to prevent the small risk of receiving a late shipment defect. I believe that you always go to the po to mail your packages so that obviously isn't a problem for you but then it doesn't seem that in the year they have been tracking late shipments has caused you a problem either.

There are are many US sellers who has lost TRS because of the 90 % requirement for updated validated tracking. I am sure that if we started receiving an acceptance scan for every package we would not only pay more but also have to meet that requirement as well as other requirements that we do not have to meet to receive the discount.

I would love to have a reasonable priced tracking service available mainly because more and more customers assume that their package will have tracking. I agree that receiving just an acceptance scan may make some buyers feel more confident that their item is on the way but I don't see that added service happening any time soon and in the meantime, myself and many sellers have been able to work with the system the way it is now. It's not ideal but it's workable.

As i said before I doubt that the solution you have suggested that eBay implement to "lessen the burden" for Canadian sellers is really all that simple. I also suspect that the reason that they aren't considering it has absolutely nothing to do with "a fear of backlash and cries of favouritism from their U.S. Sellers" but has more to do with the fact that it has burdened very few Canadian sellers and that they feel the cost and time involved to implement it isn't worthwhile for them or CP. I don't ever remember hearing about cries of favouritism from the US side regarding Canadian sellers.

i.am.vivian · ‎11-10-2016

@rose-dee wrote:
eBay has for the most part abandoned its vintage/OOAK/unique product producers and sellers, in favour of competing with other online marketplaces selling the same mass-produced consumer "stuff".

At the very least I believe eBay should have divided itself into two streams several years ago -- one to handle new, commercially-produced goods, and a "vintage eBay" for everything else. Why they turned their back on that marketplace, allowing others to make a success of it, is mind-boggling, particularly since eBay had a firm hold on the brand to begin with. But now that's all water under the bridge, and eBay, as you say, has painted itself into a corner and invested everything in trying to look like a combination of Sears and Best-Buy.

So nice to see someone else talk about this. 🙂 I had been thinking about this a lot lately and wondered if I am just too much of a dinosaur to belong. I was thinking it is a shame there was not a split to accommodate the 2 types, one for old vintage items, one-of-a-kind finds, handicrafts, art works, garage sale turn-overs, and all that. "eBay Vintage" as you say. And another for all that cheap Asian drop ship junk, even when it is being sold out of North America.

I already know how impracticable that would be so I don't need to be told. I was looking for something the other day and thinking how good it would be if I could PERMANENTLY set my Search to NORTH AMERICA. I never ever want to look anywhere else. I am so tired of eBay forcing that Asian junk all the time. I have some Search preferences set, like picture size. But it never lets me SAVE the Location. Every new search topics it goes back to Default and there is all that fake Chinese garbage with the titles all full of lies.

And there would be the main problem with "eBay Vintage". The Asians would simply list there and lie about their items. Right now they show cheap new items with words like "vintage" and "antique" in the title, because those are popular search words used by real buyers. But the items are new drop-ship junk. They use any word that will put their listings in front of buyers with no regard for accuracy.

Watches for example. People who fix & fiddle with watches often buy a parcel or "lot" of old watch parts for cheap. There is usually something in there they can use or play with. But today, sure enough, in the listings for cheap Chinese watches is the word "LOT". It has no reason to be there on a cheap plastic kids Hello Kitty watch, other than to be first in the "vintage watch lot" search.

I'm probably getting too far from your post theme in my ramblings, although you did cover quite a bit of ground in one go. 🙂

i.am.vivian · ‎11-10-2016

@pjcdn2005 wrote:
Be careful what you wish for. Also keep in mind the grass is not necessarily greener elsewhere.

All good points and very interesting. I support the entrance scan thing for all the reasons rose-dee mentions but like you say there could be a down side, and a sizeable one too.

Sometimes I think it would be so nice to just watch an armload of things scanned in and then not be thinking on the way home how many if any I am likely to have to refund. There is a part of me that would just love to be able to tell an impatient buyer, "Look. It's on its way. See?!"

My honest opinion is that we will end up getting pretty much nothing at all so for all those like yourself who think we really don't need anything to begin with you won't mind. I am still HOPING for real tracking. Cheap tracking. For all those things that we can now place in a mail box. Just like the Americans have.

I also can't help thinking that eBay seems so punitive-minded toward sellers. I know there are crooks who don't mail the items, lazy careless people who take the money but won't mail the item for weeks. Newbies who don't know about the PP 21 Day Hold, and don't mail it until they've got the money. But the way it is now, with eBay's sword of Damocles hanging over our heads all the time. I know buyers want their items fast but this is like whipping the driver when its the horses who are pulling the wagon.

That was a really good post about what could be the 'other side'. I'm sure there will be an unfortunate downside to anything we get. There usually is. It just bugs me that eBay is so voraciously obsessive about fast delivery but there is simply nothing sellers can do when the item is deposited. To my mind the entrance scan, when its utility is incorporated into the eBay lashing machine, would verify the on-time issue and then it gets there when it gets there.

I'm not even going to mention that eBay remind buyers that this is mail order which has always been and will always be slow compared to everything else and that if the buyer wants overnight courier service most sellers would be willing to oblige so long as the buyer pays the costs without argument. 🙂

Lots to think about anyway. We all need to think seriously about all sides of this, not just the side we want.

hlmacdon · ‎11-10-2016

@rose-dee wrote:

You make some very cogent points on this subject, which I agree with, including both of the above. I would add that eBay has for the most part abandoned its vintage/OOAK/unique product producers and sellers, in favour of competing with other online marketplaces selling the same mass-produced consumer "stuff".

As you point out, the problem is eBay is not in the same position to compete with these products because of the structure of their platform. They have effectively gifted away large segments of online selling, including auctions, digital products, and OOAK/vintage articles to other sites through destruction of the models for those items here on eBay. Those sellers (and more importantly, their buyers) won't be coming back to eBay. So if eBay's calculation fails, and they can't compete with other online marketplaces selling modern consumer goods, what will they have to fall back on?

Precisely, ebay has driven away sellers in droves with unpopular policies over the years and by not paying enough attention to the needs of smaller sellers. In that sense they lost their USP, which was access to a wide range of non-typical, non-mass market product. That has been extremely short sighted as you can see that the natural site traffic this selection of product helps generate has dropped off a cliff in recent years. Ignoring that market is perilous due to the traffic it brings, but also because it creates a self sustaining economy where buyers become sellers and sellers become buyers, and funds get recycled through the ecosystem.

The problem with the current approach is the twofold merchandise cost and logistics efficiency issue. When you try to compete against an amazon, a best buy, a target, a staples, a Walmart, etc you will always be at a cost disadvantage. A marketplace imposes a tax on sellers, and you are competing directly with large retailers that have better, lower cost logistics, and have better front end direct and back end indirect merchandise costs. This is why so much of the focus is on higher margin categories like fashion for example and why lower margin categories like electronics are so heavily funded via the ebay deals program. The problem with this is you are pigeonholing your user base. This is a big part of why their GMV has been so stagnant in recent years.

Having been in retail for the past 15+ years I've seen so many brick and mortar retailers go out of business by trying to compete head to head with larger retailers on products and categories where they are at an inherent cost disadvantage, rather than trying to diversify their offerings or develop specialty areas. Celebrate your uniqueness rather thank shirking away from it.

At the very least I believe eBay should have divided itself into two streams several years ago -- one to handle new, commercially-produced goods, and a "vintage eBay" for everything else. Why they turned their back on that marketplace, allowing others to make a success of it, is mind-boggling, particularly since eBay had a firm hold on the brand to begin with. But now that's all water under the bridge, and eBay, as you say, has painted itself into a corner and invested everything in trying to look like a combination of Sears and Best-Buy.

Couldn't agree more. A C2C selling model that recognizes the importance of this market is needed. If they aren't careful sites with large userbases will successfully monetize that in the coming years. That traffic continues to shift to specialty marketplaces and social media platforms. Trying to retain as much of that traffic is much healthier for the ebay ecosystem as a whole.


That is absolutely correct, which is why eBay should be taking more of a partnership approach to Canada Post rather than pushing for changes that are patently not cost-effective from CPC's point of view, nor truly helpful for Canadian sellers.

Again, I agree, although I think the rationale wasn't so much a savings on paperwork as hoping that Canada Post will agree to lose even more money for eBay's benefit. There was no a mention of an acceptance/input scan by Ms. Stairs during her presentation. Its omission makes her presentation all the more laughable and transparent.

That is very disappointing to hear, and quite telling as you mention. I know this is a discussion that ebay has had with them in the past but it would have been nice to see the topic discussed more publicly.


In any event, those of us who sell primarily to the U.S. know that our buyers aren't going to be happy with slower delivery than they already get from Canada. I've had buyers asking me where their parcel was after 5 business days. That's what they've come to expect.
US buyers are used to the tick tock nature of USPS. It isn't perfect (the majority of my mailing is with USPS these days), but delivery times are very consistent and when they aren't you hear from your buyers. Other large retailers with consistent logistics patterns only reinforce this. Sellers that use slower services in the US like fedex smartpost or courier ground services tend to get pilloried. A slower approach is not consistent with the metrics and buyer expectations ebay has been pushing in recent times.

As I said earlier, eBay itself created the mess with its on-time defects and the way those metrics impact Canadian sellers. Why should Canada Post (and, by extension Canadian taxpayers) be solving it? There are some simple solutions eBay could implement to lessen the burden of the on-time metrics for Canadian sellers. They just don't want to have to do it. I suspect the reason is a fear of backlash and cries of favouritism from their U.S. sellers.

This is the crux of the problem I have seen with ebay and Canadian sellers. Regardless of how much actual impact it has on the sellers it only further deteriorates the relationship between the platform and the seller. It is a self imposed problem and lobbying the government to create a tax relief system that provides no benefit for Canadian sellers only further exacerbates this. I don't expect them to fix higher level issues like UPU reciprocal rates, but what they are advocating for does little to help domestic sellers. Pushing to expand tracking options is going to be an uphill battle, but acceptance scans should be a realistically achievable goal.

rose-dee · ‎11-10-2016

pjcdn2005 wrote:

"Be careful what you wish for. Also keep in mind the grass is not necessarily greener elsewhere. You keep mentioning how horrible the defect system is even though as far as I know, you have never received one."

'Pj', you can never bring yourself to agree with, or even see the sense in anything I ever say, but I do have logical reasons for the suggestions I've made. I'm not sure what "grass is greener elsewhere" has to do with this subject, but the very reason I've had no late defects so far is that eBay has put the fear of defects into me, and so I've been extremely careful, using tracking strategically on a far higher percentage of shipments than ever before. I have also been heavily subsidizing that tracking wherever necessary. In other words, my buyers don't realize how much it's costing me to avoid the defects.

At my current level of turnover/transactions, I can't afford not to be over-cautious, especially considering that I have to account for an extra 2 to 3 days from my location to anywhere, and the delays of bad weather (basically winter hurricanes) in my area from January through March, as well as U.S. Customs delays (since I sell mostly to the U.S.). Add to that the delivery expectations of U.S. buyers, and I'm at risk for most parcels I send off. Partly I need to "conserve" my allowance of late defects for unavoidable trouble during the winter months.

"Yet there are many many US sellers that I've read about who have received late shipping defects even though they have tracking just because their packages did not receive an acceptance scan in time."

Well, I'd say that if you're a U.S. seller and have the advantages of cheap tracking, and yet don't ensure that you get your parcel out in good time (or that the scan at the counter actually "takes"), you have only yourself to blame for being sloppy.

"Many of us do not present our items at the post office/outlet counter because of the time involved and because it is more convenient to use an outside mail box. If there was an acceptance scan available on all packages, I don't know if I would be willing to wait in line to guarantee a scan in order to prevent the small risk of receiving a late shipment defect. I believe that you always go to the po to mail your packages so that obviously isn't a problem for you but then it doesn't seem that in the year they have been tracking late shipments has caused you a problem either."

See my earlier reply. If an acceptance scan option were available, it doesn't mean that sellers couldn't still choose to use tracking and not take their parcels to the P.O. No one would be obliging anyone to stand in line. An acceptance scan system would at least provide Cdn. sellers who can't afford tracking with an alternative.

"There are are many US sellers who has lost TRS because of the 90 % requirement for updated validated tracking. I am sure that if we started receiving an acceptance scan for every package we would not only pay more but also have to meet that requirement as well as other requirements that we do not have to meet to receive the discount."

Well, I think that's conjecture. Acceptance scans could be done in two or three different ways that would not necessarily involve expense on the part of Canada Post or the user for every parcel. In any case, acceptance scans are already free (included) for all tracked services. Some sort of acceptance confirmation could perhaps be provided at very small cost for services that don't currently have tracking (Light/Small Packet USA/int'l and possibly also even lettermail within Canada). I really wouldn't mind paying $0.25 or $0.50 to defray CPC's costs if necessary, for the peace of mind of knowing I've met eBay's on-time rules and could not get a defect for shipping issues that are beyond my control.

Canada Post outlets already have the means of producing digital receipts; it's really more a matter of eBay using some flexibility and creative thinking to make the system function as input confirmation for purposes of its own rules.

"I would love to have a reasonable priced tracking service available mainly because more and more customers assume that their package will have tracking. I agree that receiving just an acceptance scan may make some buyers feel more confident that their item is on the way but I don't see that added service happening any time soon and in the meantime, myself and many sellers have been able to work with the system the way it is now. It's not ideal but it's workable."

I honestly think CPC won't be able to provide reasonably priced tracking on their currently non-tracked services, at least not at present. The only reason I suggest some form of input/acceptance confirmation for non-tracked parcels is as an alternative for those services in the meantime. That process would be far easier and far less costly for CPC to implement than full tracking on such services as Light/Small Packet. I only wish Andrea Stairs had mentioned it, rather than harping on a "tiered", or slow-boat service with tracking. I can't see that idea as benefiting either Canadian sellers or CPC.

"As i said before I doubt that the solution you have suggested that eBay implement to "lessen the burden" for Canadian sellers is really all that simple."

It is extremely simple. As simple as liaising with CPC to use the processes and services that are already available and using them to meet eBay's policies. The real problem, as I see it, is not a practical or financial one, but a lack of willingness on eBay's part to alter its on-time shipping policies in any way.

"I also suspect that the reason that they aren't considering it has absolutely nothing to do with "a fear of backlash and cries of favouritism from their U.S. Sellers" but has more to do with the fact that it has burdened very few Canadian sellers and that they feel the cost and time involved to implement it isn't worthwhile for them or CP. I don't ever remember hearing about cries of favouritism from the US side regarding Canadian sellers."

Do you recall the favourable terms Canadian sellers used to have with regard to tracked shipping and how it helped our ability to keep TRS? We used to be able to enter an "unofficial" tracking number and get acknowledged for full tracking. The reason that very important benefit was removed -- at least according to the eBay.ca reps who were asked why it was discontinued -- was that there had been an outcry from U.S. sellers over unfair advantages to Canadian sellers.

As for burdening few Canadian sellers, we can't know how many have given up selling as a result of the on-time delivery policy and an inability to afford tracking. All I know is that it is very much an added burden for me, and from what I've seen on the boards, for other small sellers as well. A small concession from eBay would be all that would be required to ease this added handicap, for example (but not limited to):

Exemption from the on-time delivery policy where free shipping is provided;
Adding a third option: "Don't know/Can't recall" so that buyers don't feel obligated to answer the on-time question;
Accepting some form of input/acceptance or confirmation of shipment for Canadian sellers' non-tracked parcels. Understand that this would not necessarily have to be a scan in the usual sense of the word. It could be a confirmation number, an input code, an uploaded screenshot, whatever the heck keeps eBay happy and is simple to implement.

In this regard, I note with real interest a post this week by one Canadian seller who, on complaining about getting a defect because her acceptance scan on a tracked parcel didn't properly "load" into the system (unbeknownst to the seller), was told by eBay CS that a photo of the parcel at the P.O. counter would be acceptable to eBay to remove the defect! So -- if eBay can go this far, why can't those brilliant CEOs in San Jose come up with an analogous, but simpler, proof of acceptance? The answer is that they would rather look to CPC to do the thinking and solving for them.

i.am.vivian · ‎11-10-2016

This is such an interesting topic to consider. To me it is, at least. I like reading all the different thoughts and input.

@rose-dee wrote:
Adding a third option: "Don't know/Can't recall" so that buyers don't feel obligated to answer the on-time question;

Why, oh why will they not add that? It makes so much sense. Why didn't anyone who concocted the on-time Q think of this option in the first place? Keep suggesting it on Weekly Chat, maybe eventually it will "take".

Accepting some form of input/acceptance or confirmation of shipment for Canadian sellers' non-tracked parcels. Understand that this would not necessarily have to be a scan in the usual sense of the word. It could be a confirmation number, an input code, an uploaded screenshot, whatever the heck keeps eBay happy and is simple to implement.

In my opinion it would have to be a real scan. The seller could choose to pay it or not, or just use stamps to mail those little things. I'm thinking of really little things, like postcards and earrings. Or even those patterns you sell. The reason it has to be a genuine scan is because all the other forms are too easily faked. Only when the post office gets their hands on something and really truly scans it would that be of any actual use.

Then, eBay has to get on board and accept that the item has been mailed. As in "proof of shipment". Where sellers used to put those fake tracking #s, the entry scan would suffice to prove shipment and halt the on-time question. It would prove the seller mailed it and did so on time. That's how I see all this but I know a lot of people have completely different views.

Exemption from the on-time delivery policy where free shipping is provided;

Well now, that would be one way to get absolutely every eBay seller on the planet to go with Free Shipping. 🙂

momcqueen · ‎11-10-2016

@i.am.vivian wrote:
This is such an interesting topic to consider. To me it is, at least. I like reading all the different thoughts and input.

@rose-dee wrote:
Adding a third option: "Don't know/Can't recall" so that buyers don't feel obligated to answer the on-time question;
>Why, oh why will they not add that? It makes so much sense. Why didn't anyone who concocted the on-time Q think of this option in the first place? Keep suggesting it on Weekly Chat, maybe eventually it will "take".

We've been asking for that since the Defect system for Late Shipment was announced. I don't expect it will ever happen. I imagine the powers-that-be feel it undermines the whole purpose of the question.

Exemption from the on-time delivery policy where free shipping is provided;

Well now, that would be one way to get absolutely every eBay seller on the planet to go with Free Shipping. 🙂

For domestic CANADIAN sellers I think it would be a nice 'thank-you for your efforts' gesture but it would spell disaster for all the 'free shipping' orders from overseas that may or may not arrive. On time or otherwise. Right now, with Negatives being meaningless on seller performance evaluation, the only thing ebay has to go on for seller standards is Late Shipment Defects and unresolved Resolution Centre cases. A free pass on free shipping would allow all those 'bad' overseas sellers to get away with almost whatever they like scott-free. And, as we see from buyers who come to the Answer Centre nearing their last straw, there is a tipping point for frustration with ebay that send them packing for good. Collectively, we cannot have that. When ebay comes off looking bad because one seller has been a jerk to their buyers, we all suffer for it.

i.am.vivian · ‎11-10-2016

mjwl2006 wrote:

rose-dee wrote:

Adding a third option: "Don't know/Can't recall" so that buyers don't feel obligated to answer the on-time question;

We've been asking for that since the Defect system for Late Shipment was announced. I don't expect it will ever happen. I imagine the powers-that-be feel it undermines the whole purpose of the question.

I agree, as good a suggestion as it is, eBay will never add it. But I don't think that is a sufficient reason to just sit quietly back and pretend it is therefore not needed, not for those who feel strongly about it. To me it looks more like eBay will never admit when they don't do everything right. I recall the response about it

https://community.ebay.ca/t5/Weekly-Chat-Session/February-10th-2016-Weekly-Session/m-p/326523#M3527

The only thing I can say is that the Standards team is listening to any and all comments and suggestions made on this forum. For now, as I keep saying, the data we have suggests that the measurement of on time shipping works well for the vast majority of sellers, even for Canadian sellers who don't use tracking.

EBay's persisting that whatever they do it is always the best thing for everyone and that their very secret data confirms how well it's all working always makes me think of Voltaire's Candide who, throughout the book, keeps saying things like "Everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds", at the most inopportune moments.

Personally I think the 3rd choice would be a good option that would not undermine anything because those who have a clear recollection would say so but for those who are indifferent or can't recall it would be an honest choice. As it stands we are left to rely entirely on human nature. I am aware that the whole thing is more of an issue for people who do not live in cities and who do not use tracking. I live in a West Coast city with fine weather and post offices nearby, but I don't dismiss the challenges faced by others in different situations. It is unfortunate that some people feel they must to great lengths "to protect themselves from eBay" with its punishing lash.

https://community.ebay.ca/t5/Weekly-Chat-Session/November-2nd-2016-Weekly-Session/m-p/355824#M5326

Exemption from the on-time delivery policy where free shipping is provided;

For domestic CANADIAN sellers I think it would be a nice 'thank-you for your efforts' gesture but it would spell disaster for all the 'free shipping' orders from overseas that may or may not arrive. On time or otherwise. Right now, with Negatives being meaningless on seller performance evaluation, the only thing ebay has to go on for seller standards is Late Shipment Defects and unresolved Resolution Centre cases. A free pass on free shipping would allow all those 'bad' overseas sellers to get away with almost whatever they like scott-free. And, as we see from buyers who come to the Answer Centre nearing their last straw, there is a tipping point for frustration with ebay that send them packing for good. Collectively, we cannot have that. When ebay comes off looking bad because one seller has been a jerk to their buyers, we all suffer for it.

Yes, well, it certainly wasn't my suggestion. 🙂

pjcdn2005 · ‎11-11-2016

Sometimes I think it would be so nice to just watch an armload of things scanned in and then not be thinking on the way home how many if any I am likely to have to refund. There is a part of me that would just love to be able to tell an impatient buyer, "Look. It's on its way. See?!"

Unfortunately receiving an acceptance scan without a delivery confirmation option wouldn't make you immune from having to refund for an inr claim although it might make some buyers wait a little longer before making a claim. But an on time scan would definitely protect you from a late delivery defect.

i am saying that being able to get an acceptance scan for all services would be a bad thing because it would come in handy but i really can't see it happening any time soon so Instead I focus on how to best work with the system we now have.

cumos55 · ‎11-11-2016

Sellers who use the Paypal/eBay postage option in the US, take their parcels and drop them off at a USPS postal outlet....

The parcels are dropped off and will get scanned at a later time... and that is the entry scan... which could be late....such as on the next day.

Many sellers have found out that they have to get in line and actually see their parcels scanned.... and ... in many instances the postal clerk gets agitated/bothered with this process...especially if there is a long line up at the counter

That is when the seller goes to a different postal outlet that is more cooperative and much less abusive

This was discussed on eBay.com.

tobyshitzu · ‎11-11-2016

"

As for burdening few Canadian sellers, we can't know how many have given up selling as a result of the on-time delivery policy and an inability to afford tracking. All I know is that it is very much an added burden for me, and from what I've seen on the boards, for other small sellers as well. A small concession from eBay would be all that would be required to ease this added handicap, for example (but not limited to):

'

This doesnt makes any sense. Why would anyone give up selling over the on time thing? Losing TRS at most means 2% of the gross extra in fees (as low as .8% for stores). Anyone who was worried about "on time' can just increase their handling time to 10 days or more and have most items delivered to anywhere before they were even supposed to ship! Or use the very long time "economy" provides

As its turned out, with the long time frames and buyers rarely saying it was late, it would appear its easier to keep the trs discount here then in the USA with 1 day handling/90% tracking uploaded/lower % late. If Cp had services that allowed ebay to implement that here then it would jsut take a bad weather day and a bunch wouldn't count, while the way it is they are likely all fine. If ebay changes anything, I'd guess ti would be to reduce the numbers getting the discount here, not make it even easier.

rose-dee · ‎11-11-2016

@mjwl2006 wrote:
"For domestic CANADIAN sellers I think it would be a nice 'thank-you for your efforts' gesture but it would spell disaster for all the 'free shipping' orders from overseas that may or may not arrive. On time or otherwise. Right now, with Negatives being meaningless on seller performance evaluation, the only thing ebay has to go on for seller standards is Late Shipment Defects and unresolved Resolution Centre cases. A free pass on free shipping would allow all those 'bad' overseas sellers to get away with almost whatever they like scott-free."

I think perhaps there was some misunderstanding of what I was saying. I never meant to suggest that eBay should allow an exemption for all sellers from the on-time rules, but only for Canadian sellers (who offer free shipping).

There are precedents for this. EBay has created different rules and exceptions in other areas for their various sites (including eBay.ca). I really can't fathom why this concession couldn't be made to Canadian sellers since eBay surely must know we have a handicap in selling to the U.S. in particular. Not only would it encourage more free shipping offered by Canadian sellers, but would probably increase sales. A win for us, a win for eBay.

"We've been asking for that since the Defect system for Late Shipment was announced. I don't expect it will ever happen. I imagine the powers-that-be feel it undermines the whole purpose of the question."

Well, it's true that this is eBay's rationale, but the rationale was necessary because eBay has so completely committed itself to this one parameter as its main control and punishment of sellers. However, in being so singularly focused on this method of seller evaluation, they forgot about their buyers.

Consider the buyer who is faced with The Question, really can't recall, but thinks the item may have arrived on time. Consider that buyer to be an honest person for whom truth and accuracy are important, and who feels it's important to leave feedback.

Now they have a real dilemma, faced with a "Yes" or "No", and no way out. Do they choose "Yes", and feel they are lying, or "No" and feel they are being too harsh? I say it's only fair to buyers to provide them with an out, a third option. At the very least, if eBay can't or won't add a third "Don't know/Don't recall" option, eBay should state on the FB page that the buyer may, if they wish, bypass the on-time question, with no consequences to the seller.

The reason I say this is that I've been in exactly this position myself. I was surprised at how easy it was to be confused or unable to recall a particular arrival date, especially if a few items were ordered that arrived at different times!

I chose not to answer The Question because I felt I couldn't answer completely honestly, but then as a seller of course I knew I could demur. I doubt many buyers understand this. How many, when faced with the Yes/No choice and unable to say one way or the other, have simply abandoned the FB page? Could eBay be not only turning many buyers away from leaving FB, but also in the process be helping to nullify their own scheme?

I can honestly say, I just about gave up and left the FB page when faced with this conundrum. It was only because I'm a seller that I knew how useful and important my FB might be to the seller from whom I purchased.

rose-dee · ‎11-11-2016

@toby**bleep**zu wrote:

This doesnt makes any sense. Why would anyone give up selling over the on time thing? Losing TRS at most means 2% of the gross extra in fees (as low as .8% for stores). Anyone who was worried about "on time' can just increase their handling time to 10 days or more and have most items delivered to anywhere before they were even supposed to ship! Or use the very long time "economy" provides

I don't think it's that simple an equation. I specifically asked about extended handling times this week and Raphael confirmed that longer handling times will have an effect on Best Match/placement, etc. Showing longer shipping times (economy) can be a risk too, especially if you sell mainly to the U.S., where buyers expect to see far shorter delivery times. It's a rock and a hard place scenario.

i.am.vivian · ‎11-11-2016

@pjcdn2005 wrote:
Unfortunately receiving an acceptance scan without a delivery confirmation option wouldn't make you immune from having to refund for an inr claim although it might make some buyers wait a little longer before making a claim. But an on time scan would definitely protect you from a late delivery defect.

I agree with you. I am not arguing the likelihood of the most probable outcome. The way I see the entry scan working (the way it can only really work best) is if eBay accepts the proof of shipment the way credit card companies do. I fully agree that the way it is now with eBay's single-minded attention on Delivery (actually the purview of the post office) that all an entrance scan would or even could do is soothe impatient buyers and halt the on-time question, if eBay would even accept it for the latter.

I'm not arguing with your points at all. The opposite. I can't help but wish for some sort of "proof" the item is on its way but I also think it is important you come along and so eloquently remind us all that it could backfire. Everything you said was true. To my mind the entrance scan, when its utility is incorporated into the eBay lashing machine, would verify the on-time issue and then the item gets there when it gets there. But that is only IF eBay gets on board and accepts it as Proof of Shipment the way credit card companies accept P-o-S to stop a chargeback.

It seems PayPal wants to mimic card companies with their 6-months-to-file-a-claim policy. Fine. That's great for buyers, isn't it. Then share the wealth. Give some to sellers, too. Accept P-o-S to stop an INR claim.

All this would only apply to those sellers who paid for it. We all want cheaper tracking. (Keeping it realistic, I'm thinking a MAX of $1 entry-only, $2 if DC goes with it). I don't see why not since the technology is there. For those sellers who think its wiser to just use self-insurance they can do that too, it's the equivalent of mailing things "Surface", being completely untracked only not as slow. Just like now. Some items are not worth any extra cost, postage being too expensive already.

I appreciate everyone has different opinions about this. Radically different even. Mine is that I am tired of sellers being held responsible for the activities of the world's delivery systems. I see the need for eBay to recognize that once a seller has put the item in the mail there is nothing more the seller can do. Just like card companies.

Without that, I believe you are absolutely right that a bona-fide entrance scan would not be much help and instead could make things worse. EBay is very American in outlook and Americans always have to take everything there is and turn it into a weapon. I have no doubt eBay would seize on the entry scan and twist it to use it AGAINST sellers. Not that it really matters because I also agree, as I said earlier, that we will likely get nothing at all. When Canada Post rolls out its new & improved futuristic changes it is likely to be little more than the reinstatement of Surface shipping to the US.

The last thing we need is more slow services. (Unless eBay accepts an accompanying entry scan as on-time P-o-S).

@pjcdn2005 wrote:
i am saying that being able to get an acceptance scan for all services would be a bad thing because it would come in handy but i really can't see it happening any time soon so Instead I focus on how to best work with the system we now have.

That is what we've all been doing and what we will all have to do. Even if there are some genuinely useful improvements to come along, there is no pleasing everyone so someone somewhere will always have to work the best they can within the system to optimize their personal results. Everything in life is like that. Its just not enough reason to stop asking for needed changes, especially when invited to do so.

tobyshitzu · ‎11-11-2016

credit card companies wont stop a chargeback with proof shipment. Paypal itself will cover an authorized credit card use claim only with proof of shipment

pjcdn2005 · ‎11-11-2016

It has nothing to do with "bringing myself to agree wit you. You are not the only one who can use logic and in this case many of my logical conclusions are different than yours. You've explained before why you made changes to prevent yourself from getting late shipment defects but that doesn't mean that you defininately would have received any defects had you not made an changes or made fewer changes it that you would have received anywhere close to the 5 maximum that you are allowed. Regardless, it's your choice on how you whant to handle shipping but just because you choose to do things that way doesn't mean that you 'had' to and it doesn't prove that Canadians in general are having problems meeting the curreint standards. I'm sure that some are having problems but we aren't u inquest in that respect.

I'm not sure why you don't understand my grass is greener comment. IF eBay and Canada Post set up a way for us to receive an acceptance scan for all services, then the next logical step would be for them to require us to meet the 90% validated tracking and other trs plus requrements. Any specific rules for Canadians that we now have would likely be eliminated....perhaps that wouldn't be a bad thing but it does seem that whenever one change is made here, a negative side often comes with it.

You are saying the change would be simple. Raphael has already said they will not accept a receipt as proof of acceptance and I am very sure that the only way they would accept any type of acceptance is if they could see it in their system and it was all figured out automatically. You suggested before that they would've only have to check a physical method when a buyers feedback stated the item was late but then they would be assuming that all was ok otherwise. Obviously they don't want to make assumptions or else all transactions would now be counted In the total whether or not there was any other online proof or customer cooments,

So I need order to provide online proof order to CP woukd have to add a bar code to light packet labels online I suppose if you wanted an acceptance for oversize letters in Canada the po or outlet would have to print out a scan code to put on the envelope each time. Right now the small packet scan can not be seen online so CP would have to set it up so that code and all other acceptance scans could be seen be ebay. Why would CP want to do all of if that to set it up, maintain it and give their postal workers more items to scan each day? I suspect that eBay packages are a small portion of their business so what is the benefit to them?

You said that you wouldn't mind paying extra....that's fine for you but it wouldn't be a win win for everyone. For example a seller can send a coin anywhrere within Canada for .85. They can currently receive a trs discount without tracking but an acceptance scan being available could mean if they wanted to keep trs and if the cost was.50 their postage cost would go up by about 60%. What if that seller never had a problem with late shipments? Should they be penalized because your logic says that some Canadians "might" gave a problem with late shipments. I say 'might' because there is no proof at this point that it is a problem for the majority.

Please tell me what free shipping has to do with shipping on time and why that should be taken into account with the late shipment system? One of the reason that the on time shipping system was set up and needed to be validated online was that some US sellers were printing their labels right away but not mailing them right away. They remained trs sellers because they uploaded their tracking number in time but they were really gaming the system. eBay wants proof that a seller is shipping within their handling time......giving 'free' shipping is not related to shipping on time in any way.

Again, I'm not saying that some type of acceptance proof would absolutely be bad but there is more than one way to look at it.

On my iPad..apologies for any typos. My iPad has a mind of its own.

pjcdn2005 · ‎11-11-2016

Do you recall the favourable terms Canadian sellers used to have with regard to tracked shipping and how it helped our ability to keep TRS? We used to be able to enter an "unofficial" tracking number and get acknowledged for full tracking. The reason that very important benefit was removed -- at least according to the eBay.ca reps who were asked why it was discontinued -- was that there had been an outcry from U.S. sellers over unfair advantages to Canadian sellers.

As for burdening few Canadian sellers, we can't know how many have given up selling as a result of the on-time delivery policy and an inability to afford tracking. All I know is that it is very much an added burden for me, and from what I've seen on the boards, for other small sellers as well. A small concession from eBay would be all that would be required to ease this added handicap, for example (but not limited to):

Yes of course I remember when the system was set up like that. But I don't recall anyone from .ca saying that the change had anything to do with any outcry from US sellers and I don't believe that was the case. In fact I don't remember reading anything on the US boards suggesting that any sellers were upset or even aware that we were treated differently. They made the change when they started the trs plus system. If they were so worried about what the US sellers thought I doubt that we would receive a discount for any .com listings unless they met all the criteria.

sylviebee · ‎11-13-2016

pjcdn2005 wrote: But I don't recall anyone from .ca saying that the change had anything to do with any outcry from US sellers and I don't believe that was the case.

A very prominent poster to this board did state exactly that.