@recped wrote:
The problem is that a big feedback number (or a small one) and a percentage rating if it is 98.8 or 99.9 (or even 100%) isn't a very accurate indicator of service levels.
Almost all of my eBay purchases are from sellers that by current eBay standards have "horrible" feedback but I find the service better than many with "perfect" feedback.
As Devin stated in his recent comments, in terms of how feedback is useful to buyers (internal seller performance may be a different story) it's not really because 99% of eBay sellers are squeezed in between 98.5 and 100, a meaningful system would have a MUCH wider range.
Personally I'm in favour of doing away with all public feedback for both buyers and sellers beyond a simple transaction count. Even the transaction number is misleading, I provide the exact same service on my selling id's with a hundred feedbacks over one year as I do on this one with 16,000 over 16 years.
I still do a fair amount of buying on eBay, and I tend to agree that a wider spread in seller evaluation would be more helpful for buyers.
A seller can hide a lot of naughty behaviour in a big FB number, or on the other hand, as you say, a seller who provides exemplary service on a smaller scale may not have his/her reputation fairly reflected in mere transaction numbers.
The other problem I have in looking at FB comments left for sellers is wondering how accurate they really are. How obliged do buyers feel that they should leave "friendly" FB even if they're slightly dissatisfied, or, conversely, how many buyers have knee-jerk reactions and leave unfair FB (for things not under the seller's control). In my view, FB and DSRs should not be used by eBay to evaluate sellers at all, but should simply be an open review system -- let the marketplace and the buyers make up their own minds. Cases and other negative parameters would serve much better in my view to separate the bad apples.
Still, this really is a chicken-and-egg problem. Does eBay really want to expose a larger percentage of its sellers as incompetent or dishonest (to one degree or another)? Doesn't it serve eBay better to have 99% of all sellers in that 98.5 to 100% range? In other words, a little smoke and mirrors keeps buyers buying.
I agree with 'pj' however in that I can't see how eBay can determine "buyer experience" by removing information. I could understand if they were displaying it differently, but this doesn't make a lot of sense. Opaque and obscure eBay, as usual.
By the way, to 'silviebee' -- it looks as if your baggage is back, at least from where I'm viewing it. Maybe the test was very short-lived.
w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
