w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
Hello everyone,
Welcome to our weekly session. I'll be around for most of the day.
Here are the issues I'm currently tracking:
- Hard block on non compliant images only on relist/sell similar
-
Missing Tracked Packet destinations
- Odd missing gallery picture in search results
Updates:
- SYI: Form resets IS when switching currencies. - Problem identified, Dev team is working on a fix
- SYI: Form resets IS when trying to update handling cost - Problem partially solved. Complete fix upcoming
- Sold items going into Unsold container in Turbo Lister - TL team has been unable to reproduce the issue on the current version
- Safari browser SYI exhibiting erratic behaviour when trying to select text in description in Revise - under investigation
@pocomocomputing wrote:
Raphael, do you know about the feedback glitch on eBay.ca. Apparently, feedback cannot be left sometimes on eBay.ca and the workaround posted in the forums here is to go to eBay.com and leave feedback there.
I do not have experience with this issue. I just remember reading about it in topics here from time to time.
Perhaps someone reading the weekly session could post a real example and details.
Here is the topic I just read where someone mentions not being able to leave feedback. I do not know if this is the same issue as mentioned in other topics.
Never heard about this. Unfortunately the reporting user already has left FB so I can't try it out for myself. If anyone gets that issue please report it to me before leaving FB so I can see. Thanks!
@pjcdn2005 wrote:
I have a cart /combined shipping question. A couple of months ago a Canadian buyer purchased two items from me and paid for each one separately. They wrote and told me that when they asked for an invoice the message they received was that this seller didn't offer combined shipping. I don't have combined shipping rules set up mainly because I have so many different sizes of items and it seems a bit daunting to set up but regardless, shouldn't the buyer still be able to ask for an invoice? In my preferences I do allow buyers to combine payments for item purchased within 7 days.
I can't give you item numbers right now as I can't remember exactly which items they were.
Are you sure both items were bought using the same buyer ID and within the 7 days? Either way I'll need the item numbers to look into it.
@block36 wrote:
Buyers from USA tell me that system requires them to make immediate payments although I do not have such a requirement on my listings.
I usually provide them with instructions to enter eBay through Canadian door and then they are not facing such a demand.
Same was with buyer from Israel, but she did not follow the demand for payment, she reversed her first purchase and wrote me for clarification. I instructed her and she made multiple purchases of cards, and got her combined invoice...
Next time she was able to do the same on her own
On eBay.com, there is a rule that forces immediate payment on BIN items priced under $100. This was a 2014 initiative to help reduce unpaid items and is, combined with the limitations of the US shopping cart which can't accept items listed on eBay sites other than .com, is the root cause of this "cart disconnect" issue that's been talked about a lot on these sessions. Chances are your Israel buyer was using eBay.com to try and buy your items.
@pjcdn2005 wrote:
raphael@ebay.com wrote:
@pjcdn2005 wrote:
@rose-dee wrote:
raphael@ebay.com wrote:
Here is the reply I got regarding the gallery image:
The listing example you provided was originally created in 2012. When listings are so long lived it often occurs that the original gallery image used becomes no longer available. Often the simple solution is to revise the listing, remove the photo that was previously the gallery image, and then re-upload the photo and choose the option to display it as the gallery image. Alternatively the seller can opt to use another photo as the gallery image. This revision should prompt a refresh of the gallery image URL which can take up to 24 hours.
LOL. Tells you how bad things have been sales-wise in my neck of the woods. OK, thanks Raphael, I'll give this a try (hopefully I still have the original image). Actually, I think I'll try the second option first to see if that works.
Perhaps part of the reason for your slow sales is that some of your listings have been running for more than a year. IMO that does make a big difference in search but perhaps Raphael could tell us if that really is a factor or not.
New listings with no sales shouldn't rank much better than old ones also with no sales. Also note that sales history only affect ranking for multi-quantity listings. Single item listings cannot be considered better or worst performing without sales data.
Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression though that one of the things that cassini looked at was the number of impressions your listing received vs sales. You're saying that is valid only for multiple quantity listings?
Even if I am wrong, I still think that it is a good idea to end and redo listings every once in a while to give them a fresh look. Isn't that part of the reason why ebay suggests doing so after so many months?
The thing about Best Match is that no one really understands completely how it works 😉 Thus I can't confirm or deny what Cassini looks at, but what you say isn't implausible. That said, suggesting to update stale listings is probably a good idea regardless, since leaving them as is is likely to produce no results.
Great session today everyone! Thank you. I have to go for now but will leave the thread open till tomorrow morning. Good evening & night!
Good morning Raphael.
Small technical question for you today.
We know that all eBay employees using these forums must be identified as such (blue border; "pink" in the old days)
Do the same rules apply to former employees? Or are they free to post using a posting ID without stating they were previously employed by eBay?
@hlmacdon wrote:
raphael@ebay.com wrote:
Just one comment on this. Let's not forget to look at the situation from a buyer's point of view. First of all, stating that the item is located in a different location than where it really ships from is wrong and misleading. I'm glad to read that the seller has corrected this. Now, with regards to the need to pad handling time to reflect the true time it'll take for the item to get there, again I just see this as the right thing to do to ensure buyers have the right expectations.
The right thing to do would be to give sellers the ability to set their own ETAs via a customizable shipping method that is definied by the seller both in text representation (or defined as something generic) and a min and max day value. The business logic for this is that by padding handling time you are telling a buyer you don't care about their order. Buyers are sensitive to the speed at which you process their order and increasing handling times will lead to an increase in lost sales. You state that "the new standards rules are global. As much as we would have preferred to create a set of rules that are specific to the Canadian shipping reality, the current structure of standards program doesn't allow for this"
I know this is not your fault, but can you not see how ridiculous this is to state to Canadian sellers while not providing them with any tools to be able to accurately produce an ETA? The fact that shipping services that ebay makes available to Canadian sellers have no tracking capability, and thus no initial scan to prevent defects, and ETAs in place that do not match Canada Post standards dooms a large percentage of Canadian sellers to losing their top rated seller status. The people in the best position to manage the expectations of buyers are the sellers themselves, yet the tools for doing so are limited and clearly not up to task as sellers are relaying to you.
I'm guessing this is down to a lack of resources and an imposition of global policy, but surely someone in a position of responsibility for the region can see that this will potentially lead to lost sales, further drive a wedge between buyers and sellers, and disincentivize sellers to sell on ebay by financially penalizing them for factors beyond their control? Surely that is a far greater financial risk than assigning resources to come up with a better solution to this.
Hi hlmacdon, thanks for your comments. There are a lot of things at play in creating the situation we are in today. Is it ideal? Probably not. Is it the best were were able to get for you Canadian sellers? At this time, yes. Maybe the most relevant question is, is it enough? The answer to that one will vary from seller to seller, but we have data that clearly shows it will be enough for the vast majority of sellers. In the meantime, we continue to document examples of cases where the current system fails and bring those to the relevant people.
@pjcdn2005 wrote:
You're very popular today!
Recently I've had 2 customers contact me via ebay messages that they wanted to return their items for buyers remorse reasons.
They didn't go through the return process so I just gave them the info and they sent the items back.
In one case, the buyer was in England so by the time I received the item back and went to refund, it was past 30 days and I couldn't cancel the order and therefore could not get my fees back. Is it possible that they will be looking at this rule and making a change as it is very possible for it to take over 30 days for a buyer to receive an item and then send it back, especially when the buyer is in another country and when the seller has a 14 day + return option.
In the second case, the buyer was in the U.S. and well within the 30 days so I could refund and cancel the order in ebay. But I was not given the option of refunding the total less the original shipping cost. The last time that I had a refund it did go through the return process and I would have been able to hold back the shipping if I wanted to. ( I never do but it is nice to have that option) Is the difference just because one went through the return process and the other one didn't or is that the way it is set now regardless of how the return is done?
Hi pjcdn,
Regarding your 1st example, yes, the specific challenges of cross border & overseas returns are something that is being looked now that the new program is about to launch.
On the 2nd one, not sure about this one, I'll have to investigate. Thanks for bringing it up.
@hlmacdon wrote:
As a followup to my previous message, here is some testing based on the current ebay hard coded etas using a variety of methods available to sellers that would fall under the category of non-expedited services, or services without guaranteed service levels). Have a look at the below for examples of where there is a clear disconnect. It is also important to note that the Canada Post ETAs only apply to large metro areas, many areas in Canada are outside of said metro areas, and Canada Post has clear guidelines as to the extended handling times for those areas)
United Kingdom
•Light packet International 5-10 business days (Canada Post Specifies 6-10 business days)
•Small packet International Air 5-11 business days (Canada Post Specifies 6-10 business days)
•Standard International Shipping - 4-10 business days
USA
•Canada Post Light Packet USA - 6-11 business days (Canada Post Specifies 5-8 business days)
•Canada Post Small Packet USA - 5-11 business days (Canada Post Specifies 5-8 business days)
•Small Packet International Air - 5-18 business days
•Small Packets International Ground - 5-13 business days
•Standard International Shipping - 6-11 business days
•Expedited International Shipping - 5-10 business days
As you can see most are redundant, out of step with existing delivery standards or simply haven't been reviewed to see if they make any sense (ie why does an air option have a wider eta range than ground?). Adding the economy option that exists on ebay.com is one way of helping with this situation but I still feel that having a user customizable option would be of far more
benefit, not only for Canadian sellers, but all global ebay sellers. I realize that Canadian logistics are by and large quite unique versus those of many other countries, and rather than a Canadian specific option, we need more generic options to cover a wider range of ETAs or something the individual seller can define. You can see from above that many of these options came about to cater to specific country shipping scenarios, and you are left with a legacy of redundant options rather than one single user definable option.
A revamping of some of the existing legacy shipping method options would be welcome.
I think you just explained the reason why we have longer estimates than those of Canada Post's in many cases, so I'm not going to address that.
As for a revamping of the delivery estimates as a whole, that's another thing I've mentioned we are pursuing already.
