eBay

kalvin@ebay.com · ‎09-26-2013

Feel free to share your thoughts about the Global Shipping Program here.

A few questions to get the ball rolling:

What has worked well for you with the Global Shipping Program?
Any ideas to help improve the experience for Canadian buyers?
What has deterred you from buying items offered using the Global Shipping Program?
How have you managed to search for items outside the program?

Please try & keep the comments constructive 🙂

If you have any questions about the program, please post them here.

~Kalvin
eBay.ca Community Manager

kalvin@ebay.com

kxeron · ‎05-11-2014

Forum software ate my previous post in part, so:

At this point in time, the eBay website software is designed as an "ACCEPT ALL" into the GSP, there's no mechanisms in place, at least to make a seller informed that their item can or cannot be shipped by the GSP. the eBay website software mode of failure is to accept an item and to make it seem like it can be shipped by the GSP, while it should be for something as commercial as the GSP, the website software should have its mode of failure to REJECT anything where an affirmative assessment cannot be made. Consider the ongoing CITES issues with guitars. If PBI cannot guarentee that they can process guitars with success, the eBay should disqualify all guitars from the programme and prevent even as much as a PBI facility shipping label from being printed. Too, if the guitar cannot be certified to be CITES compliant prior to shipping, the item should be disqualified.

If an item too doesn't make sense (e.g. under the CBSA $20 limit) to be shipped through the GSP, it should be disqualified until it meets that limit. While an auction may have a $5 item that has the GSP enabled, only if it hits $20.00 should the item be qualified. So if the item is $19.99 CAD, the item would still be disqualified.

eBay's website software needs correction to reject an item from the GSP until it provides the appropreate information to qualify it. For the items that the GSP targets (retail items) this would be little problem as this information is widely available, if an item is custom made outside of industrial process (e.g. custom guitars), it would be disqualified since the information cannot be provided to assess its ability to meet laws and such. Parties would then be required to negotiate directly to see if the item can be shipped still.

00nevermind00 · ‎05-11-2014

@kxeron wrote:
Forum software ate my previous post in part, so:

At this point in time, the eBay website software is designed as an "ACCEPT ALL" into the GSP, there's no mechanisms in place, at least to make a seller informed that their item can or cannot be shipped by the GSP. the eBay website software mode of failure is to accept an item and to make it seem like it can be shipped by the GSP, while it should be for something as commercial as the GSP, the website software should have its mode of failure to REJECT anything where an affirmative assessment cannot be made. Consider the ongoing CITES issues with guitars. If PBI cannot guarentee that they can process guitars with success, the eBay should disqualify all guitars from the programme and prevent even as much as a PBI facility shipping label from being printed. Too, if the guitar cannot be certified to be CITES compliant prior to shipping, the item should be disqualified.

If an item too doesn't make sense (e.g. under the CBSA $20 limit) to be shipped through the GSP, it should be disqualified until it meets that limit. While an auction may have a $5 item that has the GSP enabled, only if it hits $20.00 should the item be qualified. So if the item is $19.99 CAD, the item would still be disqualified.

eBay's website software needs correction to reject an item from the GSP until it provides the appropreate information to qualify it. For the items that the GSP targets (retail items) this would be little problem as this information is widely available, if an item is custom made outside of industrial process (e.g. custom guitars), it would be disqualified since the information cannot be provided to assess its ability to meet laws and such. Parties would then be required to negotiate directly to see if the item can be shipped still.

It would be no great feat of programming to do this! Just make the weight and dimensions fields compulsory when listing an item with GSP shipping (and while they're at it, make the country of origin compulsory as well.) There are countless online forms with compulsory fields being filled every minute on the internet. If the item's weight and/or dimensions exceed the GSP's limits, then the seller should then be prevented from listing it with GSP. Ebay claims that they are reading these GSP threads and taking the comments into account. Seriously? The fact is that these "confiscated" GSP items are an extremely sore point for buyers and sellers alike and are creating very bad publicity for eBay (not to mention PB!) but it sure looks like they don't care.

Why not also have a warning window pop up every time a seller is trying to list a small, lightweight, inexpensive item with GSP? I was doing searches on the site yesterday, something that is becoming increasingly rare precisely because of the GSP and its inappropriate use for $10 postcard-sized items. Also, how about stopping the practice of deceitfully enrolling sellers into the GSP under other pretenses? During my searches yesterday, I kept stumbling upon GSP listings where the seller specified "No international shipping" or "International buyers: Please email for a quote," or some variation thereof.

I think that even despite the many complaints, eBay and PB are betting that the desire to acquire US goods will be stronger for international buyers than their dislike of the program. I know mine isn't, but everyone is different, and maybe this scheme is paying off for them. But it sure doesn't reflect well on either of them.

dasia143 · ‎05-11-2014

Quoting 00nevermind00:

"I think that even despite the many complaints, eBay and PB are betting that the desire to acquire US goods will be stronger for international buyers than their dislike of the program."

The GSP has probably made sales go up as the international community suddenly finds they can order that sought-after item from the USA. But there have been posts on these and other boards to the effect of, "This was my first and last experience with the GSP" due to surprise charges in checkout, items not being able to be shipped after all, having to pick items up from faraway warehouses, etc, etc.

After a critical mass of people in a variety of countries have had a chance to experience the GSP will be a better time to see if it's is as much of a boon to buyers outside the USA as eBay and PB seem to think it is.

mwc1942 · ‎05-11-2014

"(and while they're at it, make the country of origin compulsory as well.)"

They probably could but in doing so would lose a great revenue source.

pjcdn2005 · ‎05-11-2014

@mwc1942 wrote:
"(and while they're at it, make the country of origin compulsory as well.)"

They probably could but in doing so would lose a great revenue source.

I was thinking the same thing. It would probably be PB who would lose that particular revenue.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@mwc1942 wrote:

Depends on what your definition of money grab is? As to the "taxes and duty on imports" without the proper paper trail, how would any buyer know for certain. As you previously posted, your province does not collect the pst, so has the tax been paid by PB or not?

I'm not completely following this post but I'll try to address the points in it. The out of line charges on shipping of smaller items is probably due to a combination of dimensional weight and the fact that Pitney Bowes doesn't do its own shipping so there's some mark-up in the shipping price that gets split between PBI and the various parties involved in shipping the item from Kentucky. It works out fairly well for larger items, not so much for smaller ones. I don't think there's much money to be grabbed in the shipping charges.

As for the lack of a paper trail, how can one be certain that even with a paper trail of sorts, taxes are being remitted appropriately?

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/nwsrm/cnvctns/on/on130617-eng.html

Also keep in mind that commercial imports can't legally enter Canada without taxes/duty being paid or at least put on some sort of tab or ledger.

You've really lost me on your last point, though. BC does have a provincial sales tax, but it doesn't seem to be all that fussy about collecting it on online sales where the website hasn't specifically targeted British Columbia. The "import charges" for a GSP listing seem to be the same for BC as they are for Alberta, which definitely has no PST.

If you wish to elaborate on that point, feel free, but I've done the best to respond to it with the information given.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@kxeron wrote:

We need to start looking less at the $50 figure and more toward the $20 CBSA figure and too asking why the GSP as a programme is accepting anything and everything into the programme, and not disqualifying things until they can be proven that PBI will successfully process the items.

The value of the item is immaterial, as far as I'm concerned, particularly as tax/duty exemption values vary considerably from country to country. Remember, this is the Global Shipping Program, not the Canadian Shipping Program.

It's the size of the item that generally makes an item viable or not viable to ship through the program, not its value.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@kxeron wrote:

Forum software ate my previous post in part, so:

At this point in time, the eBay website software is designed as an "ACCEPT ALL" into the GSP, there's no mechanisms in place, at least to make a seller informed that their item can or cannot be shipped by the GSP. the eBay website software mode of failure is to accept an item and to make it seem like it can be shipped by the GSP, while it should be for something as commercial as the GSP, the website software should have its mode of failure to REJECT anything where an affirmative assessment cannot be made. Consider the ongoing CITES issues with guitars. If PBI cannot guarentee that they can process guitars with success, the eBay should disqualify all guitars from the programme and prevent even as much as a PBI facility shipping label from being printed. Too, if the guitar cannot be certified to be CITES compliant prior to shipping, the item should be disqualified.

If an item too doesn't make sense (e.g. under the CBSA $20 limit) to be shipped through the GSP, it should be disqualified until it meets that limit. While an auction may have a $5 item that has the GSP enabled, only if it hits $20.00 should the item be qualified. So if the item is $19.99 CAD, the item would still be disqualified.

eBay's website software needs correction to reject an item from the GSP until it provides the appropreate information to qualify it. For the items that the GSP targets (retail items) this would be little problem as this information is widely available, if an item is custom made outside of industrial process (e.g. custom guitars), it would be disqualified since the information cannot be provided to assess its ability to meet laws and such. Parties would then be required to negotiate directly to see if the item can be shipped still.

Is this CITES issue with guitars "ongoing"? I've only read of the one problematic guitar shipment on this forum and the .com site's International Trading discussion board, and we don't know for sure if it's a CITES issue or something to do with the fact that the seller provided no information on the guitar's shipping dimensions.

Keep in mind that PBI likely deals with a laundry list of different logistics firms. Some of them may be more thorough than others in providing information that PBI requests. It may be a case of a shipper saying, "Uh-huh. Yup. We ship guitars all the time. Go through us," not realizing that for a bulk shipment of guitars to Australia, they have paperwork stating that the item conforms with CITES regulations, while they wouldn't for one sent through the GSP.

How would your "disqualification" routine based on an item's value deal with fluctuating exchange rates and differing tax/duty thresholds? And how would it deal with the fact that most sellers using the GSP aren't even entertaining the idea of shipping directly to their buyers? I can see this leading to GSP listings that wouldn't ship to some countries but would to others based strictly on the item's price, and that could make things even uglier than they are now. Given that items that don't ship to Canada aren't generally visible on the .ca site, I don't see any sort of "negotiating" that you envision.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@dasia143 wrote:

The GSP has probably made sales go up as the international community suddenly finds they can order that sought-after item from the USA. But there have been posts on these and other boards to the effect of, "This was my first and last experience with the GSP" due to surprise charges in checkout, items not being able to be shipped after all, having to pick items up from faraway warehouses, etc, etc.

After a critical mass of people in a variety of countries have had a chance to experience the GSP will be a better time to see if it's is as much of a boon to buyers outside the USA as eBay and PB seem to think it is.

The complaints you give as examples appear to make up a pretty small proportion of the total complaints about the GSP. Most objections to the GSP seem to be about the program fees.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@pjcdn2005 wrote:
@mwc1942 wrote:
"(and while they're at it, make the country of origin compulsory as well.)"

They probably could but in doing so would lose a great revenue source.
I was thinking the same thing. It would probably be PB who would lose that particular revenue.

Oddly enough, the "program rules" in the GSP seller terms and conditions require the item's country of origin/manufacture if this information is available to the seller.

pjcdn2005 · ‎05-11-2014

Oddly enough, the "program rules" in the GSP seller terms and conditions require the item's country of origin/manufacture if this information is available to the seller.

Yet ebay makes no attempt to make it a compulsary field on the gsp listings.

marnotom! · ‎05-11-2014

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

Yet ebay makes no attempt to make it a compulsary field on the gsp listings.

Some--if not many--US sellers object to eBay being a "nanny" overseeing and interfering with every aspect of a seller's listings. At some point we do have to let go and trust that sellers are going to do right by eBay, just as sellers have to put some trust in their buyers.

Besides, having the country of origin in a listing seems a fairly useful indication that a seller may be aware that they're enrolled in the program. 😄

00nevermind00 · ‎05-11-2014

@marnotom! wrote:
@pjcdn2005 wrote:

Yet ebay makes no attempt to make it a compulsary field on the gsp listings.

Some--if not many--US sellers object to eBay being a "nanny" overseeing and interfering with every aspect of a seller's listings. At some point we do have to let go and trust that sellers are going to do right by eBay, just as sellers have to put some trust in their buyers.

Besides, having the country of origin in a listing seems a fairly useful indication that a seller may be aware that they're enrolled in the program. 😄

Well, if they don't want to make the country of origin field compulsory on the listing form, then they really should refund the buyer for the duty paid, if the item is found to be non-dutiable upon opening at the hub. The buyer didn't fill the form, yet he or she is the one who may end up paying too much because of the seller's omission.

It's stuff like this that makes the GSP look like a "scam" or a "money grab" to so many buyers!

mwc1942 · ‎05-11-2014

'Well, if they don't want to make the country of origin field compulsory on the listing form, then they really should refund the buyer for the duty paid, if the item is found to be non-dutiable upon opening at the hub. The buyer didn't fill the form, yet he or she is the one who may end up paying too much because of the seller's omission.

It's stuff like this that makes the GSP look like a "scam" or a "money grab" to so many buyers!"

ABSOLUTELY

kxeron · ‎05-12-2014

@marnotom! wrote:

Is this CITES issue with guitars "ongoing"? I've only read of the one problematic guitar shipment on this forum and the .com site's International Trading discussion board, and we don't know for sure if it's a CITES issue or something to do with the fact that the seller provided no information on the guitar's shipping dimensions.
The reason I said "ongoing" is because I have only seen an eBay employee say that they'll "discuss" the issue with PBI but no followup has been publicly made on an issue that impacts the public.

As far as dimensions, This would be easily mended by making those parameters required to even have the GSP offered for the item.

Keep in mind that PBI likely deals with a laundry list of different logistics firms. Some of them may be more thorough than others in providing information that PBI requests. It may be a case of a shipper saying, "Uh-huh. Yup. We ship guitars all the time. Go through us," not realizing that for a bulk shipment of guitars to Australia, they have paperwork stating that the item conforms with CITES regulations, while they wouldn't for one sent through the GSP.
PBI's lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on our part. If they can't coordinate with their logistics partners correctly then that is a failure on their part, we as the public shouldn't have to plan around these failures. PBI should utilize its corporate power to lean into logistics companies to ensure that item classes that qualify for the programme can be shipped.

Again, eBay's site software should be requiring item specifics from sellers so that there is enough information to make an affirmative judgment based on these policies and any exceptions should not be shippable through the GSP until PBI explicitly qualifies that type of item and/or the dimensions.

How would your "disqualification" routine based on an item's value deal with fluctuating exchange rates and differing tax/duty thresholds? And how would it deal with the fact that most sellers using the GSP aren't even entertaining the idea of shipping directly to their buyers? I can see this leading to GSP listings that wouldn't ship to some countries but would to others based strictly on the item's price, and that could make things even uglier than they are now. Given that items that don't ship to Canada aren't generally visible on the .ca site, I don't see any sort of "negotiating" that you envision.

Qualification/disqualification checks should be performed in the same programming logic as the "Is the buyer in a GSP participant country?" checks, essentially implementing more checks into the programming logic, to which the item could have listed "This item is listed under the Global Shipping Programme but does not meet eligibility requirements for your location, so it will be shipped directly to you by the seller" before the qualifying then basically how it is now after the qualifying where the pricing of the GSP is displayed.

Consider:

Item cost: $15 CAD
Destination Country: Canada
Item type: Stapler

Disqualify for the GSP and provide the seller information to ship directly to the buyer given that there are no need for remission of taxes or duty given the CBSA's limits (based on the destination country).

Item cost: $150 CAD
Destination Country: Canada
Item type: Guitar
Item CITES documentation has been provided
Dimensions have been provided and are within the shippable limits.

The item qualifies. Provide the GSP programme fees and costs.

The problem with the GSP as it currently stands is it is trying to be a GLOBAL programme but completely fails to take into account the international laws and requirements. This would reduce PBI's overhead to process items that it can't ship, the kinds of items that it needs to seize and then "makes the buyer whole" for.

The issue here is that the eBay website software acts like *EVERYTHING* is acceptable to be shipped through PBI, but PBI has its own idea about what is shippable — the website software currently makes nothing compulsory for commercial shipping qualifications.

Again, I'll repeat again in other words: the GSP is grossly over-simplified for an arena where there are hundreds of years of law and regulations have been implemented while everything that comes through the GSP is last minute decided on what the "import charges" are or if PBI or its contractors can ship something or so forth.

The GSP's current design has PBI flying by the seat of its pants (again, because the programme is grossly over-simplified) and PBI isn't admitting this, eBay is covering up the issue by hiding the complexities from the sellers by not requiring all information meanwhile the T&C's make it difficult to look behind the curtain to demand from either company direct clarification on any element of the programme before a transaction takes place.

marnotom! · ‎05-12-2014

@mwc1942 wrote:

'Well, if they don't want to make the country of origin field compulsory on the listing form, then they really should refund the buyer for the duty paid, if the item is found to be non-dutiable upon opening at the hub. The buyer didn't fill the form, yet he or she is the one who may end up paying too much because of the seller's omission.

It's stuff like this that makes the GSP look like a "scam" or a "money grab" to so many buyers!"

ABSOLUTELY

The way Pitney Bowes seems to see it, the "import charges" are treated as one big service fee and there's no breaking it down. The buyer isn't paying duty, PBI is, but out of this "service fee."

It's a bit like buying a $6.99 salad in the winter and paying the same price for the salad in the summer when veggies are cheaper. You're not likely going to get the restaurant agreeing to give you a price break on the salad if you point out that lettuce is half the price that it was in the winter. You're paying for the salad, not the lettuce, cucumber, tomato, carrot, radishes and green onion separately.

kxeron · ‎05-12-2014

@marnotom! wrote:

Oddly enough, the "program rules" in the GSP seller terms and conditions require the item's country of origin/manufacture if this information is available to the seller.

The Terms and Conditions largely mean nothing outside of a court room if eBay's website software isn't enforcing these rules and accepts forms that are submitted in violation of these alleged rules. Too, since the programme targets retail-available items, it shouldn't be a matter of "if this information is available to the seller" it should be mandatory and the item should be disqualified from the GSP until this field is filled in.

kxeron · ‎05-12-2014

@marnotom! wrote:

Some--if not many--US sellers object to eBay being a "nanny" overseeing and interfering with every aspect of a seller's listings. At some point we do have to let go and trust that sellers are going to do right by eBay, just as sellers have to put some trust in their buyers.

Besides, having the country of origin in a listing seems a fairly useful indication that a seller may be aware that they're enrolled in the program. 😄

Those sellers need to realize that when they list through the GSP, they are partaking in a commercial shipping process, not a private shipping process and that far more information must be pre-provided ahead of time. If they want to be more informal and provide less information, then they can partake in an informal shipping process, e.g. private direct shipping.

The problem with your approach is that it works within the "eBay world" where everything's just words on a screen, but the moment you get into real-world commercial shipping (e.g. bonded trucks, bulk shipments, etc that the GSP does) things become much more serious — laws and commercial norms need to be followed more strictly than private shipping and all documentation and details must be pre-provided just like a US distribution centre shipping items requested to a distribution centre in Canada for further distribution. In this case, the sellers are the originators of these commercial shipments regardless if they know it or not.

marnotom! · ‎05-12-2014

@kxeron wrote:

The Terms and Conditions largely mean nothing outside of a court room if eBay's website software isn't enforcing these rules and accepts forms that are submitted in violation of these alleged rules. Too, since the programme targets retail-available items, it shouldn't be a matter of "if this information is available to the seller" it should be mandatory and the item should be disqualified from the GSP until this field is filled in.

The same could be said about a game of pick-up hockey in a recreation centre gym: The rules largely mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. They're just there to facilitate smoother functioning of the game and it's up to those participating in the game to respect and enforce them.

marnotom! · ‎05-12-2014

@kxeron wrote:

The problem with your approach is that it works within the "eBay world" where everything's just words on a screen, but the moment you get into real-world commercial shipping (e.g. bonded trucks, bulk shipments, etc that the GSP does) things become much more serious — laws and commercial norms need to be followed more strictly than private shipping and all documentation and details must be pre-provided just like a US distribution centre shipping items requested to a distribution centre in Canada for further distribution. In this case, the sellers are the originators of these commercial shipments regardless if they know it or not.

You forget, though, that eBay considers a GSP item to no longer be the seller's responsibility once it reaches the Global Shipping Center in Kentucky. Technically speaking, the seller is just getting the item to the point of origin on the paperwork.