eBay

westernstargifts · ‎12-06-2015

Late shipping defects may come back to bite you.

I looked at the feedback of a seller from whom I had recently made a purchase. I was completely satisfied with everything about the transaction. However one buyer left the seller negative feedback because it hadn't arrived yet and was "estimated" to arrive the day before. He even used the word "estimate" but I guess he didn't understand its meaning.

A second buyer left neutral feedback because the seller missed the "estimated" delivery date (yes, he also used the word estimate) by 5 days. He also said that the seller had "buried" in his listing that there was a 5 day handling charge. This was a reasonable handling time because it was a custom made product. The seller states, in his listing, in big bold red letters, that handling time is 5 days. Now he could have made a change after receiving the feedback but I had no trouble seeing the 5 day handling time when I made my purchase.

Yet a third buyer left neutral feedback saying that the seller didn't ship until he opened a case with eBay. I don't have any actual knowledge of that transaction but have to wonder if it was for the same reason as the above. Or he may not have bothered to read the listing to see the handling time.

westernstargifts · ‎12-08-2015

And yet another seller that I have on watch who received negative feedback because the item did not arrive on the date that eBay said it would arrive. NOT because there was anything wrong with the product or the transaction in any other way.

Anonymous · ‎12-08-2015

@westernstargifts wrote:
And yet another seller that I have on watch who received negative feedback because the item did not arrive on the date that eBay said it would arrive. NOT because there was anything wrong with the product or the transaction in any other way.

That is so so unfair. This whole late shipping defect thing is a bad idea.

This is not going to be pretty...............

pjcdn2005 · ‎12-08-2015

I don't understand why people are so impatient. It's ignorant to give a seller a negative because of something totally out of their control. The negative by itself won't give the seller a late shipping time defect unless the buyer also answered the question about the item arriving late. If the item had tracking and the seller got the package scanned within their handling time, they won't get a defect.

but that probably helps out more U.S. sellers than Canadian ones.

pierrelebel · ‎12-08-2015

"but that probably helps out more U.S. sellers than Canadian ones."

That has been the problem for Canadian sellers from the day eBay announced its new policy, despite repeated "do not worry" statements from eBay.ca staff.

The new policy simply does not take the reality of Canadian shipping costs and methods into account.

It was made in America for Americans.

pierrelebel · ‎12-08-2015

I should add that the only "solution" offered by eBay-Canada is to misrepresent our handling time (for example: five days instead of one day) to minimize the problem eBay has created.

That is plain wrong. Shame on eBay for even suggesting it.

ricarmic · ‎12-08-2015

It is kind of funny that you call their CSRs for help and they're all about helping you to "cheat the system"....

A looonnnnggg time ago I called about a duplicate listing problem and the helpful fellow explained about 4 different ways I could trick the system to avoid duplicates. That isn't what I called about, I called because the items getting flagged weren't duplicates.... sigh.....

westernstargifts · ‎12-08-2015

@pierrelebel wrote:
I should add that the only "solution" offered by eBay-Canada is to misrepresent our handling time (for example: five days instead of one day) to minimize the problem eBay has created.

That is plain wrong. Shame on eBay for even suggesting it.

In addition, we would also lose TRS status because of the longer handling time.

I neglected to mention that both sellers were in the U.S. I know at least one had tracking so they would not have to care about the late shipping defect, only the negative feedback. Now if they were Canadian sellers who did not use tracking because of the high cost it would be a different story.

The same level of service should be EQUALLY rewarded. And good service is what eBay should be worried about, not how fast the postal services can deliver the mail or having every single item shipped with tracking. If it comes to the point where we are "required" to ship with tracking then many of us will not be selling here anymore.

sylviebee · ‎12-08-2015

Currently there are about a dozen ways to get ratings trashed unfairly.

With the new system there will be but one.

How is that not a step in the right direction?

westernstargifts · ‎12-08-2015

@sylviebee wrote:
Currently there are about a dozen ways to get ratings trashed unfairly.

With the new system there will be but one.

How is that not a step in the right direction?

Because for every single transaction the buyer will be asked the "question" whether or not the order was delivered on time. Most buyers will be unaware that when they answer "no" that they are trashing the seller's rating.

I think for the most part that buyers leave honest feedback. Presently they are asked to give their "opinion" as eBay calls it. Asking the question whether or not it arrived in eBay's off the wall "estimated" delivery time is not asking for an opinion, but a fact, and the buyers will most likely give an honest answer.

Our ratings and status, if we do not provide tracking, will be totally dependent on postal services to deliver within eBay's "estimated" time and whether or not eBay's "estimated" time frames are any where near being accurate. eBay is making US responsible for something that is totally out of our control. Delivery time has always been the DSR that sellers hated the most because we can't control it.

Frequently packages arrive late for who know what reasons The potential is there for the defects to add up quickly because of this ridiculous new rule. And I believe they will add up faster than any of the defects in the old system. IMHO

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

.... Yes, but this can go both ways.

When buyers email me to ask why am item hasn't arrived yet, it's almost always well before the estimated date of delivery.

When they email with that question after the estimated delivery date it's almost always a non-arrival and I refund.

Antsy buyers who would otherwise trash ratings might not when the question clearly provides a delivery date.

The question can also serve to protect sellers against unfair Negative ratings.

Again: One easy solution is to lengthen handling time. That's an innocent lie if ever there was one.

Yes, there will be unfair defects but likely nothing like we're experiencing now.

Remember: A lot of sellers do, in fact, ship late and the defects are deserved.

IMO this is all really a lot of unnecessary drama. Yes, it may be a problem but there as many reasons to predict that it won't be as otherwise.

lukey9 · ‎12-09-2015

Since I closed my store out by my choice I am now a low volume seller and every defect counts allot more. Two of the late arrival Feed Backs were from buyers I sell to all the time and did not realize the damage they done till I told them. E-Bay has not explained what damage checking no off can do to a seller. If a buyer decides to leave feed back after a few weeks in most cases they can not remember if was received on time or not, all they remember is that they received it I can not see why a seller should receive a defect for delivery time as once you turn it over to CP it is completely out of the Seller's control even if you mailed it on time.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

@lukey9 wrote:
I can not see why a seller should receive a defect for delivery time as once you turn it over to CP it is completely out of the Seller's control even if you mailed it on time.
________________________________________________________________

That is absolutely true.

With the new system there will be unfair defects and it sounds like you were on the receiving end of that.

However, that will be ONE way to get an unfair defect.

Currently there are numerous ways to get unfair defects and under the new system those will disappear.

One way to get an unfair defect vs. A dozen ways to get an unfair defect (which are just as likely as the former)

Obviously, we'd all prefer a third option of NO way to get unfair defect but currently that's not an option.

Why this singular focus on the negative aspects of the new system rather that the other way around?

lukey9 · ‎12-09-2015

If is my fault I accept the defect such as a NAD but for some thing I have to depend on the poor delivery service of Canada Post or sitting in Customs or weather I can not agree with as it has nothing to do with me as a seller doing my job right.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

@lukey9 wrote:
If is my fault I accept the defect such as a NAD but for some thing I have to depend on the poor delivery service of Canada Post or sitting in Customs or weather I can not agree with as it has nothing to do with me as a seller doing my job right.

You are suggesting that the current defect system is fair because because defects are deserved because the seller at fault. Really?

The way defects are currently received is no less unfair than the Shipping time defect of the new system.

Not just that, we are already subject to getting unfair defects for shipping time.

The new system exaggerates that risk in some ways, but it also reduces the risk in other ways. A wash in my opinion.

Some buyers who might have left a 1 for shipping time will be deflected when they see that the item arrived within the estimated time frame.

It can work either way.

pierrelebel · ‎12-09-2015

On Canada Post website today:

"Due to the busy holiday season, we are seeing higher-than-expected volumes. We’ve devoted extra resources to serve Canadians throughout this peak time. We apologize to anyone who experiences a delay."

Have they adjusted their estimated delivery date? Of course not.

rose-dee · ‎12-09-2015

@sylviebee wrote:
Currently there are numerous ways to get unfair defects and under the new system those will disappear.

One way to get an unfair defect vs. A dozen ways to get an unfair defect (which are just as likely as the former)

Actually, it's not as simple as simply comparing the number of possible defects. The whole approach toward defect generation has changed.

The existing system of defects does for the most part give sellers control over factors that would influence whether a buyer is satisfied or not.

Describe a item accurately and carefully (including good pictures), sell at a good price, with free shipping perhaps, use a short handling time to represent your good service, ship promptly, and pack the item well so that it arrives in good condition, and chances are very good you can avoid defects. These are things a seller can choose to do in order to stack the odds in their favour.

However, under the new system, the only thing a seller can do to stack the defect odds in their favour will be to use tracking (and to refund immediately in any instances where a buyer might otherwise open a case). That will be the extent of seller control, and it will be worse than the current defect system in terms of proportional metrics. The new policy will not be based on total transactions, or even the total FB count, but on a much smaller statistical base consisting of those buyers who actually answer the on-time question.

Remember too that the allowable defect percentage itself is being lowered. All of this is why, unlike the current system of defects, one or two defects from an "on-time" issue during a 12-month period will be very serious for a small volume seller.

So, with only two decision-making areas left to us in crafting the service we provide to buyers, essentially the new system will reward sloppy sellers in the U.S. or China (who can afford tracking), and be far more punishing to sellers who otherwise provide excellent service in every way (including especially Canadian sellers). In addition, eBay is now telling us to lengthen (i.e. lie about) our handling times in order to hopefully defeat the system. Being untruthful with my buyers is not what I define as excellent customer service.

In the end, I think we smaller sellers are no longer relevant to eBay anyway. I can't help but wonder, in reading the OP's examples, whether the new policy is not so much intended to loosen the defect reins on eBay's traditional "core" of sellers (as was so publicly proclaimed by David Wenig a few months ago) in order to give us a "break" -- which it clearly doesn't -- but rather to open the gates wide to smooth the way for sellers who will be benefiting from the partnerships with Chinese manufacturing sectors that eBay is undertaking (see the announcement of earlier this week, linked on another thread in Seller Central, concerning eBay's direct involvement with manufacturing cities in China).

If eBay also sets up massive fulfillment centres for these products, it's not a big leap to imagine that eBay will arrange some way to provide tracking for all such items, at a very reasonable cost to buyers (or even free). It's the next logical step, which, in conjunction with the announcement of eBay's new "on-time delivery" policy, will also essentially wipe out small competition.

Where eBay is concerned, you have to look at the big picture. What I dislike is the paternalistic and dissembling pat-on-the-head reassurances we get on the one hand, while eBay is busy on the other hand really doing something quite different.

westernstargifts · ‎12-09-2015

@pierrelebel wrote:
On Canada Post website today:

"Due to the busy holiday season, we are seeing higher-than-expected volumes. We’ve devoted extra resources to serve Canadians throughout this peak time. We apologize to anyone who experiences a delay."

Have they adjusted their estimated delivery date? Of course not.

And therein lies much of the problem. First of all, we don't get to see what the "estimated" delivery date is in the first place. Secondly, we don't know if it is accurate or if it has been adjusted for the time of year, holidays, etc. eBay won't be held responsible if their estimates are unrealistic...we will.

We all know that many packages are going to arrive after the estimated date, especially at this time of year, and we could very likely get a lot of no's. Keep in mind that, with small volume sellers, those defects stay with them for a whole year.

We can have our rating trashed in TWO ways, not just one. There is also the defect for issuing full refunds. It would not take long to knock a seller out of TRS. The TRS itself does not concern me except for the fact that it apparently affects our placement in search.

We will have to wait and see how it all plays out in the long term.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

Rose, I don't agree with any of your post.

However, I know there's no point in trying to make you see otherwise so I won't.

You believe that eBay is out to get small sellers and I think that's bizarre.

I think that the new system might be hard on sellers in distant locations, but so is the current system.

However, extending handling time is an easy fix and a forgivable lie. (Oh, man, that seller said handling time was 3 days and she actually shipped in one. So sue her.)

We lie to buyers every day when we leave PFB for those who are nothing but a PITA.

It's just business.

sylviebee · ‎12-09-2015

westerngifts: I'm in Kitchener and I believe you're in Sarnia.

My items all arrive well before the estimated date, and even if your items take a day longer than mine do because you might be a little further from the hub, you'll still have lots of leeway.

Are your items arriving late?

Or, are you anticipating problems that will likely never occur?

I simply can't believe that I'm the only one whose items are arriving on time.