eBay

arteis · ‎04-18-2018

It seems that more and more transaction problems count as "late delivery".

For example 2 of the item I've sold never arrived so I've refunded the buyers.

But these transactions are also showing in the "late shipment" report?

It's probably because of the "Did you received the item before date" question, they answer no which is obvious as the item never arrived! The system could simply not count refunded undelivered item as "late shipped" even when the answer to the question is no.

Also items that are late arrival are considered late shipped which is a LIE!

I can ship 5 minutes after sale and the item can still arrived late but you can't say it was shipped late.

I do not use tracking services (it cost more than the value of the items) so 2-3% of my item never arrived and I refund them no problem, I still save more on shipping. But the standard needed to keep the top-seller rating is lower than the standard delivered by Canada-Post.

I do not get why item I ship on Monday have 50% more chance to get dinged for "late shipment".

I am discouraged as I am responsible for something I have no control on.

Keven Noel

femmefan1946 · ‎04-25-2018

the GSP (which eBay is likely earning some sort of fees from via Pitney-Bowes)?

Just as likely, eBay is paying PB to run the program for them.

Which benefits most from the GSP?

EBay gets more transactions and more fees.

PB gets more shipments and more fees.

muscoviteman · ‎04-25-2018

"They must think that Canadians and our government are utterly stupid. None of us should fall for that guff. I do have confidence that our government is not so naive or weak as to be taken in by eBay's ploy. "

Not by eBay...but...it could have come up in NAFTA negotiations. This is just a guess.

rose-dee · ‎04-26-2018

@muscoviteman wrote:

"They must think that Canadians and our government are utterly stupid. None of us should fall for that guff. I do have confidence that our government is not so naive or weak as to be taken in by eBay's ploy. "

Not by eBay...but...it could have come up in NAFTA negotiations. This is just a guess.

I think eBay brought up their de minimus idea prior to the most recent NAFTA talks, or at least prior to the fiasco that Trump created. Although it does seem that NAFTA discussions have been going on forever.

The one thing I do worry about in this regard is that Trump, in his protectionist zeal, may insist on the U.S. de minimus being decreased again -- and substantially this time. (It appears, thankfully, that no one has brought that particular point to his attention yet). That would have an immediate, detrimental effect on Canadian businesses selling to U.S. consumers directly (including of course eBay sellers). The U.S. recently raised their de minimus to $800 from $200 (if I recall correctly), which has been a real benefit to Canadian retailers selling to U.S. customers. The higher allowance means fewer customs charges, making Canadian goods over $200 a better bargain for Americans than previously, especially if sold in $CDN. Let's hope nobody whispers THAT in Trump's ear.

Whether a higher Canadian de minimus would be better for U.S. retailers as a whole is another question, since Canadian consumers are probably not a very large market for them in comparison to their domestic market. But it would certainly mean Canadian retailers losing even more of their own domestic customers -- the very reason why the Canadian ceiling has been kept so low in the face of our giant neighbour to the south.

widgetc · ‎04-26-2018

It is at least on the NAFTA radar:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/u-s-governors-to-canada-use-nafta-to-relax-duties-on-online-purchase...

widgetc · ‎04-26-2018

From the article:

"Changing Canada's limit is a high priority for the U.S. side in NAFTA talks.

An American source familiar with the talks tells The Canadian Press that's one reason the U.S. mentions the issue and sets a specific $800 target in its published list of negotiating objectives.

The source says that while other U.S. demands are vaguely worded and devoid of hard numbers to leave negotiating room, the demand to change the limit -- known as "de minimis" -- is firm and unequivocal."

pjcdn2005 · ‎04-27-2018

That’s interesting, I wasn’t aware of that.

arteis · ‎06-25-2018

The reality is this expectation is NOT the same for US and Canada.
Canadian sellers doesn't have to supply tracking number as US sellers does to keep their TRS.
It Show that Ebay is fully aware that shipping service that include a tracking number is merely an option for Canadian seller ($15-$20 within Canada, $24-$40 to US).

arteis · ‎06-25-2018

Thanks, it's exactly what I meant!

arteis · ‎06-25-2018

You mean no punishment other than the lost of the item and the lost of shipping cost?
To give up and say "it is what it is" doesn't help Ebay to evolve and improve.
Ebay when through many changes through the years in big part because of sellers and buyers complaining/suggesting changes.

arteis · ‎06-25-2018

I've lost my TRS for 2 weeks because of false late shipping complaint.
Lost in sale volume, lost of the 10% discount, looks like a punishment to me.
All that because I didn't take any action to get Canada-Post faster.
It has become a lottery, you got lucky, Canada-Post delivered your package in time, I didn't have as much luck.

retroman_studios · ‎06-26-2018

I often find myself either not answering the question did an item arrive on time or *gasp* lying and saying it did.

Most of the time it's not the Sellers fault but eBay is kinda like my old boss. He would be so into the "customer for life" that he would discount stuff without the customer even asking, so much so that if we later tried to help the customer and quoted regular prices, he would retort that the owner would give him a deal. Made those customers impossible to deal with.

eBay is essentially doing the same thing, training it's customers to demand everything and anything. eBay should not ask if a an item was delivered on time, only if the customer indicates there was a problem with the transaction and even then it's salt in the wound.

Back when I worked retail, once we refunded a customers money, our obligation ended for that product. Oh, you forgot files on that laptop? Too late it's being wiped. Oh you want free lessons on using a laptop you hated so much? Sorry. Buy another one and I'm happy to help. Forgot you purchased software and activated it on that laptop? Too bad.

There does need to be a limit to how far we bend over.

Right now the playing field is not even for Sellers and buyers. I'd love to be able to opt in to refuse customers who have a case/return ratio greatjer than 5% but that will never happen because that will cause sales to go down and reduce seller costs, which ultimately leads to better pricing for honest customers. Surely that can't be right!