I think that there are a number of buyers out there that try to hold sellers hostage with the neg. feedback. I have had it happen where you give them an inch and they ask for a mile and threaten you w/ neg. feedback. I think that the new rating system will open the door for this kind of behavior, leaving the seller in a no-win situation. Very sad.
I have been both a buyer and seller since 1998. Recently I received my first and only negative as a seller. A new user won the bid on an item that I was selling. At the time they had a negative for non payment and their feedback rating was 8. I had a bad feeling about this one so I checked to see what they had bid on and won and to my dismay they had bid on 16 items going back a month but there was no feedback from the sellers. Sure enough, I had to file a non paying bidder dispute. Unfortunately, this new bidder was more savvy than me. They never responded to my emails nor the dispute but about one week later I received a check. I deposited it and canceled the dispute. Three days later the check bounced. I notified eBay that I wanted to retract my cancellation and found out that I could not. I contacted the buyer with no response. I left a negative for the buyer stating that after filing a dispute they paid me with a bounced check. They retaliated with a negative and said that I did not know eBay culture. In the meantime their rating went from 8 to 3 and finally one week later they were no longer a user. The plus side was that if I was ever going to get my first negative this was the best that I could ever hope for. The member made himself look like an idiot. Now I don't have to stress about my first negative anymore.I sent numerous emails to eBay telling them what I thought about this whole situation with no meaningful response on their part. So my response to them was that I would no longer be a seller. Since they valued the buyers so much, let's see what would happen if they eventually had no sellers. Then, I see where they are changing the feedback system. I thought finally!! And much to my surprise and shock it is in favor of the very seller that I just dealt with!!Just for the record I always left a positive when the buyer's payment cleared. I felt that they had completed their part of the transaction. I shipped immediately and was always surprised when I never received any feedback back whatsoever.I truly believe that any feedback system will be flawed because dishonest people will find a way around it.For my part I plan to buy only. Read the listing entirely to make sure that I understand the details including the shipping. Pay immediately and then expect the seller to treat me as they would like to be treated, meaning ship it to me now especially when I tend to use BIN. It means I want it now. So I guess I live in a fantasy world. But I will still protect myself whenever possible and live with the realization that the feedback system still means nothing!
This has been a lot to take in. I think the biggest thing I am concerned with is the "freeze" on funds. I am a single mother, in which part of my income is derived from EBay. However, I do have my own website as well. I sell patterns in a PDF format, but also give the option for a customer to order a printed version in case they do not have a printer, etc at an added cost for printing and shipping. I just recently received 2 neutrals, from a woman who ordered PDF version, then complained the printed copies were not clear. She left 2 neutrals, 2 months after purchasing, and basing it off of her own printer (may have needed a cartridge change, maybe it was old, etc). And, within in my auctions, I am very clear that an individual can see a sample of a PDF file to test it out how it will print on their own computer before buying.With this new system, that would drop me down with my ratings. As for the feedback, I do have a solution, of sorts. Leave feedback for both buyer and seller. Retaliation FB is unfair for both buyers and sellers. And, as both a buyer and primarily a seller, I can see how it can be used as such for both. And while many sellers wait to leave feedback, and many buyers will not leave a neg for retaliation, it also goes the other way too. Here is my solution:(EBay could figure out all the details). Feedback does not appear until BOTH parties have left feedback. Say, a 30 day period. Once feedback has been left by both parties, it appears to the "world." Now, if someone does not leave feedback, the other feedback will appear at the 30 days (or whatever time frame eBay would choose), and the individual who did not leave feedback loses their chance to do so. This is not necessarily problem proof, as for deadbeat buyers and sellers, another innocent may come along and would not know it for 30 days, but that is what eBay could figure out. This does 2 things, encourages both buyers and sellers to leave feedback without retaliation.I really do believe this is a great solution, with all the details ironed out. Or at least, it is one element that could be pursued, as I am sure there would be many kinks in it people could come up with, but much better I think than taking away seller's ability to leave feedback.Now, this freezing of funds, is ludicrous. I can see there being an issue with feedback, I can see somewhat of a raising of fees, but to freeze funds (especially in many cases) where the seller is not a bad seller, but has customers who do not read or do not understand, and then we have to send out our product without access to funds or risk a negative? That is ludicrous. No shop, gives the product without having the funds first. This needs to be addressed.
as a buyer with about a thousand purchases i can unequivically state i would probably stop shopping eBay if Pay Pal were not accepted by most sellers. to have to schedule an extra trip into town to buy money orders is not something most people, especially frequent buyers like me could do. Why punish customers because of eBay's bad ideas. you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.
i have only ever left a few negative feed-backs and then only as a seller for a buyer, but it seems some buyers, especially new buyers, have a shoot first ask questions later mentality. maybe when a person selects a negative to leave for feedback a pop up detailing steps that should be taken before the negative is accepted should appear. the person the negative is being left for could get a notification that this is being done. the notice could contain contact information and that way the parties would have an opportunity to work it out. it would halt some of the blind siding/shoot first negatives. combine the notification process with a 3 day cooling off period before the negative can be posted officially so the party wanting to give it has an opportunity to withdraw it.
I got a response from PAYPAL, they said that they didn't know about it LOL - they also stated that it appeared to be an Ebay Policy not a Paypal Policy but to contact them back if I have any problems or questions on my PAYPAL account - Gotta Love it
Buyer holding the sellers hostage!!!!Today my boyfriend realized that a guy that had a beef with him was bidding on everything he had been bidding on in the past month or 2. Making it so he paid more for the items. Which Ebay would not do a thing about.(they get more money) But the guy didn't always get outbid buy my boyfriend, and won some of the items. Well guess what! He's not paying for them! We got ahold of those sellers and let them know what was going on. They were afraid to give the guy a negative because they were afraid to get one back. So they went with out payment. So it goes both ways here, and there's no protection for the seller from these jerks. Ebay wouldn't even help out my boyfriend who is a power seller with around $12,000 per month. Also the sellers we talked to didn't put in for a NPA, they never heard of it. So these types get away without paying and never get non-paying bidder alerts. That's what Ebay is going to turn into more now than ever.
I've been both a buyer and seller on ebay for about 8 years, and I completely agree with Griff. The threat of retaliatory feedback from sellers is compromising the feedback system. For all you sellers complaining about the change, I have a question for you. Would you take the option of having feedback be given by seller instead of buyers if you then had to send out your products and not get paid for them until they were received by the buyer? And having to trust that the buyer will be honest and pay you? Because that is exactly the position that buyers will be in even after the change takes place. If you don't think the new system will work, you're wrong. This system is already in place on Amazon Marketplace, where sellers have feedback, but buyers don't. The feedback ratings there are MUCH more reliable. The good sellers have ratings in the mid-90s, while the bad ones have ratings in the 70s and 80s, unlike on ebay where everyone is in the high 90s.
I've been buying things on ebay for many years, on and off. I really like this new system because, while most of my transactions have been smooth, I have encountered some problems. Years ago, I actually chose to open a new buying account because I had had several retaliatory negative feedbacks which were truly undeserved: one involved a purchase I had made and I received the wrong item. I told the seller who agreed to send me the item I actually purchased, but first I had to send back the wrong item. I told the seller I would return this item when the seller sent me the proper item and paid for the shipping of this item upfront - I mean why should I pay for someone else's mistakes? The seller refused, so I decided to be nice and send the item first. I waited forever for the proper item and the seller never paid for the extra shipping that I had to incur in shipping back the incorrect item. So I left negative feedback, and I received the same, which shouldn't happen since I paid for the item and have every right to demand that the item I paid for be sent. Now, I just don't leave any feedback if I haven't had a good experience with a seller because many sellers will cancel bids from buyers with low feedback scores and negative feedback to boot. Buyers are the ones who take the biggest risk as we have to send money out for an item and hope for the best. The most sellers lose when a buyer doesn't pay is the price for re-listing. Buyers can potentially be out hundreds of dollars if an item doesn't arrive, or is not what was described. Therefore, it's fair to hold sellers accountable without fear of retaliation, and it will certainly increase my confidence in the system. If you sell in a store, you don't ask your buyers for references? Why should it be any different online?
Closed AccountFeb 2, 2008
I think that there are a number of buyers out there that try to hold sellers hostage with the neg. feedback. I have had it happen where you give them an inch and they ask for a mile and threaten you w/ neg. feedback. I think that the new rating system will open the door for this kind of behavior, leaving the seller in a no-win situation. Very sad.
dontworkFeb 3, 2008
I have been both a buyer and seller since 1998. Recently I received my first and only negative as a seller. A new user won the bid on an item that I was selling. At the time they had a negative for non payment and their feedback rating was 8. I had a bad feeling about this one so I checked to see what they had bid on and won and to my dismay they had bid on 16 items going back a month but there was no feedback from the sellers. Sure enough, I had to file a non paying bidder dispute. Unfortunately, this new bidder was more savvy than me. They never responded to my emails nor the dispute but about one week later I received a check. I deposited it and canceled the dispute. Three days later the check bounced. I notified eBay that I wanted to retract my cancellation and found out that I could not. I contacted the buyer with no response. I left a negative for the buyer stating that after filing a dispute they paid me with a bounced check. They retaliated with a negative and said that I did not know eBay culture. In the meantime their rating went from 8 to 3 and finally one week later they were no longer a user. The plus side was that if I was ever going to get my first negative this was the best that I could ever hope for. The member made himself look like an idiot. Now I don't have to stress about my first negative anymore.I sent numerous emails to eBay telling them what I thought about this whole situation with no meaningful response on their part. So my response to them was that I would no longer be a seller. Since they valued the buyers so much, let's see what would happen if they eventually had no sellers. Then, I see where they are changing the feedback system. I thought finally!! And much to my surprise and shock it is in favor of the very seller that I just dealt with!!Just for the record I always left a positive when the buyer's payment cleared. I felt that they had completed their part of the transaction. I shipped immediately and was always surprised when I never received any feedback back whatsoever.I truly believe that any feedback system will be flawed because dishonest people will find a way around it.For my part I plan to buy only. Read the listing entirely to make sure that I understand the details including the shipping. Pay immediately and then expect the seller to treat me as they would like to be treated, meaning ship it to me now especially when I tend to use BIN. It means I want it now. So I guess I live in a fantasy world. But I will still protect myself whenever possible and live with the realization that the feedback system still means nothing!
cglisaFeb 3, 2008
This has been a lot to take in. I think the biggest thing I am concerned with is the "freeze" on funds. I am a single mother, in which part of my income is derived from EBay. However, I do have my own website as well. I sell patterns in a PDF format, but also give the option for a customer to order a printed version in case they do not have a printer, etc at an added cost for printing and shipping. I just recently received 2 neutrals, from a woman who ordered PDF version, then complained the printed copies were not clear. She left 2 neutrals, 2 months after purchasing, and basing it off of her own printer (may have needed a cartridge change, maybe it was old, etc). And, within in my auctions, I am very clear that an individual can see a sample of a PDF file to test it out how it will print on their own computer before buying.With this new system, that would drop me down with my ratings. As for the feedback, I do have a solution, of sorts. Leave feedback for both buyer and seller. Retaliation FB is unfair for both buyers and sellers. And, as both a buyer and primarily a seller, I can see how it can be used as such for both. And while many sellers wait to leave feedback, and many buyers will not leave a neg for retaliation, it also goes the other way too. Here is my solution:(EBay could figure out all the details). Feedback does not appear until BOTH parties have left feedback. Say, a 30 day period. Once feedback has been left by both parties, it appears to the "world." Now, if someone does not leave feedback, the other feedback will appear at the 30 days (or whatever time frame eBay would choose), and the individual who did not leave feedback loses their chance to do so. This is not necessarily problem proof, as for deadbeat buyers and sellers, another innocent may come along and would not know it for 30 days, but that is what eBay could figure out. This does 2 things, encourages both buyers and sellers to leave feedback without retaliation.I really do believe this is a great solution, with all the details ironed out. Or at least, it is one element that could be pursued, as I am sure there would be many kinks in it people could come up with, but much better I think than taking away seller's ability to leave feedback.Now, this freezing of funds, is ludicrous. I can see there being an issue with feedback, I can see somewhat of a raising of fees, but to freeze funds (especially in many cases) where the seller is not a bad seller, but has customers who do not read or do not understand, and then we have to send out our product without access to funds or risk a negative? That is ludicrous. No shop, gives the product without having the funds first. This needs to be addressed.
jimmyzenFeb 4, 2008
as a buyer with about a thousand purchases i can unequivically state i would probably stop shopping eBay if Pay Pal were not accepted by most sellers. to have to schedule an extra trip into town to buy money orders is not something most people, especially frequent buyers like me could do. Why punish customers because of eBay's bad ideas. you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.
jimmyzenFeb 4, 2008
i have only ever left a few negative feed-backs and then only as a seller for a buyer, but it seems some buyers, especially new buyers, have a shoot first ask questions later mentality. maybe when a person selects a negative to leave for feedback a pop up detailing steps that should be taken before the negative is accepted should appear. the person the negative is being left for could get a notification that this is being done. the notice could contain contact information and that way the parties would have an opportunity to work it out. it would halt some of the blind siding/shoot first negatives. combine the notification process with a 3 day cooling off period before the negative can be posted officially so the party wanting to give it has an opportunity to withdraw it.
rensgirlFeb 5, 2008
Well put. My thoughts exactly. Ebay has got to stand behind their sellers. Without us, there is no Ebay.
sundevaFeb 13, 2008
I got a response from PAYPAL, they said that they didn't know about it LOL - they also stated that it appeared to be an Ebay Policy not a Paypal Policy but to contact them back if I have any problems or questions on my PAYPAL account - Gotta Love it
tabby2toeFeb 19, 2008
Good Idea!!!
tabby2toeFeb 21, 2008
That would beAWESOME!!! Gofor it!!!! I'll follow!!!!
motorpurrrFeb 22, 2008
Buyer holding the sellers hostage!!!!Today my boyfriend realized that a guy that had a beef with him was bidding on everything he had been bidding on in the past month or 2. Making it so he paid more for the items. Which Ebay would not do a thing about.(they get more money) But the guy didn't always get outbid buy my boyfriend, and won some of the items. Well guess what! He's not paying for them! We got ahold of those sellers and let them know what was going on. They were afraid to give the guy a negative because they were afraid to get one back. So they went with out payment. So it goes both ways here, and there's no protection for the seller from these jerks. Ebay wouldn't even help out my boyfriend who is a power seller with around $12,000 per month. Also the sellers we talked to didn't put in for a NPA, they never heard of it. So these types get away without paying and never get non-paying bidder alerts. That's what Ebay is going to turn into more now than ever.
mastamikeMar 18, 2008
I've been both a buyer and seller on ebay for about 8 years, and I completely agree with Griff. The threat of retaliatory feedback from sellers is compromising the feedback system. For all you sellers complaining about the change, I have a question for you. Would you take the option of having feedback be given by seller instead of buyers if you then had to send out your products and not get paid for them until they were received by the buyer? And having to trust that the buyer will be honest and pay you? Because that is exactly the position that buyers will be in even after the change takes place. If you don't think the new system will work, you're wrong. This system is already in place on Amazon Marketplace, where sellers have feedback, but buyers don't. The feedback ratings there are MUCH more reliable. The good sellers have ratings in the mid-90s, while the bad ones have ratings in the 70s and 80s, unlike on ebay where everyone is in the high 90s.
princesstxoxoMay 22, 2008
I've been buying things on ebay for many years, on and off. I really like this new system because, while most of my transactions have been smooth, I have encountered some problems. Years ago, I actually chose to open a new buying account because I had had several retaliatory negative feedbacks which were truly undeserved: one involved a purchase I had made and I received the wrong item. I told the seller who agreed to send me the item I actually purchased, but first I had to send back the wrong item. I told the seller I would return this item when the seller sent me the proper item and paid for the shipping of this item upfront - I mean why should I pay for someone else's mistakes? The seller refused, so I decided to be nice and send the item first. I waited forever for the proper item and the seller never paid for the extra shipping that I had to incur in shipping back the incorrect item. So I left negative feedback, and I received the same, which shouldn't happen since I paid for the item and have every right to demand that the item I paid for be sent. Now, I just don't leave any feedback if I haven't had a good experience with a seller because many sellers will cancel bids from buyers with low feedback scores and negative feedback to boot. Buyers are the ones who take the biggest risk as we have to send money out for an item and hope for the best. The most sellers lose when a buyer doesn't pay is the price for re-listing. Buyers can potentially be out hundreds of dollars if an item doesn't arrive, or is not what was described. Therefore, it's fair to hold sellers accountable without fear of retaliation, and it will certainly increase my confidence in the system. If you sell in a store, you don't ask your buyers for references? Why should it be any different online?
princesstxoxoMay 22, 2008
Actually, it's not America notahappyseller, it's the internet. Your constitution does not apply here.