eBay getting hot on dealing outside

UnclePsychosis

Neil said:

If you lot think ebay's fees are greedy (I don't personally)  I recommend you have a look to see what traditional auctions charge. 

-this. 

Ebay's fees are perfectly reasonable. They have lots of other downsides but fees 'ain't the problem. 

siraxeman

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Neil

siraxeman said:

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Yeah, ebay can afford it and it's a victim less crime.

I bet people say the same when they are shoplifting in Tesco.

impmann

Neil said:

siraxeman said:

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Yeah, ebay can afford it and it's a victim less crime.

I bet people say the same when they are shoplifting in Tesco.

No, because you aren't shoplifting - you are chosing to sell something without the 'safety' of selling it through eBay.

Seriously, if you cannot contact the seller to arrange to view something (especially an expensive item) without alarm bells ringing at eBay HQ then they must be having financial problems - or they aren't performing as well as they had predicted. If you then meet up and agree a deal on the spot involving cash, other than putting the two individuals in touch eBay have done nothing - and so they aren't actually doing the selling. You pay a listing fee (or rather you used to) and you used to pay that regardless of whether it sold or not. Perhaps making that more rigid would be more fair for all parties.

FWIW I had a heated debate with someone from eBay over ownership. I sold something outside of eBay  that was at that time listed on their site - I cancelled the auction and then got contacted. Thing was, the buyer did not see the item for sale on eBay and the item was *MINE* not theirs, so what business is it of theirs as to how I sold it. I was getting all sorts of threats of bans and whatnot so I said "just have a look at how much money eBay have made out of me since 2001 when I joined. THEN tell me if you are paid enough to make the judgement call as to whether eBay can afford to lose that amount of money over the same period... " It went quiet. I got a warning - which I told them to "fuck off" and don't warn me like I'm a child. I have done nothing wrong, whatsoever so don't treat me like this and in fact, in view of the distress caused I should have an apology. They refused, told me I wasn't "entitled" to an apology and they were not convinced by my "story".
Cutting a long story short... I got an apology from their head of customer service following an email to their MD (rob.hattrell@ebay.com).

eBay have this delluded idea that as they are the 'market leader' in private selling currently, they can treat people badly and they will just accept it. The rules are now stacked against the (private) seller and its very hard not to fall foul of a scam or a timewaster. I don't think the fees are unreasonable but I do think some of their policies are adrift. A market leader has to maintain that position - doing it by force never succeeds.

Sassafras

Neil said:

siraxeman said:

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Yeah, ebay can afford it and it's a victim less crime.

I bet people say the same when they are shoplifting in Tesco.

I'm a gourmet so I do all my shoplifting in Waitrose.

UnclePsychosis

impmann said:

 

eBay have this delluded idea that as they are the 'market leader' in private selling currently, they can treat people badly and they will just accept it. The rules are now stacked against the (private) seller and its very hard not to fall foul of a scam or a timewaster. I don't think the fees are unreasonable but I do think some of their policies are adrift. A market leader has to maintain that position - doing it by force never succeeds.

I agree with you---ebay has done some really stupid things recently---but the whining about fees really pisses me off. Lots of the (stupid) things that eBay implemented are basically a reaction to everyone doing their best to avoid paying fees for the service that eBay have provided and that were perfectly open about when the listing was made. This recent thing about no phone numbers etc is a (badly thought out) reaction to all the people who thought it was acceptable to use eBay as a shop window and then deliberately cut ebay out of the deal.

Fees on P&P costs were a reaction to greedy sellers charging 99p for an item and £199.00 for postage to avoid paying fees on a £200 sale. Etc, etc etc.

The next time one of these "ebay sucks" threads comes round we may do well to remember that perhaps everyone who has deliberately ripped ebay off should shoulder some of the blame.

By all means don't use eBay---but using their service when you have absolutely no intention of actually paying them for it isn't very cool. You (the generic you, not a specific you) wouldn't do that to a small business, don't do it to a big one and then whine about the consequences.

Cue lots of whining about eBay's reaction being all wrong: well, yes. But two wrongs don't make a right. Sellers also have a responsibility for forcing eBay into making these (stupid) changes.

Plus, eBay fees were perfectly reasonable anyway. 10% capped at whatever it is is a great deal for the exposure you get.

Whitecat

eBay slashed their fees by over half in the US in the musical instruments & pro audio categories, presumably because Reverb is killing their market. Sucks that they haven't budged here, but Reverb is making inroads so it may only be a matter of time. 

dano

I sold my Les Paul last year on eBay for 1K.

Buyer met and paid cash, I then (with their blessing) cancelled the transaction a few days later and paid them back what would have been the ebay fee.

 I didn't loose out, the seller got a 'deal' and I beat the ebay system. It felt good ! 

Neil

UnclePsychosis said:

impmann said:

 

eBay have this delluded idea that as they are the 'market leader' in private selling currently, they can treat people badly and they will just accept it. The rules are now stacked against the (private) seller and its very hard not to fall foul of a scam or a timewaster. I don't think the fees are unreasonable but I do think some of their policies are adrift. A market leader has to maintain that position - doing it by force never succeeds.

I agree with you---ebay has done some really stupid things recently---but the whining about fees really pisses me off. Lots of the (stupid) things that eBay implemented are basically a reaction to everyone doing their best to avoid paying fees for the service that eBay have provided and that were perfectly open about when the listing was made. This recent thing about no phone numbers etc is a (badly thought out) reaction to all the people who thought it was acceptable to use eBay as a shop window and then deliberately cut ebay out of the deal.

Fees on P&P costs were a reaction to greedy sellers charging 99p for an item and £199.00 for postage to avoid paying fees on a £200 sale. Etc, etc etc.

The next time one of these "ebay sucks" threads comes round we may do well to remember that perhaps everyone who has deliberately ripped ebay off should shoulder some of the blame.

By all means don't use eBay---but using their service when you have absolutely no intention of actually paying them for it isn't very cool. You (the generic you, not a specific you) wouldn't do that to a small business, don't do it to a big one and then whine about the consequences.

Cue lots of whining about eBay's reaction being all wrong: well, yes. But two wrongs don't make a right. Sellers also have a responsibility for forcing eBay into making these (stupid) changes.

Plus, eBay fees were perfectly reasonable anyway. 10% capped at whatever it is is a great deal for the exposure you get.

Wisdom awarded.

Completely agree. 

Neil

impmann said:

Neil said:

siraxeman said:

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Yeah, ebay can afford it and it's a victim less crime.

I bet people say the same when they are shoplifting in Tesco.

No, because you aren't shoplifting - you are chosing to sell something without the 'safety' of selling it through eBay.

Seriously, if you cannot contact the seller to arrange to view something (especially an expensive item) without alarm bells ringing at eBay HQ then they must be having financial problems - or they aren't performing as well as they had predicted. If you then meet up and agree a deal on the spot involving cash, other than putting the two individuals in touch eBay have done nothing - and so they aren't actually doing the selling. You pay a listing fee (or rather you used to) and you used to pay that regardless of whether it sold or not. Perhaps making that more rigid would be more fair for all parties.

Surely that is the crux of the matter though?

Otherwise you could use Gumtree or similar.

The fact you use ebay is because it has a huge marketplace and will be far more expeditious in finding a buyer/seller.

Using someone else's resources and then refusing to pay for them reflects badly on folk IMO. 

impmann

Neil said:

impmann said:

Neil said:

siraxeman said:

Still best if you can sell at 0% fees tho eh? ;-)

Yeah, ebay can afford it and it's a victim less crime.

I bet people say the same when they are shoplifting in Tesco.

No, because you aren't shoplifting - you are chosing to sell something without the 'safety' of selling it through eBay.

Seriously, if you cannot contact the seller to arrange to view something (especially an expensive item) without alarm bells ringing at eBay HQ then they must be having financial problems - or they aren't performing as well as they had predicted. If you then meet up and agree a deal on the spot involving cash, other than putting the two individuals in touch eBay have done nothing - and so they aren't actually doing the selling. You pay a listing fee (or rather you used to) and you used to pay that regardless of whether it sold or not. Perhaps making that more rigid would be more fair for all parties.

Surely that is the crux of the matter though?

Otherwise you could use Gumtree or similar.

The fact you use ebay is because it has a huge marketplace and will be far more expeditious in finding a buyer/seller.

Using someone else's resources and then refusing to pay for them reflects badly on folk IMO. 

As I said above. The listing fee used to be non-refundable. Perhaps if that was reintroduced and this whole silliness about deals done in real life rather than the virtual world was ignored (it was for at least 16 years) then all would be happy. Therefore eBay get their money for putting the two individuals together.

Thing is, it used to be that as a seller you were protected a bit from the idiots, timewasters and general all round fuck ups - therefore you felt that you didn't want to do deals away from eBay and your fees felt like they were paying for something, other than the humungous profits of a mutinational corporation. These days those protections are gone and the idiots are out in force. So of course there is a temptation to 'go native'.

TheBigDipper

There are lots of people who seem very competent at adjusting their moral compass to fit the way they deal with the world, aren't there? 

If someone doesn't like the trading terms for using eBay, don't use it. Use Reverb. Use this place. 

If someone lists something on eBay, they're entering into a contract. If they then conspire with the buyer to bypass the fees, they're breaking the terms of the contract they entered into. End of. 

The fact eBay is a corporate monster doesn't excuse our own behaviour, does it? We're not forced to use their platform to sell stuff. 

Fiftyshadesofjay

Not going into the morality of it but I'm inclined to say that the fees possibly aren't reasonable if they're going to all these lengths to stop people avoiding them? That's surely your customer giving you a clear picture that it's too high? 

I personally think they'd be better off working out a different selling model like they do with motors. Surely 5% or a one off fee is preferable to hunting people down and banning them? 

siraxeman

Why do ebay ignore/turn a blind eye (to reports) and profit from selling counterfeit goods? Where is their moral compass set to? People can't complain (well they can but...) about their fees...as we all know what the deal is. But this is just a game of one-upmanship. Usually ebay win in most cases and on smaller items I don't bother to fight 'em. On bigger items if I can hint the buyer can save a few squids (and me also by selling privately) then as long as I am able to sell privately in preference I will.  It is a sellers prerogative to be able to sell inside or outside ie advertise in multiple places at the same time. But if in the meantime someone places a bid on an item like a guitar or an amp I might want to sell then fair enough I'm locked in to that 'deal'...if on the other hand they get in touch. Happy days. I winz...and they (the buyer) winz.

Neil

siraxeman said:

Why do ebay ignore/turn a blind eye (to reports) and profit from selling counterfeit goods? Where is their moral compass set to? People can't complain (well they can but...) about their fees...as we all know what the deal is. But this is just a game of one-upmanship. Usually ebay win in most cases and on smaller items I don't bother to fight 'em. On bigger items if I can hint the buyer can save a few squids (and me also by selling privately) then as long as I am able to sell privately in preference I will.  It is a sellers prerogative to be able to sell inside or outside ie advertise in multiple places at the same time. But if in the meantime someone places a bid on an item like a guitar or an amp I might want to sell then fair enough I'm locked in to that 'deal'...if on the other hand they get in touch. Happy days. I winz...and they (the buyer) winz.

You the seller probably "winz" but if a buyer is after purchasing a reasonably high ticket item then they are better off going though ebay/paypal/credit card. 

Giving somebody you don't know cash only to find out afterwards that the item may not be what it first seemed (people are unlikely to start taking necks off even if they know what they are looking at) or an amp that has an intermittent  fault that you only find out about later is not a "winz".

Switch625

I got my first warning today! Had something up for sale that was also listed on Gumtree. The buyer sent a few questions about the item then sent one saying he couldn't view my listing for some reason and would try later on. So I replied that the item is also on gumtree and he could contact me through that if he wanted (which he did). Didn't exchange any contact details through ebay yet still got a warning. Seems like you can't even mention Gumtree in the messages without it being flagged up.

impmann

switch625 said:

I got my first warning today! Had something up for sale that was also listed on Gumtree. The buyer sent a few questions about the item then sent one saying he couldn't view my listing for some reason and would try later on. So I replied that the item is also on gumtree and he could contact me through that if he wanted (which he did). Didn't exchange any contact details through ebay yet still got a warning. Seems like you can't even mention Gumtree in the messages without it being flagged up.

Funny that... IIRC, they own Gumtree too.

Jack_

impmann said:

switch625 said:

I got my first warning today! Had something up for sale that was also listed on Gumtree. The buyer sent a few questions about the item then sent one saying he couldn't view my listing for some reason and would try later on. So I replied that the item is also on gumtree and he could contact me through that if he wanted (which he did). Didn't exchange any contact details through ebay yet still got a warning. Seems like you can't even mention Gumtree in the messages without it being flagged up.

Funny that... IIRC, they own Gumtree too.

Really? That'll be why Gumtree develops so slowly then? There are lots of features they could implement that they already own, but they probably choose not to so people feel they have to use eBay instead and pay fees.

It all centres around money, it's so bent.

Sassafras

Jack_ said:

Really? That'll be why Gumtree develops so slowly then? There are lots of features they could implement that they already own, but they probably choose not to so people feel they have to use eBay instead and pay fees.

It all centres around money, it's so bent.

What doesn't?

impmann

Jack_ said:

impmann said:

switch625 said:

I got my first warning today! Had something up for sale that was also listed on Gumtree. The buyer sent a few questions about the item then sent one saying he couldn't view my listing for some reason and would try later on. So I replied that the item is also on gumtree and he could contact me through that if he wanted (which he did). Didn't exchange any contact details through ebay yet still got a warning. Seems like you can't even mention Gumtree in the messages without it being flagged up.

Funny that... IIRC, they own Gumtree too.

Really? That'll be why Gumtree develops so slowly then? There are lots of features they could implement that they already own, but they probably choose not to so people feel they have to use eBay instead and pay fees.

It all centres around money, it's so bent.

Wiki says they are still owned by eBay:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gumtree