scams in both directions
How do the rule changes affect the feckless sods who claim never to have received your item and get their money back through paypal without you having any say in it?
eBay: 'We will lower listing fees'
This morning, eBay's CEO-to-be told a roomful of obsessed internet auctioneers that he will soon charge them between 25 and 50 per cent less to list their items on the site's virtual marketplace. But he's not willing to kiss all those dollars goodbye. While charging less for listings, eBay plans to charge more when items are …
This topic is closed for new posts.
PayPal sucks
I only ever use old-fashioned postal orders when paying for goods bought on eBay, because postal orders are much, much more secure -- both for the buyer and the seller.
First of all, there is no need for the recipient of a postal order to positively identify themself to the sender -- it can always be made out to "CASH". The sender does not have to know the recipient's real name, nor even an alias under which the recipient may have opened a bank account (which in itself is getting harder and harder to do these days, as this control-freak government seek to pry ever deeper into our lives and use big business to do their dirty work for them -- but that's a separate issue).
Secondly, there is no information on a postal order which allows the recipient to positively identify the sender -- so long as it was paid for in cash, it cannot be traced back any further than the Post Office where it was sold. In all probability this will be a busy Post Office in a city with hundreds of customers passing through every hour, now the government have closed so many of the local sub-Post Offices where the sub-postmistress knew everybody's name.
Yes, the Post Office will sting you a few pence in the pound for a postal order. But this is a small price to pay for being able to perform a transaction in such a way that neither party need positively identify themself to the other. Contrast that with PayPal, where somebody always knows not only who both parties are, but what they were buying and when.
About shill bidding: It's ultimately self-regulating. If as a seller you get greedy and push up the price higher than anybody is genuinely willing to pay, you end up winning your own item back -- which puts you out of pocket due to listing and final value fees. If as a buyer you think that an item is too expensive, the proper course of action is to leave it alone and wait for another to come along. Remember, at every stage of the process you enter the MAXIMUM you are prepared to pay, and bids are placed incrementally up to this amount.
Why PayPal seems cheap
PayPal seems cheap and efficient because they've gone a long way to cut costs. They have removed one of the most expensive parts of any service package: consumer protection.
It's equivalent to the low-cost airlines who will leave you stranded in a foreign country at 11pm without a bed for the night or any idea of how your going to get home. And just like those airlines, it's not always down to outside influences (snow, fog, pilots arrested for being drunk-in-charge of an aircraft), but sometimes just because they feel like it (too many spare seats -- flight cancelled).
Sadly, we're all too thick to realise that old adage "you get what you pay for."
@scams in both directions
"How do the rule changes affect the feckless sods who claim never to have received your item and get their money back through paypal without you having any say in it?"
I've had a number if instances over the years, where items have not turned up and I have had to claim.
The thing that I can't understand is that everyone always cailms it was sent but can't provide shipping details, either proff of posting or recorded number etc... You are given these when you post it if using the post office.
Another thing that irratates me is when an item will be sent recorded and the final value is withing the covered value for recorded, yet you have to pay a compulsary insurance fee.
@By A J Stiles
"I only ever use old-fashioned postal orders .............. it can always be made out to "CASH". "
If you make it out to cash and don't cross it, it is the same as sending real cash, hence no security at all. the seller could claim you didn't post it to him and you have no way of tracing it. You should always have a name and cross the PO.
NOT the item you are looking for.
I hate searching and finding items with "NOT" in the title.
Sometimes when ebaying late at night and after a few drinks I normally ask the 'NOT' sell a question.
saying,
'I was going to ask a question about the .........item , but I see you are NOT selling that. Therefor this is NOT a question.'
If they are wasting my time seeding my searches and clogging up the eBay search engine for that matter, I'm going to waste their time reading my NOT question !!
Worse on Amazon.co.uk
Amazon Marketplace charge an £0.86 completion fee and an utterly ridiculous 17.25% closing fee atop that for things sold there!!
Also their P&P allowance is painfully small, and frequently isn't sufficient to cover materials and recorded delivery. AND their feedback system sucks, because customers often don't leave feedback and sellers frequently don't get the credit they deserve.
Anyway, I digress. I myself have no problem with "inflated" postage fees on eBay. They're presented up front for all to see, even before you view an item detail. I think sellers are entitled to recoup some of the obscene eBay and PayPal fees in their shipping costs. Why should sellers be forced to negate what little they have made on the sale, or in instances be forced to make a loss, while eBay rakes in yet more and more cash?
Google Auctions, anyone?
Monumental piss take....
RE: "...they need to go further than reducing some fees. How about they clean up all of the scam artists, con jobs, and excess shipping fee sellers? How many times have you seen a $5 product with a shipping fee of $25+?"
That is not a scam, its actually a way of stopping paying EBay so much money per sale.
Isn't this monumental piss take an ideal opportunity for some alternative sites to undercut ebay?
NOT the item....
simply add '-not' into your search and these will no longer appear
@AC
It all depends on who you want your details to be secure from.
Sometimes it's better for your money and the item to go missing altogether (nobody ever spends more on eBay than they could afford to lose, right?) than for anybody to be able to work out who was sending what to whom.
Re: eBay's problem isn't the fees it's the ratings
Everyone should scroll back to the top of the page and read comment #12 by Neil Docherty: BINGO!
ebay's new feedback policy is a step in the wrong direction. The idea should be feedback transparency, not seller protection.
ebid.co.uk anyone?
ebid.co.uk - do they still allow to copy your ebay rating to your ebid rating?
RE: Shipping Costs AC
"Also since its clearly advertised the seller is breaking no laws nor defrauding anyone"
"Actually, they are on three counts."
"Firstly, if the item is coming in from abroad then a false customs declaration is illegal and potentially HMRC lose out on tax. Secondly, eBay don't charge fees on the postage price so eBay is losing money (at least that was the case the last time I read the relevant part of their T&Cs). I'll admit, probably not many tears shed so far..."
The HMRC issue is a totally different matter to what we were talking about.
Ebay losing out because of it is not breaking any law. If you can show me the law on the statue books fine but I'm not aware of any and like tax avoidance is not illegal, evasion is. There is a big difference.
"Finally, the buyers rights are affected if the seller is a business as they are bound by the distant selling regulations (if UK based of course) and if you get an item and decide to return it under these rights, the company has to refund the original purchase price but not postage. If the postage is subsidising the item, they are still making a profit and you don't get as much money back as you should be entitled to."
Again there is no law broken if the postage cost is listed, you have accepted the terms of the sale, the price of the item and the costs the seller has decided to charge.
So no laws (apart from possibly the HMRC issue) are being broken, it might not be fair play in your eyes. As I said you have the choice to take it or leave it no one is making you buy the item, its not as though its a monopoly so take your business elsewhere in the good tradition of free trade. I really don't see the issue here. If I see an item listed which is too expensive I don't buy it, whether that cost be in the item price, the postage cost or the fact that the seller can't prove it works and won't offer any DOA warranty or 100's of other reasons I will decide whether or not to bid.
The only valid comment I've seen is the one to returning an item when I can see there is an issue.
Reason upping the postage is a PAIN IN THE ARSE
When you click to show prices in ascending/descending order and you then have to scan the whole list of however many items are returned in the search then work out for most "how much is the starting price plus the weird postage".
Either get it to fck or have a third column called "Total price" which you can click and see the REAL cheapest prices.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Popular Whitepapers
- Linux on the Desktop
Lessons from mainstream business adoption - The Register Guide to iSCSI
A primer on Internet SCSI, a protocol to transport SCSI commands over IP - The BI Inflexion Point
Information is a right, not a privilege - The Evolving Security Landscape
Reg Webinar - The Register Guide to email security
A primer on the challenges of securing email and approaches to resolving them - The Register's Green Computing Debate
An on-demand webcast
