Final value fee on shipping

[zarchy]

Would like some clarification on how this works.  Suppose a buyer wins several of my items and I send a combined invoice with a reduced shipping cost.  Am I paying the final value based on this reduced shipping cost, or on the cost stated in the listings?

[bocaboca2010]

Spoiler

The fees on the shipping really is WRONG WRONG WRONG.  I mean this should be illegal to be honest.   I mean really then on top of that they have a shipping discount which is most likely provided by the USPS and not eBay, but still they take a piece of your shipping?  I just gives everyone I am sure a bad feeling in their stomach.

[bocaboca2010]

Its a sham no matter how we look at it, no one likes it becuase it is just greed.  We could all understand the fee if it was something that they had to pay or there was some valid reason for charging it, but there is no good reason.  They say it is to discourage people from jacking up fees, lol, how does that help if you print USPS labels directly and charge actual cost? 

I cassify it as a greed tax by the executives.

[bocaboca2010]

ITS NUTS

I agree paying final value on shipping is crazy and just plain wrong for ebay to do.  The fact we already pay them 10% is piracy as it stands.   To pay for a fixed shipping fee, plus we pay for all the material packing, we do all the work listing, then we also get hit by paypal on top of it.  WOW.  You do realize it is 99 cents to post a listing on amazon and free if you pay the monthly or annual fee.

Their original reason for this as we all recall years ago was overcharging on shipping. 

WRONG
WRONG

WRONG

[bocaboca2010]

Most of us charge the customer exactly what we get charged if not less.  What you are saying makes no sense at all unless you advocate the ebay takes even more from us.  The only solution is to just charge a fee for those people not charging actual costs.  For the rest of it is just a scheme to collect more money.  Ebay is not shipping the item, they are not packing it, the USPS is shipping it, the USPS is the one giving us shipping discounts.   We pay for the packing, the tape and the work.  It benefits ebay in every way that we ship though USPS since they already have a tracking system of their own and they do all the work. 

I just do not understand on what planet paying for a SURCHARGE on something that should not be SURCHARGED makes sense.  In every sense it is wrong. Wrong for sellers, wrong for buyers.  Everyone knows it, but ebay will not admit it and remove it since it is such a large revenue stream.

[thatsallfolks]

Right, 99 cents to POST. You really think that’s the only fee if you sell an item on Amazon?

LOL

[bocaboca2010]

I know its nuts, plus its a 10% fee, then you also get hit by paypal, then you pay for all your packing etc.

[bocaboca2010]

Well in most ways he still really pays a fee because now you eat the total shipping cost. So ebay doesnt charge you but you still lose out.  It really is a scheme if one was ever invented to charge a surcharge on the shipping.  Then they wrap everyone up in it making a charge and then the USPS discount comes in.  I really do not like the smell of it at all.

[a_c_green]

---

@bocaboca2010 wrote:

It really is a scheme if one was ever invented to charge a surcharge on the shipping.

---

Right, but at this point, you're really beating the greasy spot in the road where the dead horse used to be.

The topic of FVF percentages including postage has been done to death, and eBay is not going to change it, such as to deduct postage from the Shipping charge before calculating the FVF. They have basically stated as such. (This came up not too long ago in a weekly chat when Yrs Truly raised it.) Time to retire this old thread, IMHO...

[empire53]

you get F no matter

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

You are taking a simple accounting procedure and turning it into a control issue.

Let's say 3 sellers sell the same new Kate Spade wallet for $100. They should all pay the same in fees right? Even though one seller offers "free" shipping and one charges exact shipping and one charges shipping and handling. Why should free shipping sellers pay more in fees for the same total sale of the same wallet?

The fees are the fees. They're not going to go down. The only thing that changed was the way Ebay allocated them. They allocate them based on total sale because that's the most fair way.  The only people who ended up worse were the sellers of big and heavy items.

[rrcarbon]

I understand what you said and I can see where 'inflated handling' would be a problem.  But....  eBay charged me a "Finale Value on Shipping" fee for the amount I had to pay the USPO.  eBay calculated the cost of shipping based on the zip code of the buyer and how I said I would ship it.  I had to give that money to the Post Office when I bought the "stamp".  So I lost because I did not include a special handling fee and all eBay did was inflate THEIR "Final Value Fee".  The problem is their algorithm.

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

It's not a shipping fee, it's the second half of the final value fee. it goes against your total revenue like any other expense like original acquisition price. You don't get to keep that either.

Using the total amount taken in is the BASIS for final value fee calculation. It is also the most fair. So someone selling the same item for the same total pays the same fees whether they use "free" shipping, actual or shipping and handling.

Why would we want the person using "free" shipping to pay higher fees for the same total?

[*coins]

Tis is a thread from a year ago, guys...