OK eBay your Metrics benchmarks for SNAD & INR make no sense

[timemachine777]

What does any of the stuff that you outline as the benchmarks have to do with actual SNAD and INR determinations. It looks like eBay's just out to charge sellers another 4% in FVF's. 

I don't see anything below that can even show that an item was SNAD or INR.  Are you people for real???

To determine your "item not as described" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and in the same category.
• Share the same assessment lookback period (3 or 12 months), as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar "average selling price."
• Sell items with similar item conditions—generally new or not-new conditions.
• Offer a similar return policy—usually returns accepted or returns not accepted policies.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

To determine your "item not received" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and to ship to the same destination.
• Share the same assessment lookback period, as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar average selling price.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

[coolections]

It is just a comparison to you compared to other sellers who have problems with snads and inr.

[timemachine777]

They still have nothing to do with actual SNAD and INR. 

[coolections]

---

@timemachine777 wrote:

They still have nothing to do with actual SNAD and INR. 

---

All the snads you get and all the INR you get compared to other sellers who also get snads and inr. I have no clue where you are coming from and what this complaint means.

[timemachine777]

Lets start with the short list:

To determine your "item not received" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and to ship to the same destination.
• Share the same assessment lookback period, as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar average selling price.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

What does any of this junk have to do with a INR. Most of all the last 2. Avg selling price and delivery estimates. Really. INR received has nothing to do with other items or sellers. If tracking shows that the Item didn't arrive at the destination, than that's it. INR is not a seller performance issue unless the seller never shipped the item, which again has nothing to do with the above.  INR is a postal performance issue. Once my item ships, I have no control over it any more. None. That's why I buy insurance.

[coolections]

---

@timemachine777 wrote:

Lets start with the short list:

To determine your "item not received" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and to ship to the same destination.
• Share the same assessment lookback period, as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar average selling price.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

What does any of this junk have to do with a INR. Most of all the last 2. Avg selling price and delivery estimates. Really. INR received has nothing to do with other items or sellers. If tracking shows that the Item didn't arrive at the destination, than that's it. INR is not a seller performance issue unless the seller never shipped the item, which again has nothing to do with the above.  INR is a postal performance issue. Once my item ships, I have no control over it any more. None. That's why I buy insurance. 

---

You obviously do not understand Ebay's requirement that a buyer receive their item within a specified date. You are also wrong about once an items leave your hands you are done. That's not how Ebay works.

[mam98031]

---

@coolections wrote:

---

@timemachine777 wrote:

Lets start with the short list:

To determine your "item not received" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and to ship to the same destination.
• Share the same assessment lookback period, as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar average selling price.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

What does any of this junk have to do with a INR. Most of all the last 2. Avg selling price and delivery estimates. Really. INR received has nothing to do with other items or sellers. If tracking shows that the Item didn't arrive at the destination, than that's it. INR is not a seller performance issue unless the seller never shipped the item, which again has nothing to do with the above.  INR is a postal performance issue. Once my item ships, I have no control over it any more. None. That's why I buy insurance. 

---

You obviously do not understand Ebay's requirement that a buyer receive their item within a specified date. You are also wrong about once an items leave your hands you are done. That's not how Ebay works.

---

We are only required to get it there by a certain date if you are part of the Guaranteed Delivery program.  For those sellers not participating in that program, the dates on our listings are all ETAs, not guarantees.

[mam98031]

From my point of view this is going to be a very difficult thing for many sellers for several reasons.

First, Ebay told us when they started the Request for Return system that they would NOT hold these against sellers as long as we resolved them without escalation to a claim.  They further told us the percentage we see on our dashboard as our "return rate" was merely a tool for us so we could see how many return requests we were getting so we could spot areas in which we could improve.

Now come September they ARE going to hold these against sellers.  I am however unclear if they are just holding the SNAD and INR requests against us.  It appears to me that BRs will also be held against us.  I have no idea how Ebay expects sellers to prevent BRs, but apparently it is an expectation of theirs.

If you look at your Dashboard now.  The Return percentage includes BRRs.  On my dashboard lets say it says I've had 6 Requests for Return in the past twelve months.  

On the detailed report it might show:

2 SNADs 

4 BRs

The only reason there may be a difference is I fought that one false SNAD and while the buyer did get refunded, it was by Ebay because Ebay gave me my money back.  So maybe that is why it only shows 9 on the percentage but 10 in the details.  That is the only thing I can think of anyway.

Having this new rule in Sept being retroactive is problematic for some sellers too.  Because Ebay TOLD us that a Request for Return would NOT be held against us.  Some sellers when a buyer would write to them and explain they had some kind of issue with the purchase, told those buyer to go ahead and open a Request for Return and they would get them all taken care of.  If those seller had known that Ebay was going to REVERSE the decision NOT to hold them against the sellers, those sellers would have most likely NEVER encourage a buyer to open a RR.

So to me, having BRs held against us is a real issue. 

Having an INR that was actually received is an issue.

Having my numbers compared to some arbitrary metrics Ebay has come up with is an issue.

Having these Requests held against us on a retroactive basis is an issue.

Having something held against my Seller Stats that was told to us would never be held against us is yet another issue.  

Obviously I HAVE ISSUES !!!

[aislynkat]

---

@timemachine777 wrote:

What does any of the stuff that you outline as the benchmarks have to do with actual SNAD and INR determinations. It looks like eBay's just out to charge sellers another 4% in FVF's. 

I don't see anything below that can even show that an item was SNAD or INR.  Are you people for real???

To determine your "item not as described" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and in the same category.
• Share the same assessment lookback period (3 or 12 months), as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar "average selling price."
• Sell items with similar item conditions—generally new or not-new conditions.
• Offer a similar return policy—usually returns accepted or returns not accepted policies.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

To determine your "item not received" peer benchmark, we group you with sellers that:

• List on the same eBay site and to ship to the same destination.
• Share the same assessment lookback period, as determined by transaction volume.
• Have a similar average selling price.
• Sell items with similar buyer-facing delivery estimates.

---

I see your point. They are apples and oranges and tangerines. These benchmark metrics have zip to do with INR and SNAD in normal people logic. In ebay logic, they make sense as they are make-work. Gotta keep busy at ebay, making themselves look like they are improving the system. It's truly a bloody mess. I will not put myself through this madness. Am phasing out. Don't care to be measured by crazy people for a sale now and then. 

[mczombies]

Wait--What? They are going to go retro-active with the seller metrics? I haven't been here much because I have been busy building new businesses elsewhere, however, I must have missed something very important--please explain, before I blow out an artery or two--what exactly that means that they are going retro-active.  Do you mean that everyone doesn't start with a clean slate? Are they going back a year--three months--what?

I remember last time that happened--it was a way to get rid of small sellers--it was totally unfair and horrible--I literally cried reading some of the postings here from sellers that were booted--please, not again.......

Also--so sorry to hear about your issues

[lasantino]

OMG. Please do not tell me Ebay is going back to holding returns against sellers!. 

First the force sellers to take returns, (one way or the other a buyer can return something, so a seller may as well have a return policy)

Now they are going to penalize sellers for working within ebay's system and having buyers open return requests etc..

Trying to operate a business with ebays constantly changing , arbitrary, short-sighted "metrics" is like walking a minefield.  

where did you read about the change coming up in september!

[ymeagainlord]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

From my point of view this is going to be a very difficult thing for many sellers for several reasons.

First, Ebay told us when they started the Request for Return system that they would NOT hold these against sellers as long as we resolved them without escalation to a claim.  They further told us the percentage we see on our dashboard as our "return rate" was merely a tool for us so we could see how many return requests we were getting so we could spot areas in which we could improve.

Now come September they ARE going to hold these against sellers.  I am however unclear if they are just holding the SNAD and INR requests against us.  It appears to me that BRs will also be held against us.  I have no idea how Ebay expects sellers to prevent BRs, but apparently it is an expectation of theirs.

If you look at your Dashboard now.  The Return percentage includes BRRs.  On my dashboard lets say it says I've had 6 Requests for Return in the past twelve months.  

On the detailed report it might show:

2 SNADs 

4 BRs

The only reason there may be a difference is I fought that one false SNAD and while the buyer did get refunded, it was by Ebay because Ebay gave me my money back.  So maybe that is why it only shows 9 on the percentage but 10 in the details.  That is the only thing I can think of anyway.

Having this new rule in Sept being retroactive is problematic for some sellers too.  Because Ebay TOLD us that a Request for Return would NOT be held against us.  Some sellers when a buyer would write to them and explain they had some kind of issue with the purchase, told those buyer to go ahead and open a Request for Return and they would get them all taken care of.  If those seller had known that Ebay was going to REVERSE the decision NOT to hold them against the sellers, those sellers would have most likely NEVER encourage a buyer to open a RR.

So to me, having BRs held against us is a real issue. 

Having an INR that was actually received is an issue.

Having my numbers compared to some arbitrary metrics Ebay has come up with is an issue.

Having these Requests held against us on a retroactive basis is an issue.

Having something held against my Seller Stats that was told to us would never be held against us is yet another issue.  

Obviously I HAVE ISSUES !!!

---

It's actually WORSE than you've stated because the official line is that they are going to include "after sale contact" in their metrics. (read that as 'for whatever reason").

[tunicaslot]

I have a 1.06% return rate for SNADs in the clothing category - while Ebay tells me other same sellers have a .95% - which I call **bleep** too. Even the vloggers who deal in clothing have a 3%+ return rate. 

Since I sell both new and used - are they comparing me to only those who sell new or only those that sell used? Average price - my items range from $1.99 - $129.

A SNAD - that I won is still included in my selling metric - that should have been removed when I won the case. 2 SNADs that buyers opened because they wanted partials are still showing on my selling metrics - even though I provided a return label and they never sent the item back - because there actually wasn't anything wrong with it.

Things are selling elsewhere with out all the problems I've started to have here in the past 2 years. It's really said to lose faith in a platform you've enjoyed for 20 years.

[d-k_treasures]

---

@mam98031 wrote:

So to me, having BRs held against us is a real issue. 

Having an INR that was actually received is an issue.

Having my numbers compared to some arbitrary metrics Ebay has come up with is an issue.

Having these Requests held against us on a retroactive basis is an issue.

Having something held against my Seller Stats that was told to us would never be held against us is yet another issue.  

Obviously I HAVE ISSUES !!!

---

And we all knew this was coming. Even the retroactive part, which, of course, is totally wrong and only meant to gain that extra 4% in FVF's.

[whatmorefabric]

I have a SNAD coming back for a Brushed Lycra knit.      Brushed knits have a fuzzier surface that feels like suede.    It says so in the description.      The fabric is coming back because of a defect because the surface is not smooth.

Most fabric sellers do not take returns.    Most buyers know that fabric sites do not take returns and they don't bother try.  

My metrics will always be higher because I take returns.

Ebay has found out what anyone of us could have told them after we bought into the return program.  There are a lot of returns and they cost money.     There solution is to penalize the seller,   not what the real problem is here and everywhere else,   the high volume of returns.