EBAY Ad fees, kind of **bleep** off at them charging us on repeat business.
RE: Ebay Ad fees
Kind of **bleep** off at Ebay ad fees, charging us on repeat/return customers. I pay an ad fee to gain new business. We should not have to pay ad fees for returning customers. The ad fee had nothing to do with my customer returning to us to purchase from us again. It was due to our premium products, great price, fast shipping and customer service that brought this customer back to our store. Ebay at this point had nothing to do with that sale. Therefore we should not be hit repeat ad fees once we obtained this customers faith in our retail/business store. I find this to be just plain GREED.
52 comments
anjofak
·2 years agoAd
Real streetwear. Checked by real experts.
 has anyone seen this add, guess I need to list more "junk"
eschdaddy
·2 years agoeBay is charging ad fees on our shipping charges too. I just noticed them refunding them after a shipping refund.
kabilab
·3 years agoDuring my 2 1/2 mos. in Navy boot camp during the summer of 1960, there were several occasions when the acronym, Keep It Simple Sailor, was mentioned. Upon my discharge in 1963, I entered into self-employed sales and at some early point, I was informed Salesman would be substituted for Sailor. Said acronym has served me well these many years. As it applies to promoted listings, since I don't like the peaches, I decided not to shake the tree.
It is my understanding, promoted listings are strictly voluntary. If, however, they were to become compulsory, I could well understand seller's objections.
city.shoes
·3 years agoOk so here's my case. I just had a sale from a repeated customer that purchased shoes from my store over a year ago. Customer came to our store purchase two pair of shoes and eBay is charging ad Fee
Below is the breakdown fees
$83.47
eBay collected from buyer
Sales tax*
-$4.72
Selling costs
Transaction fees
-$10.60
Ad Fee Standard
-$10.02
Order Earning $58.13
Now we have to put another 14 to 15 dollars on shipping
But the point is how eBay is charging ad Fee from a customer that purchased over a year ago
ittybitnot
·3 years agoBut the point is how eBay is charging ad Fee from a customer that purchased over a year ago
@city.shoes
It doesn't matter in this case if the buyer purchased from you last week, last year, or never before. They click on a sponsored or promoted listing and purchase, you pay the ad fee.
The new "enhanced" version does not go in effect for a few more days.
city.shoes
·3 years agoeBay says if the customer buy again within a 30 days period then they charge the ad fee again, not over 60 days or a year ago
inhawaii
·3 years agoI was under the impression, it doesn't matter who the customer is, new customer or repeat customer.
It doesn't matter when they last purchased from you, last week or last year.
It does natter how many times they bought from you.
If they click on your promoted listing, you get charged the PL fee.
Isn't that how it works?
Makes perfect sense to me.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@inhawaii,
If a listing is clicked on as a "sponsored" listing and purchased , there will be a PLS fee. Correct.
mightymouse
·3 years agoSo it come down to basics. You listed it as promotions and Ebay told you how they follow through on fees. If you don't like the fee "don't do promotions"
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@mightymouse Not sure what point you are trying to make. I have always accepted that it's ebay's sandbox, they can make whatever rules they want, and I've spent 20 plus years adapting to them and will continue to adapt to them. I was an early supporter of PLS, because I saw real value in it for sellers when it began. I think ebay has reduced the value proposition over time, but there is still value in using it, and I will continue to use it. My post explains how this new rule will work. Do I like it? No. I see no added value for sellers, just more expense. I will use PLS, but I will be much more selective, and I will finally begin to make a real effort to drive traffic via social media. In short, I will adapt. And, from conversations with other experienced sellers, I know I am not alone.
Sellers who use PLS can 1. stop using it, 2. continue to use it as they have been, and likely pay more for less, or 3. try to make adjustments to retain the benefits of PLS without adding a lot of extra costs. I'm in #3.
mightymouse
·3 years agoI though I was replying to the person you were replying to, complaining to the fees.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@mightymouse Yeah, it can be tricky sometimes to know who is responding to who here....
monica-sells
·3 years ago@my-cottage-books-and-antiques
I too am confused by the initial post/scenario
The PL thing is product based, not store based....i don't think there is a way to distinguish between a buyer finding your product through returning to your 'store' or clicking on a sponsored ad....
i do somewhat see the OP position and point, but what is being asked is not programmable...you can't exclude "repeat buyers" from future PL listings....that's how they found the listing
I have had more than 1 repeat buyer not get charge PL because the product itself was not promoted...and I have had repeat buyers that must have bought from a PL ad......so, i dunno
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoYou are not understanding. And yes, it's all programmed.
stainlessenginecovers
·3 years agoThe 'new' program is:
Buyer buys item using Promotions (originally found)
Any OTHER items they buy from you (because eBays PROMOTIONS is what got that customer to click) are ALSO charged that Promotion Fee.
Makes sense- as you would NOT have possibly got that customer in the first place.
Bottom Line- I always just use (in figuring costs) FVF+Promotion Fee on ALL SALES and those that are organic, good for me. I made a 'little more'.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@stainlessenginecovers
I don't see it that way.
The rooster crows, the sun rises. What can we learn from this? If we are ebay Ads Team, we have learned that the crowing of a rooster CAUSES the sun to rise. Because "A" happened, followed by "B" happening, and so A caused B. I'm sure you recognize this as classical logical fallacy, because it does not PROVE the crowing was the factor that caused the sun to rise.
That's how I view this. Buyer clicks on a totally unrelated item of mine (Item A, a Sponsored listing), forgets all about it, 29 days later sees a social media post I made for Item B, goes from my social media post to my store, where my Item B is shown to him as a non-sponsored listing (but is in a PL campaign), and so what caused him to buy Item A, a non-promoted listing? Well, my social media post was the cause, but ebay will take credit, (ebay calls it a "rebalancing of attribution") because ebay does not have to prove a causal link between Item A and Item B, they are just waving a magic wand and "attributing" the sale to PLS.
As I've suggested elsewhere, if they are going to take credit for these Halo sales, at least have the decency to recognize that a direct sale is tied to the PLS campaign, but a Halo sale might have no connection whatesover....so how about charging us , say, 10% of the fee, rather than 100%?
retro_entertainment_collectibles
·3 years agoWait what? I must have skipped re-education camp that day LOL.
What this will ultimately do is cause a spool of mess whereby sellers will be loosing all forms of sophisticated composure in these forums, to customer support and undoubtedly at any place related to eCommerce speak around the InterNut. Currently advanced concepts such as $FVF = ($Price + $SalesTax + $ShippingFee) +.30; already have had impacts on the hair loss industry. On the brighter side with these new calculations it will be easy for Walmart, BestBuy, Target and others to spot resellers.
chapeau-noir
·3 years agoWhat @my-cottage-books-and-antiques said is abundantly clear. I'm not sure what you're trying to say - that this is going to create stress?*
*Yes, it will.
stainlessenginecovers
·3 years ago@my-cottage-books-and-antiques wrote:
@stainlessenginecovers
I don't see it that way.
The rooster crows, the sun rises. What can we learn from this? If we are ebay Ads Team, we have learned that the crowing of a rooster CAUSES the sun to rise. Because "A" happened, followed by "B" happening, and so A caused B. I'm sure you recognize this as classical logical fallacy, because it does not PROVE the crowing was the factor that caused the sun to rise.
@my-cottage-books-and-antiques
I will say that "rooster and sun" is not anything like 'apples and oranges'.. more like 'apples and shoes'.
This is a website.
You list on a My website that I will charge you a fee if you sell something
My website also offers you to pay a 'higher' amount when the item is sold (promotions)
You advertise 10 items.
Buyer buys 1 that the buyer found at the top of their search as a 'promoted' item.
That buyer now looks at your 'other' items, because they "found you" on this website, using that 'promotion'.
Therefore, any 'future' sales makes TOTAL sense that the MY website, that you "voluntarily" advertised on, should also get a 'bigger' cut of the pie since that buyer ORIGINALLY found you on MY website.
No different than a consignment store as there are 'many' out there, Malls, Antique 'booths' etc.
If the agreement is a 'percentage' of the sales, if a 'customer' walks into your 'antique booth and buys 5 things', the 'store (or mall) gets said percentage of ALL ITEMS.
If same customer comes back a month later and buys 3 more items, that store GETS a share of those sales also.
Why?? Because you found 'that sellers stuff' on my property (be it a B&M Store, a website etc.)
anasazirose
·3 years agoI didn't even realize this was the new policy.
At which rate would that 2nd sale be calculated?
If 1st purchase is 2%, 2nd purchase wasn't promoted but based on 1st sale, they collect 2%?
What if first sale is 2%, 2nd sale is organic but based on 1st sale, yet 2nd item was promoted at 10%?
What if 1st sale is 11%, 2nd sale is organic but based on 1st sale, yet 2nd item was promoted at 5%?
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@anasazirose Well, that's not actually the new policy.
The new policy goes into effect on March 30th. Sorry this is a rather long explanation, but here goes:
1. Under today's rules: Buyer clicks on my Item A which says "Sponsored". Within 30 days, Buyer clicks on AND buys my Item B, which says "Sponsored". I pay the PL fee, but it has nothing to do with the 30 days. I pay the fee because it was shown to the buyer as a sponsored listing. This will not change when the new rule goes into effect.
2. Under today's rules: Buyer clicks on my Item A which says "Sponsored" Within 30 days Buyer clicks on AND buys my Item B, which does not say "Sponsored" AND is NOT in my PLS campaign. No PLS fee, because Item B is not part of my PLS campaign. This will not change when the new rule goes into effect.
3. Under today's rules: Buyer clicks on my Item A which says "Sponsored". Within 30 days Buyer clicks on AND buys my Item B, which does NOT say "Sponsored" BUT it is in my PLS campaign. I do NOT pay the PLS fee, because, while it is part of my PLS campaign, this particular buyer was shown Item B as an organic listing, not a sponsored listing. THIS IS WHAT IS CHANGING.
Under the NEW rules: Buyer clicks on my Item A which says "Sponsored". Within 30 days Buyer clicks on AND buys my Item B, which does not say "Sponsored" BUT it is in my PLS campaign. I PAY the PLS fee, because, even though Item B was shown to this buyer as an organic , not a "Sponsored" listing, it IS in my PLS campaign, and ebay, under the new rules, is attributing its sale to the fact that my buyer had clicked on one of my other ("Item A") sponsored items within the last 30 days, and so they are going to pretend the sale happened because of the PLS program (even though the purchased item was NOT shown to the buyer as a sponsored listing. (The fee I pay is the Item B fee, not the Item A fee. )
So, to recap. 1 and 2 are unchanged. #3 takes effect with the new rule:
1. "Sponsored" listing? Pay the PLS fee.
2. Organic listing NOT part of my PLS campaign? No PLS fees.
3. Organic listing PART of my PLS campaign? No PLS fee UNLESS ebay can find that the buyer sometime in the last 30 days did click on any one of my Sponsored Listings. If so, PLS fee.
The example ebay uses is Item A is sneakers in red, Item B is same sneakers in blue. One can maybe see some sort of plausible connection in that example. But.....Buyer clicks on my Sponsored red sneakers (Item A) and 29 days later, clicks on and buys a ceramic Easter Bunny from me (Item B), which is in my PLS campaign but was NOT shown to the buyer as a Promoted Listing---I will get hit with the PLS fee because ebay is going to pretend that the red sneakers click brought the buyer to my ceramic Easter Bunny. Does it matter that tracking would prove the buyer got to my Bunny because I posted a link on social media and buyer came directly from there? No. No matter how flimsy or even non-existent the connection between Item A and Item B, ebay is going to claim the Item B sale is a result of their PLS program, and I will be charged the fee and ebay can pretend the ad program is working great.
anasazirose
·3 years agoThank you!!!
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoI particularly like those emails that say they will be REDEFINING words and the creation of new terms such as HALO SALES all involving NEW CALCULATIONS and better enhancing. Funny how expensive changing terminology is. I mean, do words even matter anymore? Nope, because we update the definitions.
anasazirose
·3 years agoIt all started when Bill Clinton said, "Well, that depends on what your definition of "is" is"
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoI have many customers who made purchases months ago and years ago with no PL fee and now they return to repurchase the same item and SOLD VIA PROMOTED LISTINGS = ADD FEE STANDARD without any change to the listing. The PL fee no longer expires and is added to organic sales. STRAIGHT UP THEFT. I hope eBay is putting money aside for the litigation that will be. I guess this is all so they can pay the Steiners. Then they will create another scam to pay off the PL's settlement. It's a pyramid of pilferage.
toomuchstuffagain35
·3 years agoStrangely, one of the class action suits that ebay did lose was over their defunct "featured listings" option way back when.
toomuchstuffagain35
·3 years agoAnd before anyone else says it, technically they didn't "lose" as they "settled". But usually that means they thought they WERE going to lose.
IIRC that suit was for Featured Plus and claimed that sellers 'paid for visibility' which they did not receive.
monroe67
·3 years ago"Strangely, one of the class action suits that ebay did lose was over their defunct "featured listings" option way back when."
Could you please give us a cite to that lawsuit?
At least the names of the parties to the Class Action?
Something like: "Too M.S. Again and Others Similarly Situated v. eBay, Inc."
What state was it in: California? Utah? New York?
Was it a state court case or a federal case? If it was a federal case in San Jose, California, the court would have been:
United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
If it was a state court case in San Jose, California, the court would have been:
Superior Court of the State of California, Santa Clara County.
And "way back when" -- can you give a more accurate year for the decision that states/stated that "eBay did lose."
toomuchstuffagain35
·3 years agoJust because I'm feeling generous this morning, so instead of saying "research it" I give you this link.
https://casetext.com/case/custom-led-llc-v-ebay-inc
monroe67
·3 years ago"Just because I'm feeling generous this morning, so instead of saying "research it" I give you this link.
https://casetext.com/case/custom-led-llc-v-ebay-inc"
See, that gives me something to work from. That at least tells me the names of the parties.
AND you could have just said that in the beginning. You remembered a lawsuit that involved eBay and remembered enough about it to say (1) it was a class action, (2) that the "Featured Plus" aspect was part, if not all, of the dispute and, in your second post about it, (3) that eBay settled it, so they didn't really, officially, "lose" it, which would have to have been a decision by a judge.
But it sure looks like even you, yourself, didn't remember the names of the parties until you so generously looked it up yourself to offer a link to me and the rest of the community.
Such generosity.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop Please clarify:
Are you saying:
Buyer bought item from you more than 30 days ago from an organic listing. (No PLS fee)
Buyer now buys same item from you from an organic listing, and you are being charged a PLS fee.
OR
Are you saying:
Buyer bought item from you more than 30 days ago from an organic listing. (No PLS fee)
Buyer now buys same item from you from a Sponsored Listing, and you are being charged a PLS fee.
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoJust so you can understand this, IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE YOUR LISTINGS PROMOTED AND STILL HAVE AN ORGANIC/DIRECT SALE ON THE SAID PROMOTED LISTINGS. I do it everyday. A buyer can visit your eBay store and browse and buy something DIRECTLY causing on of the only possible ways left for an organic sale. The item they purchased was part of a promoted listings campaign, but that played no part in the sale, thus an organic sale on a promoted item.
Same buyer comes back 3 months later and purchases the same item, SOLD VIA PROMOTED LISTINGS.
I understand you want to defend eBay's every stupid move, but I'm not spending the time typing here for your reply. Only to "raise awareness" as to how manipulating the policies and definitions are. I really couldn't care about what I sell. I have no special attachment to the items. When they sell, I buy more.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop I am not defending anything. I asked a simple question, which I tried to ask as simply and plainly as possible, so that you could respond with: yes, the first example or Yes, the second example. Not sure why you found it necessary to make this so complicated.
I am well aware that a listing can be in a PL campaign and yet sold as a non-sponsored listing( no PLS fee). In fact, I have explained this exact fact many, many times to others on this Board.
If I'm understanding you correctly, you are talking about my example:
Buyer bought item from you more than 30 days ago from an organic listing . (No PLS fee)
Buyer now buys same item from you from a Sponsored Listing, and you are being charged a PLS fee.
If that's correct, well, yes, that's the way it works. The PLS fee charged for that second purchase has NOTHING to do with the previous purchase. If the buyer clicked on the second one as a Sponsored listing, then the fee is charged. It's been that way since Day One of PLS, and the new change taking effect on March 30th doesn't alter that fact.
If I'm also understanding you, I think you know all of this already, and what you are really saying is , in your opinion, ebay should not charge you a PLS fee on that second purchase, because the first organic purchase should mean every subsequent purchase of the same item should be treated as organic, even if the buyer clicks on a sponsored listing. And yes, that would be nice. But it doesn't work that way.
I, too, try to raise awareness as to how PLS works. I have posted many posts explaining how it works, and also how the March 30th changes will work. Explaining how it works is not the same thing as saying I like it. I think the March 30th change in particular is a money grab, with zero benefit to sellers....it just allows ebay to collect PLS fees on more items without having to show any real link to a PLS ad.
theteamsetguy
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop
In case you are not aware, whether it is promoted listings standard or advanced it is NOT A REQUIREMENT for sellers to participate in order to sell on eBay. How can it be theft if you chose to pay eBay more than you have to? Also, even if do participate you the seller chooses the amount you pay to promote your listings.
I looking at promoted listings as noting more than slotting fees that many companies pay grocery stores for better shelf space or displays. Have you every noticed when you walk into a Walmart on the grocery side entrance there is usually a very large display of Coke, Pepsi, Frito Lay, Kellogg's cereal, or other major brand products that rotate. One week might it be Coke products, and usually the 2 weeks before the super bowl it is usually Pepsi and Frito Lay products since Pepsi produces both. The companies pays Walmart and other stores big dollars to have their product stand out in the front of the store. Most grocery stores also charge slotting fees for end cap displays.
toomuchstuffagain35
·3 years agoBut at least with those, it's pretty easy to verify they're actually doing what they're charging you for.
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoIt becomes difficult when eBay provides sellers with tools(Promoted Listings) and you adapt and learn every aspect of how they work. Use it for years, and sales would always be about 50% from promoted sales and 50% direct, organic sales. Then with some adjustments, and recalculating, and redefining, they have made 90% of the sales promoted so they can get double the fees. I have not changed how I promote my listings from years ago, the only thing that changed was eBay has made almost every sale "SOLD VIA PROMOTED LISTINGS". This includes repeat customers that found me and purchased from me organically. This also includes when a potential buyer messages me and asks if I have a certain item and I send them the link and they purchase it. eBay finds this to be a promoted sale by them.
Let's not forget when we talk about a potential buyer viewing an item's page. All of those hundred other listings on the lower portion of the page(similar items) located on scrolling carousels where you can click to the right and see more. Well let's say that scrolling goes indefinitely, all of those listings have now been viewed and are primed for a sponsored sale. The buyer will make a purchase, maybe not mine, but some seller will incur the promoted fee. This is why 90% of sales are branded as "SOLD VIA PROMOTED LISTINGS".
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop You say: "Let's not forget when we talk about a potential buyer viewing an item's page. All of those hundred other listings on the lower portion of the page(similar items) located on scrolling carousels where you can click to the right and see more. Well let's say that scrolling goes indefinitely, all of those listings have now been viewed and are primed for a sponsored sale."
That's incorrect. I can go to listing page after listing page, scroll through the entire page, and that will NOT count as a "view" of any of the promoted listings. It will count as an "impression", but not a view. It will only count as a view if I click though to the sponsored listing. Impressions do not result in a PLS fee. A view can result in a fee.
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoPLEASE PROVIDE PROOF. Something other than your words, anything. I, along with others, have run multiple tests with all aspects of PLS.
my-cottage-books-and-antiques
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop Ok. Not my words. ebay's words: "You’re not charged until a buyer clicks on your promoted listing and purchases the promoted item within 30 days."
Source: https://www.ebay.com/sellercenter/growth/promoted-listings/promoted-listings-standard
so, ball's in your court: pleaser provide proof from your multiple tests...and explain your test procedure.
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoOur tests are showing close to 90% OF ALL SALES are "SOLD VIA PROMOTED LISTINGS" without any changes to how we ran our advertising campaigns a year ago or 3 years ago when it was more like a 50/50 split between organic and promoted sales. You really can't believe everything eBay writes in black and white. That would be naive.
harafkac0
·3 years agoThey don't have to set much aside, our seller fees pay for it.
You and I, that's who pays for all that litigation.
Just so you know, before you call your team of attorneys, we're the ones who pay for it one way or another.
And you can get upset and talk rhetoric, but it's not just ebay...
It's all of corporate America that operates in this fashion, it is never the big bad "ebay" that pays for it... It's always the buyers, the employees, the sellers, anyone and everyone from whom the corporation benefits, that is who pays for it.
Whether anything at all is ever "learned," that is another whole story but make sure to remember who is actually paying for it before suggesting another law suit.
I do find your userID "the hook and the loop" quite interesting, since it is a product of the Velcro(tm) corporation.
frodobagginskennedy
·3 years agoEbay is following Esty's policy of 30 days out once clicked. On Etsy you are automatically opted in once you hit 10K in 12 months. You CANNOT opt out for LIFE. Lets hope ebay does not follow that step.
vintagecraze50
·3 years agoI am out of here if they pull that one. This should always be a mandatory stance. Prices on Etsy have increased dramatically since this happened. Most of the thing I look it in my line are so out of this world overpriced they never never sell.
m60driver
·3 years agoBut....but....but, I thought in corporate America greed was good.
ed8108
·3 years agoAn intense selfish desire for profit may ultimately prove to be disastrous.
toomuchstuffagain35
·3 years agoWasn't that Wall Street?
familygoodzz
OP3 years agoI hope this memo reaches the hierarchy of Ebay management for a review on this ad fee policy.
kensgiftshop
·3 years agoSorry, the only ones that will see this is other buyers and sellers, not Ebay.
the-hook-and-the-loop
·3 years agoIf eBay didn't read what is being said about them, then why are some of their ex-employees in prison for terrorizing people? And they also have a little $64 million dollar fund awaiting to pay damages to the victims.
My guess is eBay has their ear to the wall. They have plenty of time on their hands as they are not doing anything productive with their time other than raising fees, changing how fees are calculated, and redefining and creating terminology.
dryophelia
·3 years agoI am very confident that no person at eBay, with any power to make changes, has got their ear on these forums.
Down time would consist of dinner parties, exciting vacations, family gatherings, sitting in corporate suites at major sporting events, golfing weekends, time at the cottage, watching a private chef creating an intimate sunset meal for two.
They most certainly are not here.
theteamsetguy
·3 years ago@the-hook-and-the-loop ,
The bulk of the reserve is mainly for a EPA fine for allowing sellers to sell illegal emissions defeating devices and DEA investigation likely involving interstate transactions of controlled substances that originated on the marketplace. My guess they are cannabis related products.
Other companies have already settled on the above items. You can get a copy of the 10k since the reserve was part of their fourth quarter 2022 earning release. The $64 million is chump change for eBay. They make on average after taxes $7 million dollars a day.