Help my blonde head figure out how to appreciate this new "protection"
Summary: gurlcat expressed confusion about eBay's policies regarding 'Late' strikes for sellers, questioning whether recent announcements indicated a reduction in protection, especially concerning shipping labels not purchased through eBay. adamcartwright and others agreed that eBay's communication was unclear, with concerns that it might be a ploy to encourage using eBay's labels due to potential benefits within eBay's system. christworks speculated on eBay's motives related to label business and data accessibility. The discussion highlighted frustrations with eBay's wording and its implications, with participants awaiting official clarifications.
If I misunderstood the way something worked, it wouldn't be the first time. So in terms of getting 'Late' strikes in Seller Performance, here is what I thought I understood:
If the package delivery was past the furthest Estimated Delivery Date, but you had shipped within your handling time, you're fine.
If you ship past your handling time, but the package delivery is within the EDD range, you're fine.
The only way to get a strike is if you shipped late AND the package is delivered late. Right?
I have a few strikes, and they all say this:
But in the August seller news, they're hyping what appears to be the same old policy as some new protection, starting this month. In fact the only difference I see is the mention of "with an eBay label." -So is this actually a REDUCTION in protection, like you no longer are protected from a Late strike for a delivered-late package, even if you DID ship on time, but you had uploaded your tracking from a label you purchased 'elsewhere' rather than from eBay? 
broto_64
·1 month agoThat is not unusual, corporate heads spinning a bad thing as if it's an improvement.
Piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
It can be baffling the first time or two, but it's quite common.
Just be on the lookout for it, and soon you see that dishonesty is a systemic corporate issue.
There is no getting away from it, I am only puzzled by the question, don't their employees see that dishonesty isn't doing them any favors?
How does a business like that even survive?
I guess they're just "too big to fail?"
valueaddedresource
·1 month ago@gurlcat I believe we can just chalk another one up to poor eBay wording creating unnecessary confusion.
Nothing is changing for seller who don't use eBay labels as far as I can tell. The policy page that part of the announcement links to still says under Protections for all sellers:
We automatically adjust your late shipment rate when:
The carrier scan shows you shipped within your handling time, even if it arrives late, or
The carrier scan shows the item arrived by the latest estimated delivery date, even if you shipped it late
If there is no tracking or the carrier didn't scan the shipment, it won't count as a late shipment if the buyer doesn't indicate the shipment was late.
You can also request removal of neutral or negative feedback where the buyer references a delivery issue but tracking shows us that you met your delivery or handling time expectations.
WastingTime101 answered a question about this on Reddit and he thinks the only thing really changing is how eBay handles the refund for those who qualify for the protections announced last year when you use eBay labels.
Initially, for those situations, when a buyer opened an INR, the system would still refund them from the seller, then eBay would reimburse the seller when/if the tracking showed eventual delivery.
Now, it appears that if you use eBay labels and the buyer does an INR, eBay might handle it completely and refund them upfront, rather than making the seller refund and wait for delivery before being reimbursed - kind of like how they handle INRs for EIS after item is delivered to the hub.
Here's the link to that Reddit post and for what it's worth, I tend to agree with it, but hopefully the blues can shed some more light because I also agree that the wording in the actual update is very confusing.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Ebay/comments/1vfdpyj/comment/p1ocxs5/
valueaddedresource
·1 month agoJust as further evidence of this being poor wording in the update, the same day as the update, sellers also started seeing this message displayed in Seller Hub.
I believe this is what the update was actually supposed to say - the change is in how the refunds work, and also your ratings are still protected like they always have been.
gurlcat
OP1 month ago@valueaddedresource But even this^ second one states that seller rating will be protected "if" you ship with an eBay label!
With all due respect, I think maybe what's confusing you isn't the wording, but how they're tangling it together with the new addition to INR protection -which I agree is even better than the improvement they already rolled out last October. If it works as stated, it's going to save a lot of hassle and heartache.
But what I'm focusing on as problematic is just the seller rating "improvement". BTW I see the Reddit thread is locked so I can't even reply there, but I'm surprised wastingtime101 isn't noticing this either.
Remember, sellers ALREADY HAD protection from a strike to their seller rating as long as they shipped by their handling time, full stop. -It never mattered where the label came from, as long as the seller typed/pasted the tracking number into the order.
No, the policy page doesn't mention "eBay label" but how many times have we seen them take weeks or months to update the policy language? -That's something I know wastingtime101 has noticed too.
And if there's actually not any change to seller rating effects, then why did they bring it up at all, in the Seller News?
I have no personal interest in this because I have always bought my labels from eBay, but a lot of sellers don't. I guess we'll see soon enough whether they start making posts about late strikes despite shipping on time. I certainly hope I'm raising a false alarm, but if I am it's because eBay padded their good news announcements falsely, and made one line item sound more like bad news, by accident(?). If so, what the heII man? How hard is it to write an announcement, if that's literally your job?
Oh and speaking of jobs, note it has been nearly 24 hours since Mam tagged Blues in this thread.
valueaddedresource
·1 month ago@gurlcat my thought is that banner in Seller Hub has nothing to do with and no implications one way or another for shipments that don't use eBay labels.
I believe eBay (in their usual poorly worded way) is just saying that for shipments with eBay labels they'll now handle refunds and still also protect ratings.
My read on that is eBay may have thought if they only mentioned refunds, then sellers who do use eBay labels might think that the exclusion meant ratings may not still be protected - so they made it explicit.
As for the actual announcement, it wouldn't be the first time they left out important details so I wouldn't read too much into the fact that it didn't say anything refunds specifically.
Totally agree with all of your other points and it would be easy enough for eBay to clear up the confusion, just like it would have been easy enough for eBay to put slightly more effort into communicating it clearly in the first place.
Unfortunately, like usual, we'll just have to wait to see if eBay cares enough to provide more details or if the complaints come rolling in.
valueaddedresource
·1 month ago · EditedI also think some of the confusion may be that eBay sometimes uses "seller ratings" as a general term that includes service metrics, when most sellers understand those are separate from other "seller standards."
All sellers under the current policy get protection for late shipment rate in seller standards if they meet the criteria.
Using eBay labels gives additional protection against INR cases in service metrics.
So that could the reason it mentioned "seller ratings" and again, it's just another example of eBay not knowing how any of its own stuff actually works.
gurlcat
OP1 month agoObviously I hope you're right. Surely no one is more familiar with eBay's communication history than you. Thanks so much for your consideration on this.
valueaddedresource
·1 month agoTo be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong and I totally understand where your concerns are coming from and how it could be read that way too.
I've reached out requesting comment and more details and will absolutely update if/when I get more info if we still don't have an answer from the blues.
christworks
·1 month ago · EditedI just came here to post about this. I read it three times and checked current policy, and sure enough it is a reduction in protection. Great marketing though. There will be sellers who didn't know eBay offered broader protection prior to August.
It doesn't shock me. eBay is going to roll out managed shipping at some point. They want sellers using their labels and they need to stop losing label business to 3rd party sites. They appear to think that pulling back protections will bring more sellers back to the platform. It will some. Probably not many as they hope.
It is important to keep in mind eBay likely does not share the full discount they get from USPS. I'm sure they hold some back to handle administrative costs, and like any good business a little extra so they turn a small profit on each label sold. When sellers buy through Piriate Ship and other sites, eBay misses out.
gurlcat
OP1 month ago · EditedThis is a 'thin' area of my knowledge, but I'm faaairly certain we do get the full discount. I believe they've said so outright. Also I think (with USPS anyway; I know nothing about the other carriers) the commercial rate is the same for all businesses that get it. So if I'm right about that, you could compare the price you pay for any label here to what it shows on the USPS website for commercial rate, and it should be the same.
As for what incentive eBay WOULD have to wrangle as much in-house label purchasing as possible, it's arguably just another thing that makes for a positive buyer experience. When the seller buys it here, it uploads automatically and buyers can see it right away, whereas sellers who purchase them elsewhere might procrastinate or not know how to upload the tracking.
Also someone here (I feel like it was either wastingtime101 or @jonathanbrightlight ) said they were informed by a (decent) eBay rep that they have much better data accessibility with in-house labels. Like when buyers file INR for packages with a delivery scan, eBay can get in and see the GPS location of the scan, rather than the buyer or seller having to get it from their post office. -Not saying eBay does this automatically, just that they CAN do it, if/when they want to, ha.
christworks
·1 month agoUSPS commerical rates do not match up with eBay's label costs. Currently the cheapest standard commerical rate is $6.93. That's for a 4oz package going to your neighbor on the next block. The price for 4oz, 8oz, 12oz, etc. are the same, so it would appear that for commerical pricing the rate classes under 1lb have been eliminated for all zip codes, even non-rural. eBay has apparently negotiated something so that non-rural zip codes still have the low-end oz based weight classes since that is no longer part of the standard commerical rate package.
None of that tells us whether eBay keeps a small part of the actual discount for themselves. Even PirateShip, whose rates I think mostly align with eBay (maybe not ever time though - I have seen some differences), also may not share the full discount. This is a very good area for companies to have hidden costs.
I do think eBay has access to better data when using eBay labels. Why they do not use that data more often I don't know.
gurlcat
OP1 month agoThanks so much; I will try to turn this correction into permanent knowledge.
broto_64
·1 month agoYup, nothing commerical about it.
jonathanbrightlight
·1 month ago · EditedI think I said that at some point, @gurlcat , though it was based on an announcement I believe, not an actual conversation with a rep, back when they started offering INR protection for eBay labels. I don't think they necessarily get the GPS info, but they can see that the label was printed with the address on the order since it went through their systems.
lakefor94
·1 month ago@christworks
I save money with PirateShip on most every UPS Shipment.
EBay has to be knocking down some coin there and I am talking dollars, not change, per label.
Even AMZ still allows sellers to upload tracking for labels purchased elsewhere so I doubt that will go away.
There is no way eBay would be taking a pass on making money on USPS labels.
mam98031
·1 month ago@gurlcat I agree with @adamcartwright , for what that is worth, but I think this is very important and lets just ask for a little clarity so that none of us miss something important.
Please explain what the OP is asking.
@devon@ebay
@elizabeth@ebay
gurlcat
OP1 month agoWHY does it say there's a reply .... when there isn't?? I'm getting sick of how sketchy everything is here.
adamcartwright
·1 month agoMy reply must have posted after it registered that it posted.
gurlcat
OP1 month agoYep, the timing fits perfectly. It was 'profiling' you. Well you do get pretty out of control here Adam. 🤣
adamcartwright
·1 month agoI think you're right. That's an "improvement"?
The current policy:
gurlcat
OP1 month agoTHANK YOU. So yeah that's exactly what I thought, and I think it's been that way since I first started paying attention when I wanted to reach TRS status, like 7 years ago.
nyr134
·1 month agoDo we know with certainty if in this context “shipped” on time means you purchased a label (which prompts eBay to proclaim “your item has shipped”) or does it mean the carrier has scanned it into their system, meaning they have possession of the item?
I ask partly because current policy says “the carrier scan shows you shipped on time…” but the August Seller News has looser language: “…if you ship on time…”
gurlcat
OP1 month agoNot a stupid question, because yes when eBay talks to buyers, "shipped" is only a label purchase, whereas when talking to sellers, it means getting the package into the carrier's hands, with a scan reflecting that. -Nasty little double speak thing they have going on there, causes angry buyers all the time.
But since this was SELLER News, I think it's safe to assume they were talking about the date you get the carrier scan.