eBay

seller_update@ebay · ‎02-09-2022

Today we announced one of the ways we are reducing unpaid item cases. Buyers will automatically be charged when sellers accept their Best Offer. You can read more about that here. Feel free to review and leave any questions you may have below!

Please note that eBay experts will be present and engaging on the boards between 8 am and 4:00 pm PST on 2.9.

d-k_treasures · ‎02-10-2022

@woodland_gnome wrote:
@ittybitnot wrote:
@d-k_treasures
@lacemaker3
@donsdetour
seller_update@ebay

Perhaps there is another option that would satisfy the need for "immediate payment" required that would address the concerns of both buyers and sellers.

Allow buyers to make offers without the preliminary requirement of choosing a funding source.

If the seller accepts, the BUYER has to pay BEFORE the listing is closed and remains available for anyone until the payment is made. A time limit on how long the "offer" would remain in effect (and can be purchased at the offer price) without payment would be necessary, since auto accept/decline options are not always set.

If the offer is declined, there will be no charge holds on the buyer's payment source. If the offer is accepted, payment must be made (insert short timeframe) or it expires. Again, the listing is STILL FOR SALE until payment is made. The buyer can elect to check a payment source for immediate payment voluntarily if the offer is accepted and requires a manual action by the seller.

I am sure there is probably something wrong with this idea, feel free to tell me.
This was tried several years ago. The outcry against it by both sellers and buyers was deafening. I personally thought that it was a good idea but the critics carried the day and the test was quickly shut down and the concept never mentioned again.

Until now - where the implementation is MUCH worse than that time.

_____________________________
"Nothing is obvious to the oblivious"

donsdetour · ‎02-10-2022

@ittybitnot wrote:
@d-k_treasures
@lacemaker3
@donsdetour
seller_update@ebay

Perhaps there is another option that would satisfy the need for "immediate payment" required that would address the concerns of both buyers and sellers.

Allow buyers to make offers without the preliminary requirement of choosing a funding source.

If the seller accepts, the BUYER has to pay BEFORE the listing is closed and remains available for anyone until the payment is made. A time limit on how long the "offer" would remain in effect (and can be purchased at the offer price) without payment would be necessary, since auto accept/decline options are not always set.

If the offer is declined, there will be no charge holds on the buyer's payment source. If the offer is accepted, payment must be made (insert short timeframe) or it expires. Again, the listing is STILL FOR SALE until payment is made. The buyer can elect to check a payment source for immediate payment voluntarily if the offer is accepted and requires a manual action by the seller.

I am sure there is probably something wrong with this idea, feel free to tell me.

Well eBay has tried to give folks what they have asked for.

I do not have an ideal solution for this. Yous seems better than what is going on.

transamcc · ‎02-10-2022

An opinion from a buyer: to require immediate payment from a buyer either on offers or BIN SHOULD trigger a corresponding required immediacy of shipment (same day/next day) from sellers instead of letting them set handling times at several days out instead of same day/next day shipping. Any attempt to level your playing field should also extract performance standards from sellers. Too many sellers have joined the crowd that delay handling times until they have money in their pockets. Especially since the advent of MP, it usually takes at least a week or more to receive anything. My workaround is just to cancel offer before sending it if that requirement pops up on make an offer and then shop someone else's listings. Delays on receipt of product is just as serious as delayed payment. It is discriminatory to decide who gets the money first vs who gets the product, as either way someone is taken advantage of. It however should dramatically reduce offers from all buyers and yes, reduce nonpay incidents.

mam98031 · ‎02-10-2022

@transamcc wrote:
An opinion from a buyer: to require immediate payment from a buyer either on offers or BIN SHOULD trigger a corresponding required immediacy of shipment (same day/next day) from sellers instead of letting them set handling times at several days out instead of same day/next day shipping. Any attempt to level your playing field should also extract performance standards from sellers. Too many sellers have joined the crowd that delay handling times until they have money in their pockets. Especially since the advent of MP, it usually takes at least a week or more to receive anything. My workaround is just to cancel offer before sending it if that requirement pops up on make an offer and then shop someone else's listings. Delays on receipt of product is just as serious as delayed payment. It is discriminatory to decide who gets the money first vs who gets the product, as either way someone is taken advantage of. It however should dramatically reduce offers from all buyers and yes, reduce nonpay incidents.

As a buyer you have a choice of purchasing from sellers with handling times that you are fine with. Just don't buy from sellers that offer a handling time you feel is too long. That is the power of a buyer.

"Any attempt to level your playing field should also extract performance standards from sellers." Ebay has some of the strictest rules for sellers on the internet. Because they don't make buyers aware of this does not mean it doesn't exist.

This is just a start.

https://www.ebay.com/help/selling/seller-levels-performance-standards/seller-levels-performance-stan...

I would disagree that most sellers delay shipping due to the way MP works. I would think that most sellers ship within whatever their stated handling time is and as I said before, you have the right not to purchase from sellers that don't have a handling time you like.

mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999

ittybitnot · ‎02-10-2022

you have the right not to purchase from sellers that don't have a handling time you like.

@mam98031

eBay does not display the seller's handling time unless it is exceptionally long. A buyer has no clue if the seller ships in one day or five. This subject has little to do with decreasing the unpaid item problem.

mam98031 · ‎02-10-2022

@ittybitnot wrote:
you have the right not to purchase from sellers that don't have a handling time you like.

@mam98031

eBay does not display the seller's handling time unless it is exceptionally long. A buyer has no clue if the seller ships in one day or five.

Yes, 5+ days. Which the buyer is complaining about long handling times. It is 1-4 days that do not appear. Unless something has changed.

mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999

gurlcat · ‎02-10-2022

@woodland_gnome wrote:
@ittybitnot wrote:
@d-k_treasures
@lacemaker3
@donsdetour
seller_update@ebay

Perhaps there is another option that would satisfy the need for "immediate payment" required that would address the concerns of both buyers and sellers.

Allow buyers to make offers without the preliminary requirement of choosing a funding source.

If the seller accepts, the BUYER has to pay BEFORE the listing is closed and remains available for anyone until the payment is made. A time limit on how long the "offer" would remain in effect (and can be purchased at the offer price) without payment would be necessary, since auto accept/decline options are not always set.

If the offer is declined, there will be no charge holds on the buyer's payment source. If the offer is accepted, payment must be made (insert short timeframe) or it expires. Again, the listing is STILL FOR SALE until payment is made. The buyer can elect to check a payment source for immediate payment voluntarily if the offer is accepted and requires a manual action by the seller.

I am sure there is probably something wrong with this idea, feel free to tell me.
This was tried several years ago. The outcry against it by both sellers and buyers was deafening. I personally thought that it was a good idea but the critics carried the day and the test was quickly shut down and the concept never mentioned again.

Do you remember what any of the complaints were?
I could see whey (some) BUYERS wouldn't like it, because even when they know the BIN price is reasonable, they don't have the money yet, and in fact they don't even have the money for the amount they are offering, but by getting an acceptance from the seller, they secure the item as THEIRS, nobody else can get it, until they actually have the money to pay. This happens most often with newer listings, ones just posted within the past day or two (maybe even within hours), that are very desirable items and already at a low enough BIN price that it would surely disappear before they got paid.
What has always made me especially sick about this practice is this: there are only a couple reason a seller would post a popular item cheap enough that it would almost certainly sell immediately. --Either they don't know enough about the item to realize how cheaply they are pricing it, or they do know but are offering it at a great 'deal' price because they need the money AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. So these buyers who use Best Offer not for its' intended purpose but to get 'layaway with no deposit' just take advantage of sellers' ignorance or desperation, and make it even uglier by not paying for days. --Oh and by the way, not writing any communication to the seller either (like when they WILL pay), because they know how disgusting they are and don't want to admit it.
So yeah, I could see those pathetic shopaholics not liking it one bit if getting an offer accepted only secured a lower price, NOT the item itself, from anyone else buying it.
But I can't think of any reasons why sellers wouldn't like it. I think it sounds perfect.

woodland_gnome · ‎02-10-2022

Both sides wanted the other to be locked into the deal. That their side was also not locked in and could take further action didn't seem to be understood by them (e.g. sellers didn't comprehend that that could continue accepting BOs and making counteroffers; buyers that they could make multiple BOs). It could be that there simply wasn't the percentage of unpaid items then that there is now.

gurlcat · ‎02-10-2022

I have read all the replies and taken them into consideration before posting this.
For my particular business I think this change is AWESOME and I can't wait until it is fully rolled out. Slow/Non-payers are the reason I stopped using Best Offer years ago. I do occasionally do a round of SENDING offers to watchers/shopping cart holders, but only for items I've had listed long enough that I might have them overpriced and a 10-30% reduced offer might make just the difference. A member here advised me to do that a couple years ago, I wish I could remember who it was because it was eerie how he said that about a quarter of his sent offers get accepted by buyers, and my rate has been pretty close to identical to that. However, some portion (I don't know, maybe a quarter) of THOSE are people who stall to pay or never pay. What makes that especially galling is, I get that when a buyer MAKES an offer the seller might not see it and accept it until hours later, then it may be more hours before the buyer realizes it. But when the BUYER accepts an offer, he/she knows right then a deal has been made, so there is no reason they couldn't click on over to their cart and pay immediately. So I will be extra happy when the seller-sent offer acceptances also require immediate payment.

I also hope they integrate this into auctions, fingers crossed.

I do feel for sellers of lower-priced items that routinely get combined, but as has been pointed out several times, you can opt out of the immediate payment required. So how much more personal choice could you want?

As for the card holds thing, that is concerning and I hope Ebay fixes it, as it could indeed sour some buyers from buying here ever again. As for a seller getting neg'd for it, that doesn't worry me at all. For one thing only extremely ignorant buyers would think it's the seller's fault, and if/when they do, it's the kind of neg that would be easily removed at the seller's request. Do I know that for a fact? No but I would wager at least a pinkie toe on it, lol.

gurlcat · ‎02-10-2022

@lacemaker3 wrote:
It would be much more effective and equitable if this were changed so that sellers have the option to require immediate payment when a buyer accepts an offer.

The OP's link said this:
"By mid-year we will also start collecting payment details in other Best Offer scenarios, including counteroffers and offers to buyers. "

gurlcat · ‎02-10-2022

@woodland_gnome wrote:
Both sides wanted the other to be locked into the deal. That their side was also not locked in and could take further action didn't seem to be understood by them (e.g. sellers didn't comprehend that that could continue accepting BOs and making counteroffers; buyers that they could make multiple BOs). It could be that there simply wasn't the percentage of unpaid items then that there is now.

That's a shame. Weren't people replying to those sellers' complaints and explaining how they were mistaken and how it was actually a 'win' for them? Wait what am I saying? Something guaranteed to make an angry person more angry is finding out they have no reason to be angry, lol.

lacemaker3 · ‎02-10-2022

@gurlcat wrote:
@lacemaker3 wrote:
It would be much more effective and equitable if this were changed so that sellers have the option to require immediate payment when a buyer accepts an offer.
The OP's link said this:
"By mid-year we will also start collecting payment details in other Best Offer scenarios, including counteroffers and offers to buyers. "

They have made some major mistakes in the implementation already. They have to fix those mistakes before they even think about adding anything else to this fiasco.

seller_update@ebay and sandhya@ebay, you need to respond to this.

eBay needs to stop tying up buyers funds for more than a week when an offer is declined, and stop double-charging buyers when offers are accepted.
eBay needs to stop ignoring these issues that eBay has created with their bad programming. You need to address this problem, and tell us how you are going to respond to fix this.

monica0102009 · ‎02-10-2022

bout you bring back the negative rating for buyers
it seems that e-bay protects buyers while allowing negative feed back for sellers

d-k_treasures · ‎02-10-2022

I also hope they integrate this into auctions, fingers crossed.

That would be the height of stupidity, which would be the death of auctions on here. Smart sellers list auctions of like items hoping that bidders will bid and win more than one auction, and pay when an invoice is sent with combined shipping.

How would they know what to authorize when you start bidding anyway? I'm talking about a real auction listing, with a reasonable starting price, not one that starts at or above the worth of the item. Most live online auctions start at 1/4-1/2 of the low estimate.

Unless you end up at a food auction where they bid and pass them out and collect money right on the spot, you wait for the entire auction to be over - or when you leave - to pay. So consider a day, few days, week, whatever the seller decides on combining shipping, THAT is when the sellers auction is over on ebay.

_____________________________
"Nothing is obvious to the oblivious"

tyler@ebay · ‎02-10-2022

@lacemaker3 wrote:

@mam98031 wrote:

@ittybitnot wrote:

@downunder-61

Thanks for your post. I was just going to mention it myself. The "charge hold" or authorization that is not removed when the offer is declined is certainly an issue. That money is no longer available for the buyer to use until it "falls off" or is taken off. The charge holds can limit the available funds for the buyer EVEN when the offer is DECLINED. DAYS is too long. Instantly would be best. It appears to be a similar issue with buyer's general payments that make them think they have been charged twice. The authorization/charge hold is NOT being removed in a timely fashion. Is this a function eBay can improve or are buyers stuck with days of charge holds due to managed payments being quick to authorize, slow to let it go?

The person upthread that mentioned having a "bundling feature" gets 100000+ thumbs up for that fantastic idea!

I agree that is a real problem for some buyers, however Ebay doesn't have anything to do with how long a buyers funding source takes to process stuff.

Pinging of funding sources is a necessary process for payments otherwise Marketplaces or other websites would be flying blind on if a buyer's payment is any good until it reached the funding source. That would significantly hamper the process.

The funding source is reporting that the hold is being placed at eBay's request, and that it is up to eBay to release it. One buyer has reported that the hold was placed for 10 days; but it's not clear if that was calendar days or business days, which would amount to a hold of 2 weeks.

Also, it has been reported that if/when the offer is accepted, eBay does not follow through on the initial payment request, but sends a new one. This has caused multiple buyers to be double-charged, and some have had hundreds or thousands of dollars tied up for more than a week.

So that puts it firmly back in eBay's court. Please leave this for eBay to respond; we need to hear from eBay about this, not from a community volunteer who can't speak for eBay.

seller_update@ebay and sandhya@ebay,

Please address these issues:

Why is eBay putting such lengthy pre-authorization charges (10 days) on buyer's accounts at all?

Why is eBay not releasing the pre-authorization charges immediately when an offer is declined?

Why is eBay issuing a second charge against the buyer's account when an offer is accepted, and not releasing the earlier pre-authorization charge, so that buyers are charged twice and can't recover their money for days?

These practices need to stop. This is not acceptable.

I don't use negative feedbacks, but if a seller continues to use such a badly programmed system as this, then they can expect to get defects and negative feedbacks, and they would be deserved.