Regards,
mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
@Anonymous wrote:
@mr_lincoln wrote:Subject: "NEW" Listing identification question
Good afternoon Trinton and other eBay Team Members:
Would you be able tell me how long the "NEW" listing identification remains on a listing once it goes live? Here are the types I am asking about
1. 30 day Fixed price listing
2. 10 day Fixed Price listing
3. 5 Day Auction listing
4. 7 Day Auction listing
5 10 Day Auction listing
Thank you,
Mr. L
Hi @mr_lincoln, while I cannot share the specifics of how long an item is considered to have been newly listed, I can confirm that the length of time where an item is marked as such would not vary by the overall duration. Is something you have seen with this feature that you have feedback on?
No, I was just curious if the NEW listing designation stayed "ON" longer based on the listing "duration" setting. I have not taken the time to check these types myself but thought maybe some knew off the top of their head ... for example one week fo a 30 day Fixed Price listing or 24 hours for a 5 Day Auction listing. I am guessing its at least a day ... maybe two ...
@vrykalak wrote:
I have several nice gift boxes of coffee & tea, NOS but sealed and absolutely in as good condition as when the gift set was made.
But I'm not allowed to sell them as coffee and tea because they either have no expiration date, or the expiration is long ago.
In each case, there are other sellers offering identical items, listed in the tea category, even though those don't have expiry dates either.
Is there any way to offer them for sale, just saying loudly that they are expired?
Hi @vrykalak - when it comes to food related items we require that they have a clearly marked expiration or use by date and that it be delivered to the buyer before that time passes. In a situation where there is no listed expiration date we would not advise you list it for sale, and the same goes for a long expired food product.
If you come across listings that are not following this guidance please report them for review. Thanks!
@coinslabz26 wrote:
This is me trying my absolute hardest to report a major site issue that has been going on for a couple of months. This is like the 4th attempt to report.
Promoted listings are not correctly populating results. In many cases there are blank spots in the pormoted listings results EVEN when there ARE similar promoted items displaying in other listings or even promoted in my own inventory. Here is a quick screenshot of an Ike dollar listing. I have 6 promoted items similar just in my inventory that should have displayed.
HELP!
Hi @coinslabz26, @Anonymous let me know that he missed his reminder to email you after the chat last week and that he apologizes - we have reviewed the thread you included before and will get this over to the appropriate teams. Additionally, you are welcome to @mention us in any tech issue board post so we can work with you to investigate.
@mam98031 wrote:
tyler@ebay wrote:
@mam98031 wrote:An important question came up on a thread that needs some clarification in regards to cancellations and issuing a return label.
Sometimes a buyer will contact a seller with an issue regarding a purchase. Maybe there is an issue and the buyer wants to return the item. Through M2M the buyer and seller agree to do the return. The seller provides a return label to the buyer from whatever source the seller has choosen. No formal SNAD is opened.
Once the seller gets the item back, what is the next step.
In the cancellation process we use to have a reason that stated the item was returned for refund. But Ebay has significantly reduced the reasons for a return and for something like this the only choice would be the buyer requested the cancellation. Which isn't completely accurate, but the only real option for sellers.
When there is no SNAD in place I've always advised seller that are working directly with they buyers to file for a cancellation once the item was received back by the seller, select the reason that the buyer requested the cancellation [as they did request the return] and issue the refund from the cancellation.
I have recently been told I'm incorrect by a couple of experienced Ebayers. So I'm just looking for clarification here. I have not read that we are required to have buyer's open a SNAD, so if that is correct, then why is Ebay REQUIRING a SNAD? Sometimes buyers don't want a claim for whatever reason they have. And they aren't in a seller's best interest to have the buyer open a SNAD. So as long as the buyer is happy, what is the proper process outside of the claims system?
Hi @mam98031 - this is a good question and I'm happy to clarify that eBay's stance on this is that any full refund must be processed through a cancellation or an eBay Money Back Guarantee request.
In a situation where a buyer wants to return an item and is communicative with you as a seller you should encourage them to use the Returns flow through their Purchase History section. This allows them to quickly access a label and keeps them accountable to send it back to you in our system.
Intentionally handling a return (remorse or not as described) as a cancellation is problematic and can result in inaccurate seller metrics and performance.
There may be times when a buyer takes things completely out of the loop - for instance, returning their purchase directly to you without any input or communication on eBay. Those should be one off scenarios and we'd want you to reach out to CS for help in navigating the specifics.
With all respect Trinton I am NOT going to ENCOURAGE any customer of mine to use the Claims process. I won't discourage them, but I won't encourage them either. Why in the world would I do that?? Especially now that Ebay holds it against me. And I can take care of them to the satisfaction of my buyer without one. I won't encourage them nor will I encourage other sellers to do this as it could damage their selling accounts.
I can "quickly" give them a return label to use without having a claim opened. I do not need a claim to issue a label. So if "quickly" is the goal, there is NOTHING lost by me responding and supplying the label without the claims system being involved.
"Intentionally handling a return (remorse or not as described) as a cancellation is problematic and can result in inaccurate seller metrics and performance." Why because the service metrics wouldn't have it represented in its numbers??? The Service Metrics isn't accurate anyway since it allows for incorrectly filed SNADs to be represented and it allows for SNADs opened in error to be represented. It isn't my job to make sure those numbers are correct, it is Ebay's. And I'm not going to submit myself to potentially a damaging Service Metrics if I can avoid it and if I'm providing perfectly good customer service to my customer.
I thought the goal was good customer service and happy buyers. Not all buyers want to go through the claims system. They are perfectly happy dealing directly with a seller that is willing to work with them and provide the service they desire.
So what policy REQUIRES a seller to advise their buyer to open a SNAD?
What policy REQUIRES a buyer to open a SNAD?
So are we saying that even if a buyer does not want to open a SNAD I am left with not being able to take care of them at all because Ebay whats everything to go through the claims system?
So if a seller provides customer service to their buyer that they WANT, the seller is left in the cold by Ebay because they shouldn't file a cancellation because Ebay wanted it through the SNAD system, therefore the seller while providing the customer service their buyer wanted is left to still pay the FVFs?
Sorry if this is a bit rough, but I firmly believe [as you can probably tell] that MY JOB is to provide proper customer service to my customer. And that goal is NOT always accomplished by Ebay's intervention.
Whoops, I should have said "Tyler", sorry about that.
And just one more thing on my rant. Why would I as a seller want to support [by having my buyers open SNADs] a Service Metrics that I find to the the single most agregious policy Ebay has ever implemented. I find it a severe conflict of interest by Ebay to have this policy much less apply it to its sellers. And the outcome of failing this Service Metrics is a financial benefit to Ebay and a hardship on its sellers.
@abfabvintage wrote:
You have just hit the nail on the head. Appreciate your summary of what it is really about. Kudos to you!
Thank you. And I might add that Ebay is the sole decision maker on if we fall into the penalty FVF. Which is another reason I see it as a conflict of interest.
Thanks for joining today - we'll be going through and addressing questions we weren't able to get to within the hour, and we'll see you next week!
