eBay

zamo-zuan · ‎07-19-2018

I stumbled upon the interview where eBay's CFO stated:

"First off, as we kind of talked about, there is a fidget spinner dynamic that in Q2 of last year brought a lot of low ASP (Average Selling Price) items that were a lot of new buyers as well, and we have not retained those new buyers to the extent that we have in the past. They're a kind of "one and done," if you will, buying those fidget spinners - and they were very low ASP items.

So, as we lap that, that certainly makes it feel like the underlying growth rate is decelerating when in fact it's more a one-off aspect of that.

And that same thing is pressuring active buyers, but now, the other thing we talked about was we had been favoring higher ASP branded items in our search, and as that has kind of offset some of the pressure that we got from the fidget spinners in the sold item number pushing ASP up a bit, but really sold items down. So hopefully that's clear. But that's the dynamic between those two both active buyers and sold items."

Frankly, I find those comments completely shocking.

In the 3rd paragraph, he directly admits to manipulating the search to favor higher ASP branded items!

Furthermore, he says this is the reason sold items were down. With all the sellers having major issues with sales lately who do NOT have higher ASP branded items, this would be one large contributor to lack of visibility and sales!

This would explain why sellers who sell collectibles/unique "unbranded" items have been having issues lately.

It would also explain why those of us who are still awaiting to be added to the new catalog are having issues lately...

Sellers have been begging for some transparency. It's a shame that we have not been getting any clear information on the cause of our issues, but eBay's CFO will gladly share this information with Wall Street...

clu3 · ‎07-23-2018

I see search manipulation of high ASP branded items as not having the major impact on ALL sellers that you seem to be suggesting. I doubt that most buyers are using very generic search terms. If you search for a "pink watch" top selections are less than $3 from China and Hong Kong with free shipping. But if you search "rolex pink watch", it's another thing entirely.

I think what has affected sellers most on Ebay is the race to bottom on pricing, guarantee and delivery. All these "suggestions" from Ebay that sellers must adhere to or be penalized in search algorythms. It may be catching up with them on the buying end. If buyers find it just too much of a hassle to wade through the pink watches to find some level of quality that's acceptable without going to the rolex extreme, they'll stop searching here at all.

What Ebay is asking sellers to do is 1) have the lowest price 2) ship it for free 3) let the buyer try it out for 30 days. And in the end, if the seller isn't happy with all of the above, they can still get all their money back, after all they are "protected". It can't possibly work long term. It takes time to write descriptions and take photos. There needs to be some level of reasonable profit as well as some reasonable belief that Ebay will afford them protection as well.

As far as the CFO comments, if that's the best he can do, I would hope shareholders are smart enough to demand a new CFO.

ittybitnot · ‎07-23-2018

As far as the CFO comments, if that's the best he can do, I would hope shareholders are smart enough to demand a new CFO.

The figit spinner remark will go down in history. This, however, is not the first time ebay "stepped in it" so to speak with regards to search manipulation. Someone has the link to the old weekly chat discussion when griff and jeff were in charge. They denied for years any "manipulation" until that day, and even then continured with the company line. I would like for all to read it for themselves, but I cannot ever get this board search to work. Basically, it involved a frying pan, famous brand X.

Brand X had vintage models, as well as new in box versions. When confronted with evidence that items were being hidden, brand X was used as an example. The word was by either of the blues that since the new versions of brand X got sales, ebay 'elected not to show (to prospetive buyers) those listed in the applicable vintage categories'.

And this came from those two that swore up and down that ebay did not hide listings. I guess that hiding is different than electing not to show?! It was a few years back, and has gotten worse for sellers since.

zamo-zuan · ‎07-24-2018

@clu3 wrote:
I see search manipulation of high ASP branded items as not having the major impact on ALL sellers that you seem to be suggesting. I doubt that most buyers are using very generic search terms. If you search for a "pink watch" top selections are less than $3 from China and Hong Kong with free shipping. But if you search "rolex pink watch", it's another thing entirely.

I think what has affected sellers most on Ebay is the race to bottom on pricing, guarantee and delivery. All these "suggestions" from Ebay that sellers must adhere to or be penalized in search algorythms.

The part that I am basing my suggestion on is this:

"that has kind of offset some of the pressure that we got from the fidget spinners in the sold item number pushing ASP up a bit, but really sold items down."

Is that not saying that their favortism of certain items in search, put the number of total sold items down?

If it was only focusing on a few specific items, why would "really sold items" have went down?

We also know that when they say "branded items", this is all the branded items they discuss in their new catalog experience articles. Branded items as a whole definitely have not seen improvement.

Regarding people being penalized in the search algorithm for shipping and deliveries, the issue is that - at least until June (will not see the effect on July until the statistics update) the people thriving are NOT following these recommendations, and being rewarded for it.

We went with their recommendations and plummetted. If you look up the sellers that did well, their listings were NOT free returns, NOT guaranteed delivery, and they had restock fees up until the day they were removed. To this day, they are still doing buyer returns, and not GD.

Here's some data from Terapeak in our Motor Mount category:

Last year: https://www.screencast.com/t/vol1keZel0Q
This year: https://www.screencast.com/t/pKcJRQ4ag

If you login Terapeak (it's owned by eBay, you can login with your eBay account), you can see who that seller is that has went up significantly. Even now, they are not following best practices. Their "free shipping" method will arrive 9 days from now. Charging $20 for expedited shipping (that we offer free). Buyer pays returns.

Then look at our store, and the others who have free returns/GD. We have dropped significantly.

Take a look at the market share on top of those shots as well. And look at how the number of sellers making over 100k/month has dropped so significantly. They can't blame it on the market, because their own market statistics show a growth in the market of 6% this year. But top sellers used to be 40% market share, and now they are 30%.

This means the most successful stores on eBay, are doing around 25% worse than they were a year ago.

If this was not enough evidence to prove price is the #1 decider, and shipping ignored, refer to this screen shot:

https://www.screencast.com/t/wzzmrF1h1

Notice the fees? It seems price has been the #1 decider in eBay search. You are NOT being rewarded for doing what eBay recommends. We have taken a monetary loss, just to see those who do not listen to eBay pass us up.

It's just a mess...