Every platform has problems

[tunicaslot]

New c-net article about what's been going on behind the scenes at Amazon. This has affected the 3rd party venue sellers over there and really put them at a disadvantage.

https://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-reportedly-probing-employees-leaking-data-for-bribes/

[ted_200]

But if I may, the mindset that Tuni is protesting is the mindset that everything wrong is Ebay's fault.  You see it on the Board all the time.  Every situation, every response, leads back to, that's Ebay fault.  Ebay can't mandate integrity on the part of buyers or sellers.  That is their personal responsibility.  Ebay can only do what they can to mitigate the situations.

Then maybe eBay should go back to being "just a venue", provide transparency (like two-way transparent feedback), and let users figure it out and let it be their fault if they don't.  That's up to them.  But if they choose to go the "step in and help" route, the "managed marketplace" model, then I think it's fair to expect them to manage it well, and to not step in and make it worse.   They're not "mitigating" the situations, they're making them worse!

tunicaslot wrote:

And yet you are still here! If not - I see no reason for all the discussion. If Ebay and I ever part ways - you won't see me hanging around these boards.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just call me out a few days ago for complaining about legitimate issues with eBay because I'm still selling on eBay? 

[ted_200]

---

@wickedwolfauto wrote:

quick way for ebay to fix the "ebay's fault" is for them to step up and be accountable for their actions and be more transparant on their changes.  

WE ALL MAKE MISTAKES! we just need ebay to say the same!

---

Actually, this is a really good point.  They aren't ever going to be able to correct any mistakes if they won't admit it was a mistake to begin with.  They never do this.  Just as an example, they'll just insist the multi-variation listing format is "working as intended", no matter how much buyers complain about it. 

[emerald40]

Then maybe eBay should go back to being "just a venue", provide transparency (like two-way transparent feedback), and let users figure it out and let it be their fault if they don't.  That's up to them. 

_____________________________________

It did not work the first time around, so why would ebay go back, especially now, 20 years later where there are so many venues where buyers can go to that will treat them extremely well.

If ebay had not changed, all you would have left here are sellers.

[castlemagicmemories]

Then maybe eBay should go back to being "just a venue", provide transparency (like two-way transparent feedback), and let users figure it out and let it be their fault if they don't.  That's up to them.  But if they choose to go the "step in and help" route, the "managed marketplace" model, then I think it's fair to expect them to manage it well, and to not step in and make it worse.   They're not "mitigating" the situations, they're making them worse!

Actually, Ebay will never go back to being a venue.  It was BECAUSE of many issues that Ebay had to move away from the "just a venue" stance in order to stay competitive and retain buyers.  

For example,  buyers were leaving in response to false, retaliatory negs posted by sellers in response to a buyer's honest neg.  So Ebay eliminated negs for buyers.

They put the MBG in place because buyers had to feel their money was protected in the event of receiving items that were not as described from sellers who might fight tooth and nail to avoid a legitimate return.  Some think no returns means just that, and no refunds, either.  It seems you are arguing for Ebay to mediate such disputes.  But since either side may be lying, Ebay chooses to undo the transaction.  Return to seller, refund to buyer.  

They are not always making them worse.  Many a buyer has been protected from losing money because the seller insisted they didn't get their item back, when they did, or when the seller photoshopped the images and was...ahem...inaccurate in their description...or simply had a less than accurate listing for whatever reason.

[castlemagicmemories]

https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-delivery-drivers-claim-missing-wages-lawsuit-2018-9?utm_sourc...

[ted_200]

Actually, Ebay will never go back to being a venue.  It was BECAUSE of many issues that Ebay had to move away from the "just a venue" stance in order to stay competitive and retain buyers.  

Weren't we all pointing at a recent topic asserting seller quality was declining here, and that buyers were having more unsatisfactory transactions than ever, just the other day?  Which is it? 

It's worse now... it was worse before...   At least I liked eBay at some point! 

[castlemagicmemories]

---

@ted_200 wrote:

Actually, Ebay will never go back to being a venue.  It was BECAUSE of many issues that Ebay had to move away from the "just a venue" stance in order to stay competitive and retain buyers.  

Weren't we all pointing at a recent topic asserting seller quality was declining here, and that buyers were having more unsatisfactory transactions than ever, just the other day?  Which is it? 

It's worse now... it was worse before...   At least I liked eBay at some point! 

---

You allude to a contradiction when there is none.  Yes, seller quality has declined here, and there is a very high rate of legitimate SNADS.  That in no way indicates that Ebay should go back to being just a venue, but it rather bolsters my statement that it is because of issues that Ebay had to move away from the just a venue stance.  Ebay took away negs for buyers because of sellers who posted false, retaliatory feedback.  Ebay decided to award defects for cases closed without seller resolution and out of stocks because of sellers who fought returns, even if they took them, even if it was a legitimate SNAD, and abused the buyers~and refused to handle the case.  Ebay made returns automatic if a seller took returns, most likely because of those who fought returns even if they said they took them.  Buyers hate cancellations and out of stocks, so again, Ebay made that an offense that was awarded a defect.  

So it's cause and effect.  Adverse situations, Ebay steps in with sanctions to correct.  Ebay acted in those situations because they had to~not because they just felt the need to show their power.  

[mrv71]

The article has nothing to do with the situation on eBay. eBay is a personification of corporate greed and humiliation of a US small seller, Amazon has problems with foreign sellers in a foreign country. Everybody knows that Chinese sell the junkiest junk everywhere, and that they lie and cheat in the descriptions and everywhere else where they can, it's not news. At least Amazon is paying attention to it now, and eBay never will because it loves Chinese more that Americans.

[gracieallen01]

If you stop and think about it, seller quality has NOT declined - nor has it gotten better.  By ratio - there are probably just as many bad sellers here now as there were back in them 'good ole days' - per good sellers. Lots of sellers just don't know any better and/or are lazy nowadays - back then, a lot just didn't know any better and/or were lazy.

I would also say that ebay changed away from being a 'venue' because there wasn't enough money in that - at least, not enough to support the management.

[reallynicestamps]

@castlemagicmemories

They put the MBG in place because buyers had to feel their money was protected

I wish sellers would read the Money Back Guarantee instead of just cursing at it.

My reading is that it is no change from existing policies, only more publicity given to those policies.

Even with the MBG, sellers can refuse Returns.

Even before the MBG, sellers could not refuse Refunds.

A lot of sellers don't seem to notice that those are two entirely different words with entirely different meanings.

EBay pushes feedback hard. But feedback is a legacy of the early days of ecommerce when members were both thrilled and terrified to be in transactions with strangers thousands of miles away.

Most sites don't bother with it- more likely they have reviews of the product rather than of the seller.

But because eBay pushes FB, many naive buyers are unable to get satisfaction for terrible transactions with crooked sellers because they are persuaded that FB is the be all and end all for achieving a fair resolution of a problem.

One of the biggest complaints from Western sellers is competition from overseas sellers of shoddy, and often fake, goods. The MBG could actually help solve that problem.

Along with the rise in China Post rates and  the Hold on payments to new and occasional sellers , publicizing the MBG so that unhappy buyers can actually get resolution and sketchey sellers don't get paid, could be a Good Thing for honest sellers.

I will now go shopping for some asbestos lingerie.

[ted_200]

Even before the MBG, sellers could not refuse Refunds.

Of course they could.

Unless you're talking about PayPal Buyer Protection.

But if you're talking about PayPal Buyer Protection, then...

They put the MBG in place because buyers had to feel their money was protected

...this was just a solution in search of a problem. 

My reading is that it is no change from existing policies...

The MBG has been  "existing policies" for something like 6 years now.

[ted_200]

Yes, seller quality has declined here, and there is a very high rate of legitimate SNADS.  That in no way indicates that Ebay should go back to being just a venue, but it rather bolsters my statement that it is because of issues that Ebay had to move away from the just a venue stance. 

That still makes no sense.  eBay had to go away from "just a venue" because there were too many issues with sellers, but since doing so seller quality has declined?   

So it's cause and effect.  Adverse situations, Ebay steps in with sanctions to correct.

To me, that sounds like:  Adverse situations, eBay steps in with sanctions to correct, but adverse situations increase in frequency = makes things worse instead. 

[tunicaslot]

I think you meant "does not affect the validity of my point" but it definitely does - because it's called sour grapes. That may not be your intention - but this is exactly what is reflected by posters who say they are leaving after one mishap, say they don't sell here anymore or say they don't buy here anymore. If that is the case why post?

They are better off commisserating with each other on Ina's site where they seem to congregate.

Most people move on especially those with a history that know or feel a site is doing them wrong. I'm done, that's it - I'm out of here - and they move on to something that benefits them.

[castlemagicmemories]

You're blaming things getting worse instead on Ebay when it should be on the proliferation of questionable sellers.  Seller metrics and standards didn't cause more questionable sellers; the seller himself did that.  Think like the proliferation of weeds.

One would suppose then, that since you are so vehement that it is Ebay's fault that things have worsened, you advocate booting sellers at the first hint of trouble.   More stringent metrics would address the problem more efficiently, which is what you want.

[gracieallen01]

Ya know what I see as the problem?  Oh, and in the meantime, I think all of you can take solice in knowing that you are each right - it is ebay's fault and it is the sellers's fault.  Yes, even those good, bad and/or ugly buyers - they are at fault, as well.

The problem is the sole and single common denominator - people.  Everybody wants something, but everybody has their own style and their own objectives.  Everybody has their own agenda.

The problem is easy to see.  Unfortunately, there is that there is NO single remedy.

(personal opinion - your mileage may vary)