eBay

lowerla2003 · ‎03-24-2019

I have researched the available postings on this problem but the mainstream answer, especially from eBay, is GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). I have been trying for a while now, months actually, to get my calculated shipping at time of listing to come in line with what the charge is at shipping time. And I continue to be frustrated - generally I have to eat the difference - well this time it was too outrageous to ignore. And for all you eBayers out there that think there is nothing wrong, here it is:

Listed blouse/shirt weighing, actually, 11 ounces with padded bag sized 12" x 9" x 2" First Class - at time of listing calculated for $2.50 - I just reentered the weight and dimensions today to document this. I added $1.35 handling charge to try and accommodate for discrepancies I have been conditioned to expect - picture attached showing $2.50 eBay calculated shipping charges TODAY so it can't be claimed that shipping charges have gone up and that is the difference. So when I listed the blouse I entered $3.85 total shipping charges for First Class. At shipping time today, eBay charged me $4.06 for the same weight and dimensions I gave at listing time which of course is MORE than the shipping charge I had in my listing. Not much of course, but if I had not included the $1.35 handling charge, I could't have come close to paying the new shipping charge without a loss. I would like for eBay to try and explain to me where I have gone wrong so that I won't keep having this problem. To the person in the blog that says their answer is to list with free shipping, you too are suffering because you may not be getting what you planned when you entered the listing - you are ignoring the problem. As of now, the only answer I have is to either increase my listing price or increase even more my handling charge, which of course displeases buyers. So eBay - what is the answer??

myjunqueyourtreasure · ‎03-24-2019

@lowerla2003 wrote:
So eBay - what is the answer??

To enter the correct PACKAGE type instead of selecting a Large Envelope.

Reality is the leading cause of stress.

nobody*s_perfect · ‎03-24-2019

@myjunqueyourtreasure wrote:
@lowerla2003 wrote:
So eBay - what is the answer??
To enter the correct PACKAGE type instead of selecting a Large Envelope.

Yes, this. USPS avoids the term "Large envelope." They know that the term "envelope" is confusing because an envelope could be a letter, flat or package based on dimensions (including thickness), rigidity, etc.

The root of many of these infuriating threads is a mismatch when the "Service" is FC package and the "Package type" is letter or Large envelope, so that the buyer is not charged the package rate. And this happens because the list of Services for setting up the shipping calculator doesn't include letter or flat!!

pjcdn2005 · ‎03-24-2019

Would it work to substitute large envelope with Flat envelope (less than 3/4”, not rigid, etc.)?

This has been a problem for a long time but I’m guessing that the reason more people are noticing this now is because more are now using calculated shipping instead of a flat rate for first class because of the new zone rates.

slippinjimmy · ‎03-25-2019

New Sellers should (be forced) study the materials provided by the school of shipping (USPS).

https://pe.usps.com/text/dmm100/intro.htm

This is a pretty clear guide to all the basic things you need to know to understand the USPS terminology and the differences in the various services they offer.

And it continues with reasonable advice on picking the appropriate service, packaging items safely and other tips.

A Customer's Guide to Mailing

January 2019

Introduction

This guide will explain your options for mailing and help you choose the services that are best for you.

Price List

Notice 123-Price List, contains domestic and international prices, and fees in a concise and accessible manner. Available from larger Post Offices or on Postal Explorer at pe.usps.com.

Welcome to the U.S. Postal Service

For more than 240 years our goal has been to serve all customers, and we will continue to connect people at home and abroad for generations to come.

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. BUT, it still remains that eBay treated the SAME set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did NOT take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide CORRECT options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - BEWARE - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. BUT, it still remains that eBay treated the SAME set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did NOT take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide CORRECT options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. BUT, it still remains that eBay treated the same set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did NOT take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide CORRECT options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. BUT, it still remains that eBay treated the same set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did not take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide CORRECT options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. BUT, it still remains that eBay treated the SAME set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - but when preparing my listing, eBay did not take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide CORRECT options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware- the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. But, it still remains that eBay treated the same set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did not take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide correct options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect.

lowerla2003 · ‎03-26-2019

I don't claim to be a postal person and I don't want to be. Thanks to all of you who have responded with your comments. I see now that I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. So therefore it was GI (garbage in) on my part. But, it still remains that eBay treated the same set of parameters, size and weight, inconsistently. When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did not take into consideration the thickness of my package. So it is GO (garbage out) on eBay's part. I know that does not excuse my mistake, but it does point out that eBay is smart enough to produce a correct purchase price for a label but is not smart enough to provide correct options when listing. And eBay is not excused from this shortcoming by posting a disclaimer that seller is responsible for all information provided. This shortcoming of eBay essentially left me, and probably many others judging from the comments posted here, twisting in the wind. So I call on eBay to correct their shipping calculator to be consistent with their calculation at time of purchase. In the meantime - beware - the shipping calculator is sometimes incorrect. Maybe the answer is for eBay to ignore the "type" selected at listing time since they are ignoring it at purchase time.

nobody*s_perfect · ‎03-26-2019

@lowerla2003 wrote: ... I was reading the eBay definition of large envelope and package (thick envelope) incorrectly and I apologize for not understanding you and the definition. .... When purchasing a label, it took into consideration the thickness of my package - BUT when preparing my listing, eBay did not take into consideration the thickness of my package. ...

We appreciate your comments, but you're still not quite getting it. You're almost there!

eBay did not consider the thickness of your package when you purchased a label. eBay only prints labels for packages. Regardless of what you enter in the shipping calculator, the label will ALWAYS be for a package. Regardless of package thickness.

Package dimensions (including thickness) are used by the shipping calculator ONLY when determining whether a large package is subject to a surcharge (e.g., dimensional weight). eBay doesn't refer to the dimensions when figuring out First Class postage.

The thickness that you enter in the listing is not used to determine whether your item is a letter, flat, or package. That's the part that eBay holds the seller responsible for. They will go according to whatever you choose in the drop-down menu for "Package type." Again, thickness is not considered.

I agree that the setup of the shipping calculator should be revised. Sellers should not be able to choose "First Class package" in the "Service" menu if they choose "Letter" or "Large envelope" in the "Package type" menu. Those options are incompatible, so that combination should not be allowed. As you noted, this combination has created a lot of confusion and upset among sellers. eBay should add "First Class letter" and "First Class flat (Large envelope)" to the options for "Services."