Seller Quality. Service Metrics?

[ted_200]

Service Metrics Reminder

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Announcements/Service-Metrics-Reminder/ba-p/28976395

As announced in the Summer Seller Update, starting October 1, 2018, if you have very high rates of "item not as described" returns you may be subject to an additional 4% final value fee. This rate change is detailed in our Service Metrics policy. If you are rated below standard and you also have a very high rate of “item not as described” returns, you are only subject to the additional 4% final value fee for your below standard performance level.

The additional fee of 4% for very high rates of “item not as described” and for below standard performance are not subject to maximum final value fee caps, and will be applied to the total amount of the sale, including shipping. Final value fee discounts, including Top Rated Seller discounts, will not apply to the additional 4% final value fee.

OK.  So eBay has sellers with a VERY HIGH rate of "item not as described" and/or who are BELOW STANDARD, and they're "Top Rated Sellers"? 

How does this make any sense?   

[bigdeals.etc]

Blows your mind, doesn't it?

Not sure if this is relevant, but I'm currently TRS+ for domestic and Below Standard for Global (because of a couple of jerk international buyers).

[ted_200]

I used to be TRS for Global, but only Above Standard Seller for domestic.  It's not like I was a different or worse seller when I shipped it to New Jersey.

They fixed that though.  I'm Above Standard everywhere now.  Powerseller, 365 transactions,  0 Defects, 0 Returns, 0 Unresolved Cases, 0 Late Delivery, 0 Neg. f/b, 0 Neut. f/b, 4 x 5.0 DSRs.

And there are Top Rated Sellers who are below standard.  Fascinating. 

[gracieallen01]

---

Maybe it doesn't matter if it makes sense, but only matters if it makes cents?

[myjunqueyourtreasure]

Especially as the additional 4% isn't subject to FVF caps.

[gracieallen01]

---

@myjunqueyourtreasure wrote:
Especially as the additional 4% isn't subject to FVF caps.

---

Yes, I noticed that when I read the 'blogger' announcement.  Sort of like a consecutive, rather than a concurrent, sentence.

[ted_200]

---

@myjunqueyourtreasure wrote:
Especially as the additional 4% isn't subject to FVF caps.

---

Well... it was nice of them to not impose 4% more on top of 4% more for Below Standard sellers who also have "very high" SNAD rates, no?

But the discussion over whether they should simply charge more fees to "bad sellers" is a slightly different (but valid) discussion.  I'm saying there seems to be serious issue with the rubric that determines what is a "bad" (or average, or "Top Rated") seller to begin with... it seems to defy logic, and doesn't really pass the eyeball test...

[thevintagesilvershop]

It is my belief that Ebay has lost all control. 

[Anonymous]

---

@ted_200 wrote:
The additional fee of 4% for very high rates of “item not as described” and for below standard performance are not subject to maximum final value fee caps, and will be applied to the total amount of the sale, including shipping. Final value fee discounts, including Top Rated Seller discounts, will not apply to the additional 4% final value fee.

OK.  So eBay has sellers with a VERY HIGH rate of "item not as described" and/or who are BELOW STANDARD, and they're "Top Rated Sellers"? 

How does this make any sense?   

---

It doesn't make sense if you take the phrase Top Rated at face value. It starts to make sense when you realize that Top Rated doesn't have much to do with the quality of seller.

Anybody can increase their sales volume to become Top Rated and adjust their shipping and returns to qualify listings for TRSplus status.

There are a lot of TRS who use dark and blurry photos with no descriptions or item specifics and focus on quantity instead of quality. They can sustain more SNADs than a low volume seller because they're listing more and selling more.

I disregard TRS badges on listings when I shop here because I know it doesn't mean anything. I would like to see the listing badge disappear completely, but I'm happy the new design has at least de-emphasized the status and moved away from the gold medal ribbon.

[castlemagicmemories]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@ted_200 wrote:
The additional fee of 4% for very high rates of “item not as described” and for below standard performance are not subject to maximum final value fee caps, and will be applied to the total amount of the sale, including shipping. Final value fee discounts, including Top Rated Seller discounts, will not apply to the additional 4% final value fee.

OK.  So eBay has sellers with a VERY HIGH rate of "item not as described" and/or who are BELOW STANDARD, and they're "Top Rated Sellers"? 

How does this make any sense?   

---

It doesn't make sense if you take the phrase Top Rated at face value. It starts to make sense when you realize that Top Rated doesn't have much to do with the quality of seller.

Anybody can increase their sales volume to become Top Rated and adjust their shipping and returns to qualify listings for TRSplus status.

There are a lot of TRS who use dark and blurry photos with no descriptions or item specifics and focus on quantity instead of quality. They can sustain more SNADs than a low volume seller because they're listing more and selling more.

I disregard TRS badges on listings when I shop here because I know it doesn't mean anything. I would like to see the listing badge disappear completely, but I'm happy the new design has at least de-emphasized the status and moved away from the gold medal ribbon.

---

i couldn't agree more.  TRS has nothing to do with customer service, just volume.  The true test of a good seller is how you handle any problems.  Fighting legitimate SNAD tooth and nail by hostilely abusing the buyer in hopes they will abandon the return is not good customer service.  Remember even a TRS seller (not me) has posted that she actively avoids TRS sellers because of bad experiences she has had, and she is not alone.  Many buyers feel it means nothing, and some actively avoid them.

[Anonymous]

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

---

---

i couldn't agree more.  TRS has nothing to do with customer service, just volume.  The true test of a good seller is how you handle any problems.  Fighting legitimate SNAD tooth and nail by hostilely abusing the buyer in hopes they will abandon the return is not good customer service.  Remember even a TRS seller (not me) has posted that she actively avoids TRS sellers because of bad experiences she has had, and she is not alone.  Many buyers feel it means nothing, and some actively avoid them.

---

Any buyer who's used this platform should never be in that position. There is no communication or fighting necessary. Open SNAD, type in reason, upload photos if applicable. If seller doesn't approve the return then click the button to escalate to a case and return the item. End of story.

Buyers should not actively avoid a seller just because they have a TRSplus badge. Most - not all - sellers probably reached that status because they're doing something right. There's more to it than volume and there is some CS involved, but it's pretty easy to achieve.

[bubbleman2010]

Buyers fighting tooth and nail to get a refund? Two clicks is tooth and nail? Might as well lie about the return also so they don't have to pay the return shipping...

[sonoranboutique]

The whole Service Metrics thing is messed up and is gonna cause a lot of bad press.  Sellers should have huge warnings on the Seller Hub about their fees going up, and it should warn them in the Seller Dashboard as well.  Right now most people don't even know how to find the Service Metrics page, and don't know that it's different from Seller Dashboard.  Also it's simply not fair that buyers can lie on their returns and raise your return rate, when there's nothing you can do to dispute it.  There are also a ton of bugs on the Service Metrics page.  EBay UK has delayed the 4% fee increase, and if EBay US goes through with it they're going to look very bad in November when everyone gets their bills.  At that point everyone will notice, and the forums will explode, and the press will get wind of it as well.

[ted_200]

i couldn't agree more.  TRS has nothing to do with customer service, just volume. 

Well, the requirement isn't exactly steep... what is it, 100 transactions & $1K in a year?   Even I qualify for that!  LOL. 

Here's what eBay tells buyers it means:   "...experienced sellers with the highest buyer ratings".   I suppose buyers would believe that's DSR's (it's the only seller ratings they see or know about), and they're not involved at all.  Highest buyer ratings doesn't involve customer service? 

Buyers would certainly not believe that means any sellers with very high  INAD rates though... I wonder what that seller's Item As Described DSR would look like?  Is it saying "very high INAD rates", or is it 4.9?   IDK.

And sellers...  they jumped thorugh the hoops as required, you annointed them Top Rated, and you then reserve the right to add a 40% bad seller penalty anyhow? 

It just seems odd.

[mczombies]

Ted:

And sellers...  they jumped thorugh the hoops as required, you annointed them Top Rated, and you then reserve the right to add a 40% bad seller penalty anyhow? 

 It just seems odd.

Mczombies:

Not just odd, but deceitful--eroding the trust between sellers and eBay even further. 

The sellers I really feel sorry for are the ones who did jump through all the hoops, trusting that if they did as eBay asked of them--no matter how tedious, time-consuming, or financially hurtful--that eBay would notice that they were "team players" and have their backs. 

To penalize the sellers who have offered "free" returns the penalty % on their fvf's --knowing that their return rate would go up, and also knowing that buyers frequently make "mistakes" when returning items (all they have to do is hit the wrong button by mistake), and KNOWING that false SNADS are something that pretty much ALL sellers here have to deal with every once in awhile (they used to tell us to suck it up--it was the cost of doing business, but now all that has changed, and it actually really will COST us--it might cost some of us our businesses, in fact)--and all the while not allowing sellers to fight false SNADS anymore--is a slap in the face. Not to mention that it appears that the percentages for having " very high" returns is going to be ridiculously low--putting some sellers directly into the higher fee structure with only TWO SNAD returns.

I sell used clothing--in order for me to stay out of the "very high" returns --from the looks of things, I can have no more than TWO returns out of 300 sales--this is an impossibility--to expect nearly 100% of my buyers to be honest. To expect the post office to be 100% efficient--or to expect that out of 300 sales, with 300 different and unique buyers,  that everything will go 100% smoothly--I have only ONE mistake allowed before I hit the RED. 

And even though we have been talking about this for months--I'm sorry, but I am still FURIOUS about this, and I still feel just as full of the same righteous indignation and anger, as I did the first time I heard of this ridiculous money grab plan.