Regards,
Simply-the-best-for-you Volunteer Community Mentor
Sending a partial refund for a Shipping discount was done on one page up until yesterday on my account. Now the process is complicated by making it a multi-page process.
Page 1: This page is only for the Refund amount, the Buyer is their ID, NOT their full name like the old refund page. On this page you enter the amount and then click the Next button at the bottom that turns blue once a value is in the refund field.
Page 2: On this page you select the reason and type a message in the field provided BUT the Buyer on this page on the right is again just their ID, NOT their real name.
Page 3: Here is where you review your Refund ... and oh, the Buyer on the right is again their ID, NOT full name.
Page 4: Your refund is now complete and FINALLY, the Buyer's real name is shown on the right along with their ID (green arrow).
So this was my first time through this new process. It is now a 4 page process instead of two, I will have to remember the Buyer's name BEFORE starting a refund since eBay hides that info now until the end opposed to the old one page process where the Buyer's name was displayed for use in the typing field for a more personalized note. Since none of the pages seem to have a back button I could not go back and correct or change anything.
I am at a loss to explain why the programming department's changes typically mean more steps for simple tasks. The other one that comes to mind is the Feedback flow. We used to be able to get to the full feedback history by simply clicking the FB count number, now that too is a multi-step process.
I just fail to see this (or the Feedback page access) as being any kind of improvement. This is 2024 and making things easier seems to be a lost art for the venue's programmers.
@mr_lincoln wrote:
@simply-the-best-for-you wrote:Thanks for the heads up, I have't seen this yet, but I do fairly often, since I combine shipping. I may just stop. It's like they totally mucked up Packing Slips, make it much more complicated, resource intensive & lost the functionality that had been there before & so many people loved. So frustrating!
@simply-the-best-for-you There seems to exist a propensity for complicating simple tasks. I believe eBay has a discount off Retail for shipping which would cut down on some refunds BUT I want to see that discount be over our Commercial rates.
As to packing slips ... okay, I am a little embarrassed here but knowing you I don't think you will be too critical of me LOL. On three accounts here and over 9,000 shipments I have never printed a packing slip ... nope, not a single one. So that's what, about 18 reams of paper I saved???
@mr_lincoln None of eBay's automated options for combining shipping worked for Calculated shipping last time I checked (which admittedly was a long time ago). Also, the majority of my buyers don't use the Shopping Cart when they make multiple purchases & I don't really see that changing.
I am not critical of you. I think packing slips are an individual choice. I have multiple reasons I like to use them. The reams of paper you 'saved' are one of my frustrations. The old packing slips, there was several ways to do them, one of which was a straightforward, 1 click, easy-peasy slip that had just the basics & printed out on a 1/3-1/4 sheet of paper. So, I would get 3-4 packing slips out of 1 sheet. I also used the back of my label paper for it, so it was re-used paper 🙂 It's a shame you don't use them b/c you'd then know that they did the same thing to that process. It's now a lot more complex, no option for the easy simple one anymore, prints minimum 1/2 page & that's with a lot of messing around AND in order to not have the price print (used to be the default, like it should be), you now have to click that the item is a gift, then after you do all that messing around, it does not retain your preferences! This is the 'good' version, 9 months out. When they first implemented it, it was SO BAD it was laughable. I'm sure you can still find my post. It was clearly written by people who didn't understand a packing slip & when it's used. It referred to printing it later in the process, but there was no option to do so. It said there would be a link after you printed your shipping label, but there wasn't. That was my favorite, they thought allowing you to print a packing slip AFTER you'd gone through your whole shipping process made sense. Ummm, a packing slip needs to be done (if you're going to use one) BEFORE you print your shipping label & seal your package. You can't know the weight of the pkg til you're done putting everything in it! Anyway, my point is that just like the FB page & what you're showing here, they did the same thing with Packing Slip system.
I didn't know (or remember) that you were an old techie. As a former Assembler programmer, along with numerous other IT positions, starting back when it was called DP, do a search on Agile Methodology or Agile Project Management. It will explain MUCH of what we're seeing & experiencing daily. Somebody freaking created a methodology that amounts to 'do all the project development steps simultaneously, throw them into production & let your users debug it, don't worry about documentation, testing or user needs, putting in production is the most important'. My DH is still in IT & he told me about it. Yup, someone making millions & selling it to execs as an actual methodology, that amounts to 'throw it against the wall & keep what sticks'. But hey, we can respond to market changes & "pivot" more quickly to "market trends" b/c we do all the steps congruently. Yeah okay, we do none of them well & we don't really test anything, but who cares we're flexible & agile, so we can respond quickly to market, business or user needs. Seriously, read their principles, you will understand a whole lot more about what we're seeing. It is a very widely used project mgmt methodology these days, you see jobs advertised with it all the time, they have their own terminology (I mean I guess they all do), but these are really weird ones (scrum master anyone). Everything that doesn't amt to 'throw 'stuff' into production right away', falls by the wayside as backlog. I've been around in IT long enough to have seen many methodologies come & go, this one scares me. Especially the way it's been so widely accepted in big business.
Disclaimer, IDK for certain that this is what eBay uses, but it's not a stretch based on what we see regularly.
Actually, what you describe makes sense for what is seen here. Only a % of a programming change is completed, nobody thinks about the big picture or a list of "what ifs" that we wind up experiencing and then point out for correction. It's like a game of whack-a-mole ... yes, I am a bit of an older techie, closer to the end of the Baby Boomers than the beginning. More of a user than a programmer. Programmed some machines back in the day but they were finite systems with specific tasks and functions ... very simple stuff. Yep, watched the birth of the computer age right through the Dick Tracy wrist Watch becoming a reality. I've shared with quite a few people that my generation can certainly learn new stuff but we are also tired of learning new stuff. We all grew up on Menu driven programming. The mouse was a great invention for what I do but the touch pad on my laptop serves no purpose ... I would gladly trade it for more storage space LOL!
@keziak wrote:I never have printed a packing slip either.
Ok.
the point wasn't whether or not you've printed one. The point was that they mucked that up, just like they mucked this up & the FB screens. It was not meant to be yet another debate on whether or not you use packing slips. Do or don't, IDC, but if you do, the screens got much more complicated & took away functionality. That's the point of the discussion.
@wastingtime101 wrote:
@mr_lincoln wrote:nobody thinks about the big picture or a list of "what ifs" that we wind up experiencing and then point out for correction.
It's no secret around here - we've all noticed that changes are rolled out without considering impact on daily tasks. People making these changes (selling tools especially) clearly do not use the product so they don't know what the impact is until it's launched and complaints roll in.
We may be dismissed as complainers or opposed to change - and I'm sure many do fit that bill - but speaking personally, I am pro change when it makes sense, but I'm anti- loss of functionality and I'm anti- making things less efficient. When I complain it's constructive; it's not for the sake of being negative and it's not because I'm against change.
I'd bet dollars to donuts they use Agile Methodology, I could verify by looking up job listings, but I'm not gonna take the time. I agree with you though, change is necessary. I know we all hate dealing with it, but it is absolutely a requirement of business. But changing just for the sake of change or "modernizing" is frustrating. Change requirements are in fact part of the reason Agile came into being. As someone who worked most of my life on legacy software (which btw, still runs most Fortune 100 businesses today, despite everyone wanting to make fun of it), part of the problem was that the old methodologies & pre-methodologies, ie; the 'waterfall' methods, took so long, that by the time a project was implemented, it was often obsolete. That was a very real problem. Now the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction. Another big part of the problem is globally distributed staff. We constantly see things like a screen suddenly in German or frequently, EU format dates in the US product. That kind of stuff is inexcusable IMO.
I **bleep** & moan about change at times, but I definitely know & understand that it is imperative to keep a business running. Not that you were picking on me, just a comment 🙂
@ten_o_nine wrote:I don't always test my code.
I hope that was meant as humor. Either way, it made me laugh!
@wastingtime101 wrote:
@mr_lincoln wrote:nobody thinks about the big picture or a list of "what ifs" that we wind up experiencing and then point out for correction.
It's no secret around here - we've all noticed that changes are rolled out without considering impact on daily tasks. People making these changes (selling tools especially) clearly do not use the product so they don't know what the impact is until it's launched and complaints roll in.
We may be dismissed as complainers or opposed to change - and I'm sure many do fit that bill - but speaking personally, I am pro change when it makes sense, but I'm anti- loss of functionality and I'm anti- making things less efficient. When I complain it's constructive; it's not for the sake of being negative and it's not because I'm against change.
We are in agreement here, change that is functional and improves an experience is a good thing but change that doesn't is a bad thing.
@wastingtime101 wrote:
FYI @mr_lincoln eBay has wrecked the process. Below are the 2 other discussions I've seen to date. As eBay rolls this out to more users I expect we'll see a lot more complaints.
devon@ebay has been submitting our feedback on this and hopefully he'll pass on FB based on your OP here. My apologies in advance, Devon, if I become a nuisance but I'm going to keep tagging you on this as more sellers encounter these problems. 😁
https://community.ebay.com/t5/Report-eBay-Technical-Issues/Giving-refunds/m-p/34292304#M122815
Hey @wastingtime101! Thank you for tagging me and sharing these examples as they help a ton when I am reporting issues such as this on my end!
Devon,
@broto_64 wrote:Maybe ebay doesn't want sellers to manually issue shipping discounts, personally I would feel annoyed at a seller for doing things in such an outdated way... Sellers can institute automatic multi-order discounts under business shipping policies, then sellers don't even have to click once, it just gives it to the buyer before they even pay.
@broto_64 Sadly, that will not work either on all multi-item transactions. I have a link to a thread below from yesterday. OP was wondering about eBay adjusting a package size and not just the shipping cost on a multi-item sale. I explained why they cannot do that and why I would not want them to do that. eBay can easily add shipping costs but they cannot add package volumes or know how multiple items will be packed in one box.
One solution is what I do all the time when I buy items from out of state on online auctions and have them shipped in. Example would be a train auction with 400 lots and I win 5. I get a bill for the 5 and pay it. Once they pack the items I get another bill for the shipping cost and pay that. Then they ship.
The problem with eBay allowing that kind of arrangement is their Seller Metrics, those are all about shipping on time and other factors but fail with regard to letting a Seller and Buyer work out a transaction to both party's satisfaction. So what if a Buyer has to wait a little longer for a multiple order to ship? MILLIONS of other Buyers like me do it all the time on other venues. It is only eBay's narrow view and focus on what they perceive to be an enhanced Buying experience that prevents them from letting Sellers work with their Customers to complete a transaction.
Re: Ebay combined a customers order, but had the s... - The eBay Community
@broto_64 wrote:Maybe ebay doesn't want sellers to manually issue shipping discounts, personally I would feel annoyed at a seller for doing things in such an outdated way... Sellers can institute automatic multi-order discounts under business shipping policies, then sellers don't even have to click once, it just gives it to the buyer before they even pay.
What I run into, even with using business policies with a combined flat rate rule and offering a promotional free shipping offer, buyers do not always use the shopping cart. So, when a buyer buys multiple items, each with a separate transaction, they end up overpaying for shipping. I combine their orders on the bulk label page and refund the overpayment of shipping charges after I print the label.
I have never had any indication that the buyers in these situations were annoyed with the refund process that I used. I often receive positive feedback regarding the transactions.
