Service Metrics - EBay has given enough information to prove racketeering

[sonoranboutique]

This is about the Service Metrics page (not  the Seller Dashboard.)  If you go to this page and it says you have a "Very High" rating, starting today you are paying 40% higher fees: https://www.ebay.com/sh/prf/service-metrics

This is based on your "Item Not As Described" return rates, which cannot be disputed, even if the buyer lies about why they returned the item.  In a recent Q&A video where someone asks about this, EBay admitted that "incorrect returns exist", but the solution they offered was that they "only measure your performance against closely related peers that face a similar risk."

This is flawed logic, and thus, EBay has admitted to racketeering.  Why?  The reason "incorrect returns" are incorrect is because they are received randomly and are out of the seller's control.  So let's say the peer average in your category is 3 "incorrect returns" a month.  This doesn't mean every seller in your category gets exactly 3.  Some people will get 0 or 1, while some will randomly get 7 through bad luck.  If you are the one with bad luck, you are punished.   So EBay has admitted that a certain percentage of sellers with bad luck will be charged extra fees each month.

EBay has admitted that, each month, a percentage of unlucky sellers will randomly be charged more fees for something Ebay calls "incorrect returns", which cannot be disputed.

[moms**art**window**]

It's no doubt a Racket,i think they are just crazy myself,they do so many counter intuitive things that do so much damage to value market and sales, i thought of so many things my final conclusion incompetent and crazy no other explanation i'm tired of racketeering my brains over this "true incompetence" (when people are so incompetent they don't know they are complainant you can't point it out they are convinced they are the all knowing,you can't explain logic to people that don't comprehend logic),in the south there's a saying "some people just won't do right"

[luckythewinner]

Service Metrics - EBay has given enough information to prove racketeering

If your legal analysis is correct, then it should be slam dunk for your lawyer or anyone else's.  Have at it. 

[castlemagicmemories]

It seems based on percentages, and averages, so the sellers with high rates of returns is averaged out by the seller who doesn't have many, to come up with a common standard.  

[abfabvintage]

@castlemagicmemories

There really is no "standard" at this point in time.

[castlemagicmemories]

They are saying that you will be measured against your peers, so that is the standard~as I said, percentages and averages.

[gracieallen01]

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

Or, is it some super-secret formula - that can be adjusted as needed?

[southern*sweet*tea]

---

@gracieallen01 wrote:

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

Or, is it some super-secret formula - that can be adjusted as needed?

---

This is all I can find (under full policy overview):

https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/selling-policies/service-metrics-policy?id=4769

Peer benchmarks

Peer benchmarks are comparisons of your rates of 'Item not received' and 'Item not as described' requests to other sellers offering similar products under similar circumstances, including selling price, terms of sale, and shipping destination.

[gracieallen01]

---

@southern*sweet*tea wrote:

---

@gracieallen01 wrote:

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

Or, is it some super-secret formula - that can be adjusted as needed?

---

This is all I can find (under full policy overview):

https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/selling-policies/service-metrics-policy?id=4769

Peer benchmarks

Peer benchmarks are comparisons of your rates of 'Item not received' and 'Item not as described' requests to other sellers offering similar products under similar circumstances, including selling price, terms of sale, and shipping destination.

---

Thank you southern*sweet*tea,

Wouldn't it be nice if they were to define things like 'similar'.  Selling price - specific or range (small range, large range)?  Terms of sale - identical, somewhat alike, well, almost the same, but .... , similar products - all new, all like new, NOS, etc?  Shipping destination - same city, same state, same country, same continent, same month, same weather, same year, same carrier?

You know, just some minor details.

[castlemagicmemories]

---

@southern*sweet*tea wrote:

---

@gracieallen01 wrote:

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

Or, is it some super-secret formula - that can be adjusted as needed?

---

This is all I can find (under full policy overview):

https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/selling-policies/service-metrics-policy?id=4769

Peer benchmarks

Peer benchmarks are comparisons of your rates of 'Item not received' and 'Item not as described' requests to other sellers offering similar products under similar circumstances, including selling price, terms of sale, and shipping destination.

---

Great post, Sweet Tea!  

[a_c_green]

---

@gracieallen01 wrote:

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

---

I can't come up with a link for this at the moment, but I thought this question came up during a recent Weekly Chat, and did get an answer in some detail. Browsing the past two or three Weekly Chats might turn it up.

[zamo-zuan]

---

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

It seems based on percentages, and averages, so the sellers with high rates of returns is averaged out by the seller who doesn't have many, to come up with a common standard.  

---

This is obviously the case. But that is not fair for bulk sellers. Sellers with low sales have "100%" ratings, and therefore are not really "peers" compared to a larger seller.

How can we prove this? Look at a category such as Ignition Coils. Manufacturers of Ignition Coils state that a very strong rating for ignition coils is a defect rate slightly under 2%. 

Ignition coils are also sold in bulk. Not just 1 coil. Vehicles have 4, 6, 8, even more purchased in one set of coils.

So how on earth is it possible that the average peer rate is under 1%???

Furthermore, they are NOT only considering SNAD's. They are considering OTHER return reasons as well. Such as "Wrong Part" - yet buyers commonly pick this one when THEY choose the wrong part. Yet that is counting as a SNAD? Even if in their return message they state "I picked the wrong one, I needed for 2.0 engine not 2.5"??

They are even counting "damaged during shipment" as SNAD???

Often times 1/100 times items get lost or damaged during shipment.

So it's craziness that they are claiming that under 1% is an "Average".

You are also forced in to "Free Returns" or else you will get false SNAD's which bring your return numbers up. I can confirm that at least for the motors category, free returns significantly reduced the amount of SNAD's.

Our store has software verification systems for every item packed. We have 2 employees visually confirm the correct items on our software, and must be accepted by both employees, before items are packed. It's near impossible to send out a wrong item.

This, combined with Free Returns, and we are still "High". Not very high.

Basically this is saying, if you are a serious seller, and you do not do free returns, you are very high. If you do free returns, you are high. If you get an unlucky streak of damaged items, that will bring you very high.

This is extremely unfair. 

All that they would need for this system to be fair, is at least give sellers the ability to appeal the return reasons.

Or, how about just making "peers" comparable sellers to your store, rather than comparing people who sold $200 in a year to those who sold $2 million in a year?

[castlemagicmemories]

---

@abfabvintage
Missed paging you to the Board as most posts don't require that, but I know you page everyone, so I thought it remiss of me to not page you.  

Sorry about that, but I have now corrected it.   This is a repeat of post # 6

@castlemagicmemories wrote:

They are saying that you will be measured against your peers, so that is the standard~as I said, percentages and averages.

---

[zamo-zuan]

---

@gracieallen01 wrote:

Do you know if there is someplace where ebay specifies the criteria they use to determine a 'peer'?  Not just 'sellers who sell similar', but specifics.

Or, is it some super-secret formula - that can be adjusted as needed?

---

It is very obviously counting every seller on eBay. That's the only possible way the peer average can be below 50% of the Manufacturers stated defect rates. 

Also consider the above information about our verification of items that go out.

Another thing to consider, we are partners with most of the other large sellers in our category. They have the same results as us. 

Large sellers in the category are the ones most at risk. 

It's a bit sad because this is supposed to improve the sellers, but in effect, it's only going to punish sellers who sell large amounts. It's going to make it harder to do business on eBay, it's going to make prices go up on eBay as a whole. Either free returns, or 4% increased fees. 

I just hope they make it actually fair. Allow sellers to appeal return reasons. It will be a hassle that of course sellers would rather not have to deal with. But it's the only way to make sure these metrics target people that DESERVE penalties, and ensure that those who are doing a good job are not punished for customers mistakes.

[castlemagicmemories]

I see your point but if the average of peers includes small sellers and large sellers, that would be to the large sellers advantage as the smaller sellers, with less returns, would bring down the percentage for you as a large seller.

Of course that would break down if the small seller was a chronic SNAD lister.

But all things being equal, it could actually be of benefit to the large seller such as yourself.