Service Metrics - The Equivalent of Stealing Money Outwardly

[rockbottomauto]

We are one of the larger sellers of OEM auto parts on eBay, and have been for many years.

We offer completely free returns, even for buyers that simply "change their minds", but of course every month we enter the "very high items not as described" threshold.

Every single case that has been opened against us for "items not as described" has been completely proven that the buyer simply ordered the wrong part for their application. The words "items not as described" should equate that we sent the customer the wrong part, or a part that was not in brand new condition etc. Buyers know in all facets of online shopping they just need to lie a little to get what they want.

Furthermore, if we are offering "free returns", why should we be penalized with an extra 5% of fees anyway? It's not like the good folks at eBay are footing the bill for us, we are still out the shipping costs both ways. 

We sell exactly the same amount of parts on Amazon every single month, and guess what? We get about 80% less in returns from the parts sold on Amazon. Why is that you ask? eBay encourages scam behavior.

I know you guys are losing market share and there probably won't be an eBay in 10 years, but you really should strongly consider erasing this policy and I mean quickly. We started last year making plans to leave eBay, and are going to do so sooner rather than later.

Shameless cash grabs are a sign of desperation, and a message to the community that you are scared to death of going under.

[ittybitnot]

Furthermore, if we are offering "free returns", why should we be penalized with an extra 5% of fees anyway? 

The metric used to put you in final value fee punishment camp is counting "not as described" issues opened only. How they are handled by you, or veracity of any claim matters not.  It is simply the number you get compared to your seller "peer group" as determined by ebay.  If your percentage number is "very high" you get the extra fee. 

[rockbottomauto]

Facts matter, if people lie and it is proven, they should be held accountable. 

I'm glad you brought up the "peer group", funny how when we discuss the percentages with other sellers that sell the same volume as us that their numbers are all completely different. (Yes we know personally many of the auto parts sellers on eBay)

[mr_lincoln]

@rockbottomauto   I would volunteer to sign any petition(s) you want to champion regarding the INAD Seller Metric.  Who in their right mind would grade one party based on the honesty or dishonesty of another party???  From the outset of THAT metric I have called it subjective virtually every time I post on a thread regarding it.  It is 150% unfair to Sellers, PERIOD. 

If nothing else, they should consider lifting that metric for categories like yours.  Here is a legitimate rub for your industry, eBay has NOBODY on staff intimately familiar with the automotive parts industry and to create a "one size fits all" metric like the INAD is just downright stupid!!!!!!!!!!!

[rockbottomauto]

@mr_lincoln  The only thing that will communicate to the disreputable individuals at eBay that this is not working is to simply move to another platform. (We got our complaint all the way up to the VP level at eBay and he basically told us "tough luck")

Anyone defending this policy, please explain to me why at this time last year the surcharge was 4% and this year it has been moved to 5%? It's called trying to show a company is profitable when it is losing market share like crazy. 

[ittybitnot]

Facts matter, if people lie and it is proven, they should be held accountable. 

eBay is not big on "buyer" accountability.   Filing a phony SNAD to get free return shipping is acceptable buyer behavior.  It is so common that even if you offer "free returns" a buyer will likely not even notice. 

You can, after you give the refund, "report the buyer" for phony SNADs, but your NUMBERS will remain the same.  eBay won't change them. 

[frugality_inc]

Good luck getting eBay to remove the false SNAD from service metrics and getting your shipping label credit.

Have a ridiculous amount of false SNADs in a excel file that eBay has not reimbursed or removed the false SNAD from service metrics. Yet still stuck paying 5% on categories that have unrealistic average peer metrics of 0.10% example shown in screenshot attachment.

Called 4 separate times since middle of January. 100% of the base representatives say it cannot be appealed, yet eBay's website says otherwise. Even had 2 supervisors that had no idea about the policy. Even told they'd call me back within 3 business days after they investigated. NEVER received a call back.

https://pages.ebay.com/seller-center/seller-updates/2019-fall/seller-protections.html#m22_tb_a1_4

"If you are a Top Rated Seller and a buyer falsely claims an item was “not as described,” we’ll protect you on eligible transactions. If a buyer falsely claims an item was “not as described,” we’ll reimburse your return shipping label cost up to $6 per return. You’ll receive the return shipping label credit on your monthly invoice. We’ll also automatically remove any negative and neutral feedback, defects, and open cases in service metrics."

[simba6]

Not all venues are right for all types of selling.  We have the wally mart shoppers that return as much as they buy.

[mr_lincoln]

---

@rockbottomauto wrote:

@mr_lincoln  The only thing that will communicate to the disreputable individuals at eBay that this is not working is to simply move to another platform. (We got our complaint all the way up to the VP level at eBay and he basically told us "tough luck")

Anyone defending this policy, please explain to me why at this time last year the surcharge was 4% and this year it has been moved to 5%? It's called trying to show a company is profitable when it is losing market share like crazy. 

---

I do not recall reading where ANY Seller has defended that metric ... I could actually see where a CLA could be filed for that particular metric and succeed ...

I think you are right that the biggest statement that could be made against that metric would be for a large Seller like yourself and others to leave ...

[rockbottomauto]

@mr_lincoln  We are more than a little surprised a CLA has not been started for this as well, and if it were started, we would definitely join.

@ittybitnot  Yes, we are well aware of how the system works.

[ittybitnot]

We have the wally mart shoppers that return as much as they buy.

Though I don't know it for a fact, I don't think even WALLY WORLD has found a way to monetarily punish their suppliers for customer returns.   

[zamo-zuan]

---

@rockbottomauto wrote:

Facts matter, if people lie and it is proven, they should be held accountable. 

I'm glad you brought up the "peer group", funny how when we discuss the percentages with other sellers that sell the same volume as us that their numbers are all completely different. (Yes we know personally many of the auto parts sellers on eBay)

---

I absolutely agree that the biggest problem with Service Metrics is that they are built upon OPENED cases and not DECIDED cases!

Besides that, we sell auto parts as well and I absolutely feel your pain. We too have networked with other sellers and foud very different rates.

Beyond that, you may not have noticed yet, but the biggest problem with Motors? The entire Motors site is considered 1 big category! Yes, that means what ever product type you sell, is being compared to our Engine Mounts, Ignition coils, and so on. And those are being compared to those selling auto body parts, and so on.

Some auto parts are obviously much harder to find correct fitment for their vehicles, and that doesn't matter. Some, such as ignition coils, have a 2% failure rate per the manufacturer (and get purchased in bundles of 8 or more). 

This means for certain product lines (such as ignition coils) if you sold them only, you would be GUARANTEED to get the FVF penalty!

I've been complaining about this system since it started. But as another Motors seller in the situation, my advice for you: The only way to pad your metrics and avoid the penalty is to begin selling some product lines that do NOT have as high of a failure rate/not as hard to fit. It doesn't really matter what it is, as long as it's not a high risk for returns. 

You'll still have to rely on the "honor system". But it will balance out things as best as you could!

Wishing you the best of luck, I know how unfair it is!

[mr_lincoln]

@rockbottomauto    agreed

[mycheaperstuff]

@zamo-zuan "I absolutely agree that the biggest problem with Service Metrics is that they are built upon OPENED cases and not DECIDED cases!"

Sadly, there are so many problems that are the "biggest" problem with service metric :  lack of transparency, inability to recreate or confirm results, disconnect between alleged problem (unresponsive sellers) and solution (punish everyone) being at least equally the biggest.

[rockbottomauto]

@zamo-zuan  We have been at the forefront of the fight on this since it was instituted, there isn't anything we don't know regarding the policy. (I've had conference calls with 2 senior exec's at eBay other the past 1.5 years, plus dozens of calls fighting individual cases to have them removed from the metrics. Which they were doing for us until recently, because we had hard evidence the buyers had misused the system)

We have over 13,000 listings representing dozens of brands, there is no way to diversify any further. Being a licensed warehouse distributor, no one is more legit than we are either.

As stated in my previous message, we sell on Amazon as well, and it is not a coincidence we have 80% less returns in that store vs. this one. eBay enables bad behavior, then charges the seller for it. 

I know nothing is going to come of all this, I just want it out in the world so when eBay finally learns their lesson, it won't be a secret. 

I appreciate all of you that took time to comment.