eBay

springvalleywi · ‎11-25-2017

I have come across a seller who is selling their pretty much identical used items but is using the same photo, like his/her own stock photo for each item. Items have been altered and photos are shown of the alteration but the picture that shows up in the search results are exact. There is not another picture provided of the front of the item. Again, items are used, but altered and are not exactly alike and can vary greatly because it is a handmade item. My question is is that allowed and is it OK that I point out that I do not use stock photos in my listings like a competitor does? Also, can you call something new if it has been altered?? I play by the rules and wonder why others do not have to.

ted_200 · ‎11-27-2017

My question is is that allowed...

I don't think it's specifically prohibited outright, but I think it violates some eBay "best practices" verbiage about pictures accurately depicting the item being sold. My guess is that they consider "don't use stock photos for used items" to mean "don't use a stock of a new item to sell your used item".

...and is it OK that I point out that I do not use stock photos in my listings like a competitor does?

I don't see why it wouldn't be OK to point out it's not a stock photo, I do this, it is part of my "boiler plate" for every listing.

The item in the photo is the exact item you will receive - stock photos are never used in any of my auctions.

You certainly do not want to mention any competitor by name, that would be a policy violation. If you mention competitors in general, I think that's fair, but eBay could think (they could think anything of course, they're eBay) that is saying something "negative" that would "discourage eBay buyers".

Also, can you call something new if it has been altered??

Common sense says you can. In eBay lingo, I think that would be "New-Other". Here are a couple of links that won't really answer your question very well:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/item-description.html

http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/search-manipulation.html (see Item Condition section)

You'll want to watch out for whatever definitions eBay shows buyers for "New" though. If they include the proviso "An unused item in original condition...", then maybe not.

There may be other rules or policy pages, they're hard to find. For example, my category has a specific policy page that prohibits stock photos. However most of eBay's big favorite sellers in the category use them extensively, and eBay policy enforcers have said (in the past, when such people existed and could be reached) it would be "impractical" to require these sellers to photograph unique individual items.

I play by the rules and wonder why others do not have to.

The rules here are difficult to find, difficult to understand, and often contradict other rules. Rules without enforcement are pretty useless, and eBay has a lot of those. eBay also has provisos in their UA that pretty much say "we can ignore our own policy requirements..." for certain sellers if it makes business sense to do so. It even allows them to arbitrarily claim sellers are "Top Rated" even if they do not meet the requirements.

If sellers are violating the rules, you can report their listings. Recent history suggests the chances eBay will do anything are low. Yet, if your listings are reported, you'll probably hear about it.

The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves.

View Best Answer in original post

castlemagicmemories · ‎11-25-2017

Ebay does not like negative statements in descriptions, and anyway, your buyer will be able to tell the difference between a stock photo and your photos and act accordingly.

So not necessary to state you don't use stock photos as your competition does.

the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth · ‎11-25-2017

Just ignore the non helpful answers. We are all adults and people can be jerks as long as they follow the forum rules.

To th OP sellers of used should not be using stock pictures of new if condition is an issue, however there is no way to stop them. If buyers stop buying from those sellers and file SNADs when appropriate that may make them stop. Buyers can also leave calmly worded yet descriptive negatives for misleading purchases

slati_2013 · ‎11-25-2017

You should not worry yourself about what the seller is doing. If a buyer gets the item and it does not match the pictures in the listing, he can file a claim. If the seller's buyers are happy, that is all that matters.

yuzuha · ‎11-25-2017

I'm confused. First you say the items are "pretty much identical," in which case using one photo as an example should be just fine. But then you go on to say they are "not exactly alike and can vary greatly."

So which is it?

coolections · ‎11-25-2017

@springvalleywi wrote:
is it OK that I point out that I do not use stock photos in my listings like a competitor does?

You can say you do not use stock photos in your listing and it is perfectly OK. Do not mention that others do not. I don't know the reason for the rude comment by the first responder, just ignore them.

kensgiftshop · ‎11-26-2017

@springvalleywi wrote:
Also, can you call something new if it has been altered?? I play by the rules and wonder why others do not have to.

You have some stockings listed as new, then you have this in the description:

"Technically this is a new item/return/overstock/not quite perfect."

"The Lands End tag has either been removed or altered so the item cannot be returned"

Want to wish everyone a Safe and Happy Independence Day.

chrysylys · ‎11-26-2017

'Stock' photos should not be used unless the item is new and in the same condition one would find it on a store shelf. Even then, the seller shoulld take their own pictures to include in each listing.

Simply state that you take your own pictures. Don't reference what others do.

If you're selling returns or closeouts with altered or defaced tags, do NOT use stock photos.

Forget keeping up with the Joneses. Be the Finklegrubers!
OK kids, time to get the Dodge loaded up again. I hear 'Poppy's By the Tree' calling. This trip might be a long one too.

monty1964 · ‎11-26-2017

Yeah, so I am signed in under one account and signed in on the community boards with another account. Thanks ebay. Thought I was being discreet. Didn't know that could even happen!! My point is I am angry that people are being misled with the stock photo. Photo is not a true representation as the items do suffer damage when the monogram is removed. But since they are a high volume seller they get a pass. Buyers do not even know they were duped. Number 2, I may use the words "technically new" because I know where the item has come from/from Lands End. I have some stockings that will be listed as used because they were purchased second hand at a thrift store. When a seller removes a monogram from a 20 year old item and calls it new that is dishonest. Item has been out there for 20 years. They also do not indicate in any way that the item is really used or monogram was removed in the item description at the top of the auction page.

jackfacts2012 · ‎11-26-2017

I never buy anything that shows a "stock" photo. If you can't take the time to show me EXACTLY what the item looks like, I'm not interested.

POSTING ID ONLY.

castlemagicmemories · ‎11-26-2017

You have an advantage in using your own photos.

ANd you are not supposed to use stock photos unless the item is new.

Many do not care for stock photos. I don't. I find they either make the item look far better or far worse than the actual item really is. Thus not a true representation.

ed8108 · ‎11-26-2017

State:

Photo is of the actual item you will receive.

7606dennis · ‎11-26-2017

I would avoid using a stock photo of anything except brand new items. Of course, with eBay's catalog scheme it may be getting harder to avoid them.

"It is an intelligent man that is aware of his own ignorance."

ed8108 · ‎11-26-2017

A seller's photo and written description should accurately disclose the condition of the

Item being offered for sale.

However, for some Ebay sellers

Significantly not as described is a different higher standard than a item being somewhat not as described.

nowthatsjustducky · ‎11-27-2017

@ed8108 wrote:
A seller's photo and written description should accurately disclose the condition of the
Item being offered for sale.

That depends on whether or not it is something where condition, that is cosmetic condition, matters. Not everything is expected to be a collectible to be kept in pristine condition for generations to come.

If it works, sell it. If it works well, sell it for more. If it doesn't work, quadruple the price and sell it as an antique.

-- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #80