eBay is Listening

At eBay Live, Lorrie Norrington implored sellers to give eBay time to make the changes necessary to improve the marketplace.

Thursday is the first big announcement since eBay Live around more changes.

1. eBay is reversing their decision to make Neutrals, in effect Negatives. This will take place in late August (retroactively), and in the limbo between now and then, eBay has committed to not taking action on anyone due to neutral impact (e.g. losing PS status because neuts=negs).

2. At eBay Live, Lorrie promised that Mutual Feedback Withdrawal [MFW] and now they are saying it will be out in October (just in time for the holiday selling season - gulp).

These both make a ton of sense and are high on the list of "Changes ChannelAdvisor has asked eBay to make" that we covered in our recent webinar (although we take no credit on the change, it's very widespread amongst the seller base of course).

The nice thing about MFW is very frequently on the eBay platform as a seller you don't know the buyer has had a bad experience until a neut/neg is left for you.  Of course, great sellers fix the problem and turn that unhappy buyer into a happy one.  Without a MFW plus the increase in costs of selling on eBay, we've been seeing some sellers argue, "why should I try and turn around neg/neutrals, I can't get the feedback changed anyway."

By re-introducing MFW, it will reward those sellers that are taking the time and effort to turn around those bad experiences.

Details on "MFW 2.0" are a little sketchy in the announcement, so we'll have to watch how this gets implemented.  The only hint in the post is that: "

our new process will enable buyers to change their feedback of the seller, not just withdraw the rating.". With the Oct. timeframe, my fingers are crossed that its solid so we don't have any eBay gremlins in Nov/Dec.

Comments

[redbaron]

If eBay management had any sense of fairplay, at all, they would completely undue all their recent changes. As a long time eBay Power Seller, this news is welcome, but it does not come close to getting the feedback situation back to a fair and balanced platform, where it was before.

Ebay broke one long term cardinal rule, 'Don't fix it if it isn't broken'. And now they are going to have to pay the cost.

[Tote]

This is great news. I am very happy and encouraged eBay are finally listening to their sellers. Well done eBay for coming through and lets hope they keep it up.

[truth betold]

Ebay should have never "fixed" anything... nothing was broken. Ebay has lost the loyalty and trust of a great deal of their sellers - whom have gone elsewhere. I being an ex ebayer- seller and buyer- am speaking on behalf of so many whom ebay has tossed aside. No matter how many changes are promised- they are not to be trusted. Proof of this was the attendance at 'Ebay live 2008'.

Their is another site out there.. that will take the place of what was once the Ebay everyone knew.
OLA.com is next up and coming site for collectibles, treasures and findings... antiques.. both for sellers and buyers..

Ebay- fool me once- shame on me--- Fool me twice- I DON'T THINK SO....
Ola.com is the kind of place that ebay once was..and so many ebay refugees have moved over to OLA.com.. and are building it as it write this....
Later Ebay- YOU ARE NOT THE WAY....

hello -- OLA ! OLA.com is THE ONE !

[truth betold]

Red Baron- you are right... except the feedback issue is only one of many issues.. and there's no turning back ! Now that ebay is stuck in the mud... up to their neck in lawsuits and whatnots... NOW... they're gonna "LISTEN"...?... I'm was also an old timer .. on ebay... and worked hard to build my business... but everytime we turned around- a new "policy" was being brought in... NO THANKS... I'M DONE WITH EBAY... I'M NO LONGER BOYCOTTING EBAY... I'VE TOTALLY ABANDONED EBAY.. EVEN AS A BUYER .
too little ... too late... too much damage done...
Ebay has betrayed the those that fed them... with so much betrayal- internationally- "those who fed them" are gone for good. Ebay has taught us another valuable lesson... never to put all our eggs into one basket...

Their changes has forced so many to move right along.. no turning back.... Promises Promises...--- turn out to be nothing but lies...

History will repeat itself again.. on ebay... but too many have been 'burnt' to dare go back for a second helping...

Adios ebay.. onto better things... Ola onlineauction.com (OLA.com)

[Patricia013]

Ebay knows only one thing - their revenue. They could really care less about sellers and they could really care less about the buyers' experience. I know they're losing money. That would be the only reason for them to back peddle on anything. As their revenue falls all the pompous and domineering policies they threw at sellers this year will go right out the window! This has to be one of the worst management teams in history! They don't understand how much they've lost and the biggest and most expensive loss of all is the trust of their sellers. Ebay will never be the same.

[AliceFay]

Amen, Patricia013.

[D'Arkangel]

These changes are definitely welcome...just a little too late. Ex e-bay auto part sellers, go on down to justparts.com. They have the business model that ebay should have.

[xebayaddict]

Here's Scot Wingo again, attempting to be a spinmaster. ANYone with ANY intelligence can see he's a horrible at it:

First, neutral has never = negative. The fact that eBay tried to defy logic by making it appear that it did doesn't matter. So thanks eBay for the teeny tiny chip in your supreme arrogance.

Second, did I miss something? Are sellers now allowed to leave feedback apropos to the situation, be it positive, neutal or negative? Scot states that Mutual Feedback Withdrawal will be reinstated in the fall. "Mutual" means both parties to the feedback have the chance to withdraw feedback. All I see is that buyers will be able to CHANGE the feedback that they left for the seller.

Call it like it is, the MFW process as it once was is NOT being reinstated.

[Tony P.]

"The reality is they didn't make the change because sellers spoke out, they did it because the metrics demanded it. It was just a nice coincidence that they would get credit for listening."

"They just looked at the number and realized that too many top sellers were going to lose PS status so they made the change."


Randy Smythe made those comments on his blog. The only thing that's missing is the final point, which is the answer to this question:

Why would ebay give a damn if huge amounts of Power Sellers lost their status and ended up paying More fees and possibly being suspended?

Anyone know the answer? Anyone? (hint: it involves the word Bleed)

----------------------...


It took a six week study to conclude that sellers shouldn't be disadvantaged by neutrals? It will take another six weeks to run a program to undo that mistake?

Originally, it took only three weeks for the program to compute ALL feedback changes, calculating all the way back to 1995. This 'undo' repair to the feedback system needs to go back only 12 months.

Two choices. Either they are incredibly inept, or something else is involved here. Neither choice allows for an altruistic "ebay listened" answer. Let's put this into real world terms:


A deliberate act by someone ends up in cutting off a man's hand . Later, the assailant performs surgery and re-attaches the hand. The word "later" means after a study of the consequences of a man living without a hand.

Also, in spite of the fact that surgeons are everywhere, the assailant takes several more weeks (after the study) to enlist a surgeon. This is supposed to be a altruistic act? Puhleeze!

[nadine]

Tony, here is a good reason for Ebay to stop counting neutrals as negatives. With neutrals as negatives, Buy.com's feedback percentage is currently 99.02%. Without neutrals as negatives, Buy.com's feedback percentage is 99.56%

The minimum feedback percentage required to remain in the Powerseller program: 99.5%

QED

[Watchingthe Wheels]

Maybe one of the reasons behind the shift is to restore the quality of listings in certain catagories.

I collect depression glass. I have noticed lower counts in overall glass listings in conjunction with a degradation of the quality of choices within this area.

I read the letter written by Norrington. It was the most upfront and professional approach to date by any member of the upper tier of Ebay since the policy shift was announced earlier this year. Had a more upfront approach been taken BEFORE the changes took place, less negative public feedback in the form of the a very steady stream of comments left after any news snippet offering the opportunity to do so would have occured.

Had the top brass of Ebay appealed to the sellers about the numerous lawsuits and other challanges that the were facing and asked for help instead of arbitrarily shifting the nature of the playing field the outcome would have probably been a very smooth transition to a more controlled selling platform.

I liked Norrington's letter. it was well written and direct. The executive level of Ebay still needs alot of work in this area. A few apologies would also be appreciated, and a much more visible profile towards your dynamic and living inventory source.

I also have to assume that fear was an underlieing motivator behind the flawed approach to the policy changes. I am curious as to why Ebay used a less than upfront manner of delivery. if retalitory feedback WAS a problem, why was it allowed to fester? If the lawsuits were pending, why didn't Ebay ask for a moritorium on designer label goods as a show of respect to the companies who had put in the work to build brand recognition? Was therofit stream so necessary to Ebay's existance that they couldn't live without it? In order to receive respect, one must be willing to extend it to others.

One thing that I wasn't thrilled with was the still present caste system judgment calls pertaining to the worthiness of buyers and sellers based upon monetary gains to Ebay. Whether a user spends $1.00 or $1,000,000 within the site, they still spent money and generated FVFs to Ebay and are worhty of being shown respect. This does not happen. It needs to. This policy is prejudicial in nature and offensive. If the company shows me poor treatment at a low end purchase level how do I know that this treatment will change if I spend a larger amount of money? I don't. And I find myself judging Ebay in a negative light due to inequity in how the public is treated. It shows an incredible lack of breeding on the part of the policy maker's of Ebay. It might also be indicative of insecurity. Ebay will suck up to the big spenders. If preferential treatment is demanded by people with more money to spend, what holes exist in their souls?

Has anybody ever wondered about the phenominal success of either Oprah Winfrey or Warren Buffet? I am very sure that in no small measure it is due to their completely unpretentious approach to life. Both of these people seem at ease at all levels of humanity. They both managed to rise to the top without creating animosity. So by example, these two human beings show that it is possible to treat all people with respect and still reap astronomical financial rewards.

As America begins to reap what it has sown, ( the stock market has essentially been static for close to 10 years, there is a credit and housing crisis, etc,etc, etc, ) It may be a good idea to rethink some of the yesteryear's media and propaganda messaging and bring morality and the high road back to the frofront of how we proceed in how we do things.

[Et tu,Brute!]

This ranks about with ebay tucking tail and withdrawing forcing Paypal on all sellers in Australia, with the idiotic comments re to remove any confusion.

Huh? What confusion? The Aussie's weren't confused! They weren't gonna be pushed and didn't back down! How lame and moronic!

Patricia013 summed it perfectly. Loss of trust. It's gone. Never have I known such a spiteful, menial company. I have come to loath eBay. I won't go back. I've taken my purchasing power elsewhere.

[Et tu,Brute!]

To Watching The Wheels:

By the way, your post is excellent! As always. Great clarity and well-stated.

A caste system? Hadn't thought in that mode, but you are absolutely right! Can we say Middle Ages? Now this is a company with vision! LOL!

Observances of Oprah Winfrey and Warren Buffett are also excellent.
Very excellent food for thought! Respect shown to others should be unilateral.

eBay has NO class. None whatsoever.

And it seems to me that the company is becoming regressive. Never a good sign. It is a sign of weakness and desperation.

[tommytucker]

STOP PRESS : Ebay Members to Seek Recourse Through the Courts

Appended below is the media statement distributed widely to the media in the past hour.

The group of ebay members which has guided a large number of us in recent weeks to make written submissions to the ACCC, petition and attend a conference, and write to Ministers, Senators, ASIC, the Banking Ombudsman, industry regulators and our banks, will now launch a further series of initiatives to bring ebay into line with decent trading practices. The first of these initiatives will be to seek remedies through the courts.

Please read the media release - it is self explanatory. Make a copy now - in case ebay are foolish enough to delete it - and be prepared to distribute it via email, via your web site and any other means at your disposal to anyone who has an interest in these issues.

On your behalf the group is taking a stand. Now, more than ever, is the time to show your support. Ebay members the world over will watch with interest whether individual mums, dads, and small businesses spread across this country of ours can join together to achieve a fair deal at the hands of ebay. The group has faith in our justice system. Come join us.

Thank you.
==========

Media Statement – 5.00pm 13th July, 2008

Ebay Members to Seek Recourse Through the Courts

Early last week a well co-ordinated group of ebay members was instrumental in facilitating large numbers of their peers, nationally, to write to their local Ministers, Senators, The Banking Ombudsman and to ASIC and other relevant organisations to register complaints over the aggressive manner in which ebay continues to promote PayPal as its preferred payment method.

The complaints are well documented and numerous, and ranged from : ebay’s misrepresentation, suppression of other payment methods, deletion of sellers’ listings without cause, refusal to allow sellers to pass on PayPal charges and the issuing of misleading statements to further the illusion that PayPal is more secure than other established and proven payment methods. Other complaints included PayPal’s freezing of member’s accounts, the inequity of the PayPal User Agreement and PayPal’s refusal to sign the EFT Code of Conduct - therein denying ebay members the same protection which banks and other financial institutions provide to their customers.

Later in the week the group again led their peers to write en-masse, but on this occasion to their respective banks, to air concerns over ebay’s public statements that PayPal is the safest product in the EFT marketplace, implying that all other EFT transactions – and in particular Direct Deposit – are unsafe by comparison. On the basis that the ACCC concluded in its draft Notice : "The evidence available does not support the view that PayPal is the most secure method of payment or offers the best service for all transactions", ebay members sought reassurance from their banks that ebay’s assertions are incorrect and that Direct Deposit is a safe transaction method.

This week the group will launch a further series of initiatives. Mr Tony Green, the group’s spokesman on legal matters, announced today that “… as ebay’s response to member’s legitimate concerns is woefully inadequate it is now time to commence our next offensive which will be to seek remedies through the courts”. Mr Green went on to say ”Ebay’s recalcitrant behaviour has pushed us to the point that we must now use the legal system to bring ebay into line with decent trading practices.”

Mr Green said, “In a conference last night the group decided unanimously that it would use legal due process to stop ebay from destroying its own site and, in the process of this, destroying the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of loyal ebay members”. He added, “We are ebay’s customers and to date they have refused to listen to us. Ebay has left us no alternative than to appeal to the courts to right the wrongs that ebay has forced upon us.”

In anticipation of this offensive the group has had a team of researchers looking at legal precedents, similar legal actions and the various legal alternatives available to it.

“We discussed several options available to us in prosecuting these actions,” said Mr Green “… and the possibility of a major legal firm doing the work on a no win no fee contingency basis is being examined.”

“The principles at issue here are of vital importance to the largest consumer group in Australia – 5 million people according to ebay’s own figures – only a few of these are commercially scaled businesses, most are mums and dads striving for a modest supplement to the household income, and these people do not have the financial resources to pursue fair and just treatment at the hands of ebay”, said Mr Green. “It appears that political leaders and regulators have yet to fully comprehend the significance of the issues and have not yet commenced the required corrective actions, and thus the group has stepped up its activity to rally ebay members together and to take ebay on as one. Ultimately, ebay will be made to comply with all of the laws of our country.”

Contact has been made with a University Law School as the group are exploring the possibility of engaging law students – ironically, many of them also disaffected ebay members – to research this area and begin cataloguing the huge volume of accumulated evidence assembled by ebay members.

Further, there are a growing number of other ebay members offering to contribute to a fighting fund to pay for the planned actions.

“Ebay members are delighted to learn of Paymate Pty Ltd’s announcement on 11th July of it having lodged a formal complaint to the ACCC concerning ebay’s alleged breaches of s47 and s52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974,” said Mr Green, ” … and our group will now examine the merits of approaching Paymate with a view to the pooling of evidence and conducting a joint legal offensive against ebay.”

“Our research to date is moving us on from the Trade Practices, and other Acts, competition sections to those sections dealing with unconscionable conduct, and breach of contract “, said Mr Green.

“We need to do something dramatic, and quickly, to protect ebay members – mums, dads and businesses – from being destroyed by a company that can see no further than its own profit figure. If the anger of its loyal customers means nothing to ebay we intend to look to the courts to uphold Australian Law and to give us respite from the excesses of ebay”, said Mr Green.

“Ebay believes that ebay members are isolated from each other, largely ignorant of ebay’s actions with regard to PayPal and are therefore ineffectual in complaining about or opposing ebay’s deplorable practices. For the average ebayer being channelled into paying by PayPal may seem to be a risk free and temporary thing rather than a calculated deception by ebay”, Mr Green said. ”Most ebayers are unsure how and where they should complain, and ebay are counting on this to push its policies through. We intend to expose this tactic to all ebay members.”

“The discussion boards on ebay are a good indicator of the level of anger at ebay’s new policies. There is no flocking to the boards by people who support the new policies. To the contrary they are full of horror stories and tales of anger and frustration from people who are violently opposed to them”, said Mr Green.

“Between them the co-ordinators of the group have a data base of over one hundred thousand email addresses of ebay members who have purchased from us, and through other supporting sellers access to many hundreds of thousands more. If necessary we will contact every one of them to alert them to the full consequences of the disastrous policies that ebay have introduced. We will do the job that ebay is morally obliged but too frightened to do – to keep ebay members informed,” said Mr Green.

The group will conference again this evening to make decisions on its first legal offensive against ebay and to decide on a timetable.

Meanwhile, activity on the ebay site from both buyers and sellers has taken a nosedive, member’s anger and frustration continues unabated, and the level of disaffection with ebay is growing. Ebay’s only response has been to temporarily discount listing fees – again – the third such promotion in the past six weeks in a desperate move by ebay to arrest the steady decline in the number of listings.

----- Statement Ends ------

Media Enquiries : Mr Robert Vandermeer
Tel : XXXXXXX
Email : XXXXXXX
----------------------...

You tell your king that eBay sellers will
NOT be ruled ... and ... that they may take
our money, but they'll never take ... OUR FREEDOM

[isabeltouche]

I received an email today about no pay list for a Disney minnie mouse phone.....i couldn't get in with my password/email address. I had to go in with a new one just to get this straight. I've never ordered or sold anything on ebay. I feel your shit is bogus..and you don't protect anyone either. Apparantly someone tried to use my name and address and it wouldn't allow access to my stuff. So they won't get their stuff ...and I'm on a "list"!!! Hell. I am glad they won't get their shit!!! Serves them right!!!

[User 220016]

EBAY LISTINGS PADDING = STOCK MANIPULATION!

redwolf.newsvine.com/_...