(This month's) ebay rant

[claudiocambon]

Has anyone else noticed that, since Ebay changed its rules on feedback, buyers have become quite flaky in terms of getting in touch after the close of auction, paying, and especially leaving feedback, even when you leave it for them?

I know they wanted to change the rules to be more buyer-friendly to compete with Amazon, but I feel it is no longer the equable meeting place for buyers and sellers it was when I started on there more than 10 years ago. Between that and the fees (nd not having stuff to sell or money to buy!!), Ebay and I are soon parting.

(I think this belongs in this category, although it has a faint odor of Lounge to it.)

[John Whitley]

I can't say that I've noticed, but then I've been a buyer more than a seller lately, so perhaps I'm not a good sample. ;-)

That said, I expect that it will take some time for eBay to find the right balance for buyers. eBay has all of the data on which buyers are deadbeats, since they're the middleman for transaction closure. There's no real reason for manual seller-initiated ratings to indicate slow transaction completion. Imagine if these stats were automatically presented in a buyer's profile. Then give sellers the power to 1) set buyer rating thresholds on bidding and/or 2) let buyers reject non-conforming bidders manually.

There's also the second-chance system which picks up some of the slack here. It's worked for me both as a seller and as a buyer on several occasions.

[Ash]

I don't enjoy selling on ebay. I never have. I much prefered Yahoo Auctions when it still existed all those many years ago now.

[BarryS]

Things were definitely not equitable when sellers were blackmailing buyers with retaliatory feedback for trying to be truthful about real problems and genuine fraud. The whole feedback system had become a joke, so I think eBay took a big step in the right direction. Since eBay needs both sellers and buyers to make a profit, I don't see where they have a vested interest in one side over the other. If things get out of whack with sellers, you can be sure they'll try to do something--out of their own self-interest. To paraphrase a bit, eBay is the worst type of auction site with the exception of every other one.

[Dan Fromm]

Barry, I sort of agree with you. Sort of because although it takes two to transact, eBay transacts with sellers, not buyers. I believe, with no evidence to support the belief, that eBay management sees sellers as their customers and as the people who have to be, um, taken care of. Buyers are necessary but much less important.

Claudio, eBay is moving to become more like Amazon. That is, a site for stores who don't want to set up their own sites and try to attract buyers to them. If you want to see the future of eBay, visit ebay.co.uk or ebay.fr. Browsing for bargains in used photographic equipment is nearly impossible on both.

Cheers,

Dan

[DJGainer]

I tried to buy a 4 blade 16x20 saunders easle on eBay, and was the only one bidding. I led the auction (and was the lone bidder) up to the final 5 seconds, at which point the bid exceeded my maximum. The problem was that within 5 minutes of the auction close, I received a second chance offer from the seller. I contact the seller, who confirmed it to be legit.

Obviously, someone the seller knew or the seller himself shell bid the auction beyond my maximum bid, and then the seller offered me the item at the maximum price I was willing to pay. When I pointed this obvious fraud out to eBay, they simply said there was no evidence of shell bidding or seller misconduct. I responded, "Really? So you think that the seller contacted the buyer, received notice that the buyer would not pay, and made a second chance offer to me within all within 5 minutes? And even if that was possible, doesn't it demonstrate misconduct on the part of the deadbeat bidder?" eBay's response was that they had no evidence of either of my allegations, and that I should either accept or reject the second chance offer.

-Dave

[BarryS]

Sham bidding continues to be a major problem--I'd call it endemic. Unfortunately, the practice is a continuation of the shady practices at traditional auction houses. There's a good likelihood that any bid will be upped to near or at the maximum, so bid accordingly. Occasionally something really rare and desirable is worth going to the wall for, but everything else will roll around again.

[IanMazursky]

I am now an angry ebay seller!
Just because of the last 6 months, I have had 5 deadbeat buyers. Some took over 2 months to pay.
Ebay leaves you no real recourse but to wait. An unpaid buyers strike is useless. They dont care at all.
Opening up a case just gives them more time to wait to pay you. They can drag it out further.

The idiot reasons they give as to why they couldn't pay on time is insulting.
I had one guy basically screaming at me because i opened up a non payment case against him.
He thought that I had no reason to do it and it was all my fault. Hah! I told him i was just protecting myself.

Anyway, I always pay within 2-3 days. I never would let it lapse, no matter what is going on.
By bidding, you are entering into a contract.

Sorry for the rant but I had to get it off my chest.

[BarryS]

Ian-- you're completely right. I try to pay within 6 hours of winning an auction and wouldn't dream of waiting more than 24 hours. If you go to a store, you pay immediately, so why should people drag things out? I have some gear to sell and I guess I have to clearly state that if they don't pay within a week, I'll relist.

[Frank Petronio]

My best transactions have happened right here or on the Rangefinder Forum. People here are 99.98% ethical and reliable, so it is always my first choice.

eBay is the last choice, and more than half the time I feel like I either paid too much, or got taken advantage of, or it ended up costing me money.

[Michael Graves]

How the hell did you ever get registered at Rangefinder, Frank? I tried for an entire afternoon once....99% of the images they provided for "verification" were unreadable, and then when I could read one, it was never "correct". I sent the moderators a message telling them to hire real web designers and to $%$%# off and die.

[Frank Petronio]

Most of my writing is like Captchas anyway.... and I haven't gotten banned from RFF yet either!

[Pete Roody]

I would agree with eBay regarding your complaint. Many times there is no "foul play" involved with second chance offers. For instance, there is no way to stop someone from bidding. The seller may have said he was only willing to ship to States or that a bidder has to have some feedback to bid. Many times bidders do not read or understand that the auction has restrictions. You cannot stop a someone from bidding when done at the last second. People use bidding software so many auctions are decided in the last few seconds. All the seller can do is re-list the auction or offer a second chance bid. However, I do think you were owed an explanation with the second chance bid.

That said, I think ebay did a great disservice to buyers when they began hiding buyers identities. This makes it much more difficult to uncover "schilling."




I tried to buy a 4 blade 16x20 saunders easle on eBay, and was the only one bidding. I led the auction (and was the lone bidder) up to the final 5 seconds, at which point the bid exceeded my maximum. The problem was that within 5 minutes of the auction close, I received a second chance offer from the seller. I contact the seller, who confirmed it to be legit.

Obviously, someone the seller knew or the seller himself shell bid the auction beyond my maximum bid, and then the seller offered me the item at the maximum price I was willing to pay. When I pointed this obvious fraud out to eBay, they simply said there was no evidence of shell bidding or seller misconduct. I responded, "Really? So you think that the seller contacted the buyer, received notice that the buyer would not pay, and made a second chance offer to me within all within 5 minutes? And even if that was possible, doesn't it demonstrate misconduct on the part of the deadbeat bidder?" eBay's response was that they had no evidence of either of my allegations, and that I should either accept or reject the second chance offer.

-Dave

[ViewCameraNut]

In response to the first reply I completely agree. At lease half of my buyers have not contacted me for several days after auctions end since this new feedback rule. They also take their sweet time paying even though my policy states payment due within 7 days. I never had payment problems until now. The new rule is ridiculous. How can negative feedback be left for one party only, are you telling me that buyers are all perfect? The buyers can say whatever they want, be it true or not. There are plenty of scammers, liars and cheats who are now using this feedback rule to full advantage! You cannot get a hold of Ebay and state your case if wrongfully accused of something. I also buy my fair share of items on Ebay and I was more than happy with the old method of feedback. I have been a member of Ebay for 9 years with 100% feedback and will be cancelling my account at years end. Bad move Ebay!

[DJGainer]

I would agree with eBay regarding your complaint. Many times there is no "foul play" involved with second chance offers. For instance, there is no way to stop someone from bidding. The seller may have said he was only willing to ship to States or that a bidder has to have some feedback to bid. Many times bidders do not read or understand that the auction has restrictions. You cannot stop a someone from bidding when done at the last second. People use bidding software so many auctions are decided in the last few seconds. All the seller can do is re-list the auction or offer a second chance bid. However, I do think you were owed an explanation with the second chance bid.

That said, I think ebay did a great disservice to buyers when they began hiding buyers identities. This makes it much more difficult to uncover "schilling."

My point was twofold. Either this was the seller or his agent trying to bid up the price, or it was just some jerk who wasn't actually interested in the item (or not qualified to bid). Either way it was evident that the bid was a sham or contrary to the sellers policy, thus I was arguing that it should be disregarded.

[BradS]

eBay has changed considerably over the past ten year. It used to be fun and friendly...now it kinda draws a vacuum.

[icefan13]

I think they have to strike a balance. I haven't sold anything on eBay yet, but I've bought some things, and not been too happy with the experience.

I had one seller who never sent me the merchandise, then after she did refund me, started harrassing me and gave me bad feedback, claiming that I never returned the merchandise she never sent me. She was like a stalker.

I had another seller describe collectible pottery I was bidding on as 'mint; absolutely perfect', which I confirmed via email. But when I got the item and it wasn't anywhere near the absolutley perfect that she described, she responded by saying, 'we are all imperfect people living in an imperfect world.'

I'm guessing that experiences like that made eBay's business drop off (I know I stopped bidding), so they obviously had to do something.

It's a business built on trust really, and unfortunately, like every where else, the dishonest people ruin things for the rest of us.

[QT Luong]

As a seller, I am not too happy about ebay. I listed my Canon 1Ds2 no less than three times. Each time the winner had a different excuse not to pay. Eventually sold it on fredmiranda.com

[Wallace_Billingham]

There's also the second-chance system which picks up some of the slack here. It's worked for me both as a seller and as a buyer on several occasions.

The 2nd chance thing is bogus also. Case in point last week I was bidding on an older camera. The bidding was for $25 I placed a bid to go higher with a max bid of $40. I was then the lead bidder at $28 where I stayed until about 2 minutes before the aution ended when I was out bid. No problem not a big deal. The winning bid was $41. Then a week later I get a 2nd Chance notice that I could buy the item for $40. Why should it be $40 and not my bid of $28 which was the last legit bid on the item? This system just makes it easier to have schills, and get buyers to pay the max.

If they would cancel out the bad buyers bids and revert the price back down to the last legit bid that would get rid of the schills entirely

[BarryS]

So if buyers and sellers are equally unhappy, it must be a fair system? :)

Wallace--Absolutely right. If a high bid is invalidated for any reason, the price should revert to the second highest bid--not the maximum amount of the second highest bidder.

[Dave Brown]

I've pretty much given up on ebay, both as a buyer and a seller. Everything I've ever sold on ebay had to be re-listed at least once, due to a nonpaying bidder. And as a buyer, ebay has turned from the world's flea market to the world's garbage dump. Items that a reputable seller would list as "for parts/repair" or "ugly" are typically described as "excellent" or "like new" on ebay.

As for the "second chance offer", I received one once on an item that I had bid on but not reached the reserve. The seller offered to reduce his price to my bid amount, and it worked out well for both of us. If the offer is because the high bidder backed out, shouldn't you be able to negotiate to buy the item for your highest bid, as opposed to the deadbeat bidder's winning bid?

I was unaware that ebay had changed its feedback policy. Do I understand correctly that sellers are no longer able to leave negative feedback for bidders? If so, I can to some extent understand why; I once received "retaliatory" negative feedback from a seller, after I had left him negative feedback. In the end, it doesn't matter. My feedback is still high, and since I don't plan on ever using ebay to sell again, I wouldn't matter how low my feedback went.

[sgelb]

ebay is a crappy site with truly crappy non visionary management, interested in lining their pockets and not improving service to buyers or sellers.

the fee increase is what pisses me off the most. I think recently they raised it to 9% or so.. coupled with paypal (another poorly run overpriced service) my fees as a seller usually come out to 12% or so.. which is just outrageous compared to doing a transaction face 2 face or on a forum like this.

That said, when I need to sell something, I much prefer to do it through a forum like LF or LL and the like than the bay. I wish they would wise up ban the shell bidding and lower the fees.

[CP Goerz]

Perhaps the seller had two of the same item? I sometimes have multiples of some things and can offer a second chance right away.

[jnantz]

i haven't sold on ebay in a long time,
and tend to only buy from people i know
or have bought from before ( like dagor77 :) ).

j

[CP Goerz]

Mr Nanian that is certainly the kind of sound advice I can get behind! ;-)

[Charles Hohenstein]

Andrew, you must be gritting your teeth, now that you have to accept PayPal! :)

[CP Goerz]

Yeah, its a real bummer having to offer that nasty service but since I am forced to take it about 90% of people I sell to have used it. I of course add the paypal fees into the items shipping and refund the 'pad' if I get a MO but if paypal is used it goes towards the cost of doing business. It really adds up if you buy a magnesium 8x10 as an example ;-)

[TenOx]

The 2nd chance thing is bogus also. Case in point last week I was bidding on an older camera. The bidding was for $25 I placed a bid to go higher with a max bid of $40. I was then the lead bidder at $28 where I stayed until about 2 minutes before the aution ended when I was out bid. No problem not a big deal. The winning bid was $41. Then a week later I get a 2nd Chance notice that I could buy the item for $40. Why should it be $40 and not my bid of $28 which was the last legit bid on the item? This system just makes it easier to have schills, and get buyers to pay the max.

If they would cancel out the bad buyers bids and revert the price back down to the last legit bid that would get rid of the schills entirely

I would (and have) make an offer for the $28, and be done with it.
Just like in a market square, I feel ok making offers even if they are rejected while the seller looks down their nose.
They haven't gotten the best of you until you pay more than you think the sale is worth.

/..

[Steve M Hostetter]

My expericance has been that if your selling and you don't recieve the money right when the auction ends, you won't get it. Thats paypal only though.

People don't need time to push a button" pay now" they need time to think about what they had just done because 90% don't think before hand ... I've had my share of non-payers and second chance offers..

[eddie]

My expericance has been that if your selling and you don't recieve the money right when the auction ends, you won't get it. Thats paypal only though.

People don't need time to push a button" pay now" they need time to think about what they had just done because 90% don't think before hand ... I've had my share of non-payers and second chance offers..

i agree. i just had a guy complain for what i figure was buyers remorse.......i sold an old clock as....."parts only. repair! NOT WORKING! for parts and repair only" added 8 pictures and he complained that it was not going to "restore" well........

[claudiocambon]

My problem is that EBay's shift is a mere harbinger of things to come, all of which will make it harder for individual sellers to do well on EBay, unless they are larger concerns.

It used to be an equable meeting place for individual parties. It was easier for individuals to sell and buyers to buy, and both parties felt that it was a better deal: the seller got more money than what a camera store would pay him/her, and the buyer paid less than what he/she would pay at the camera store. EBay removed the middleman, but it risks becoming the new middleman.

I fear it will consolidate like so many other commercial experiences. One can already see the emergence of sellers gaining perceptible market share on certain products, like that tmr promotions character who sells tons of poorly described Hasselblad and Mamiya gear for too much ("Shipping to the World!" - give me a break). This I think will lead Ebay to charge even more sellers' fees, if not some sort of overall subscription fee. Why? Because they can.

The sad thing is that the only person this scenario will be better for is EBay. The consumer will be faced with a more consolidated, less competitive market, and sellers will also have to fork out more. This only leads to higher costs. Yes, individual sellers will still post, but I predict EBay will want an ever larger pound of flesh, one which only large sellers will be able to put up with.

[BarryS]

There's absolutely nothing to prevent someone else from offering a competing service. If ebay terms become too egregious, people will look for an alternative. It's hard to say ebay is being unreasonable if there isn't even a competing service. I bought a camera through an online auction from a more traditional auction house and they added a 20% "buyer's premium" on top of the final selling price. I didn't find that reasonable, but it is customary.

Ebay offers a unique premium global service to sellers and has created value out of a lot of merchandise that would otherwise be worthless--only because the buyer and seller couldn't find each other. As a buyer I'm not compelled to purchase anything I don't think is a good value. Ebay has always been the middleman, but they're finding an equilibrium that maximizes their profit without leaving an opening for competitors.

I'd *love* to see a viable competitor, but where are they? They know they won't be able to gain a foothold without significantly undercutting ebay and if they do that, they won't be profitable.

[Jim Graves]

I gotta agree with Barry on this ... ebay provides an incredible world-wide market delivered to your desktop. Like any service, they get paid.

Regular auction houses have auctions maybe as often as once a week (usually far less often) ... with a fraction of the items available and you're required to travel to their location. They routinely "sell to the wall," have unannounced reserves, withdraw items for no reason, allow pre-auction sales contracts (unannounced to other bidders), have no buyer protection at all, have no information available on the consigner's history, and they charge 10-20% on each sale.

Doesn't anybody remember what it was like to try to find a scarce item before ebay appeared? Now you cannot only find it ... you can find 3 of them ... and, you can research what the last completed auctions brought. And, the price will be set by the market place. Or, if you can't find the scarce item today ... they'll email you when one does show up.

[claudiocambon]

I gotta agree with Barry on this ... ebay provides an incredible world-wide market delivered to your desktop. Like any service, they get paid.

Regular auction houses have auctions maybe as often as once a week (usually far less often) ... with a fraction of the items available and you're required to travel to their location. They routinely "sell to the wall," have unannounced reserves, withdraw items for no reason, allow pre-auction sales contracts (unannounced to other bidders), have no buyer protection at all, have no information available on the consigner's history, and they charge 10-20% on each sale.

Doesn't anybody remember what it was like to try to find a scarce item before ebay appeared? Now you cannot only find it ... you can find 3 of them ... and, you can research what the last completed auctions brought. And, the price will be set by the market place. Or, if you can't find the scarce item today ... they'll email you when one does show up.

It's not that I, or anyone else criticizing Ebay don't like it. Far from it, for all of the reasons you and Barry list; I've been a happy member for over 10 years. The issue is, what is EBay becoming? There is a difference between appreciating the concept, and regretting/"fearing" what it is turning into, yet another middleman who charges what they do simply because they can, and, in so doing, risks erasing many, if not most of the benefits it once provided. When the swap meet turns into just another expensive mall, the fun, and perhaps also the advantage are gone.

[Jim Graves]

I don't disagree with you at all ... the level of concern is a measure of how important to all of us ebay has become.

ebay is a relatively new business ... they have created an extremely efficient method of bringing seller and buyer together, creating a secure auction system that has benefited us all. They are still evolving. Every change they make will have ripples and create comment/criticism. Nothing wrong with that. I just think those who criticize should be aware of what they really have ... and what the alternatives are. The marketplace will decide what their share should be ... not ebay. If they overreach someone else will take their business.

Should they be exempt from criticism ... of course not ... but, hey, let's keep it all in perspective.

[DJGainer]

It's not that I, or anyone else criticizing Ebay don't like it. Far from it, for all of the reasons you and Barry list; I've been a happy member for over 10 years. The issue is, what is EBay becoming? There is a difference between appreciating the concept, and regretting/"fearing" what it is turning into, yet another middleman who charges what they do simply because they can, and, in so doing, risks erasing many, if not most of the benefits it once provided. When the swap meet turns into just another expensive mall, the fun, and perhaps also the advantage are gone.

It should stabalize in time. It has rising costs with spreading popularity, but if enough people start to shy away from it due to the increased transaction cost the costs must drop eventually, mainly due to a decrease in personnel.

Just my humble opinion, I could be wrong.

[Frank Petronio]

FWIW, during the holidays it really is a buyer's market on eBay. Pity the poor fool who has an auction ending on Christmas Eve when most of the world is out with family and not bidding things up.

I never got my Live.com rebate, "technical error" they called it and the response team has been hard at work -- no doubt 24-7 -- for eight weeks now trying to solve it ;-)

I've talked to several long-time sellers who are bailing. It is much easier to open your own e-commerce site these days, the cost of entry is next to nothing, so for sellers who do a couple of hundred items per year that makes sense. For horse-traders like most of us here, why not just use the niche forums like the one here? You can offer a lower price and still make about the same money so it's all good.

[claudiocambon]

The marketplace will decide what their share should be ... not ebay.

I would like to think so, but what if EBay in essence IS the marketplace for being the 800 lb. gorilla, ie so large that it can dictate what it wants to do. Look at how badly Getty treats its photographers. Recently they more or less forced a form of royalty-free on all their photographers, and, although a band of 80 or so of them are suing them, they will probably get away with it, simply because they can. Photographers will still make more money through Getty than by going elsewhere, and Getty knows that, and uses it as leverage against its photographers.


if enough people start to shy away from it due to the increased transaction cost the costs must drop eventually, mainly due to a decrease in personnel.

Or costs for sellers go up when shareholders ask the company to "unlock more value" by charging more, and everyone grumbles, but in the end puts up with it, because it is the best, or only game in town. They would do it because they could.

In other words I don't believe market forces balance things out in a nice and equable manner when various market players become so huge that they influence, if not control the market.

Yes, we have bigger things to worry about in life in terms of corporate control, but this is an interesting, if at times frustrating example of how a company changes.

[cblurton]

I feel your frustration, but on the other hand the old system had a chilling effect on buyer feedback. Many people, myself included, did not give honest feedback. And let's face it, in the "real" market place nobody rates buyers, only the sellers. When is the last time you walked into a Walmart and the salespeople knew anything about your buying behavior? But as a buyer, if you care to know, you can know a great deal more about Walmart or any other store as a seller then is available online about eBay sellers.

I've only bought 80 items on eBay, and I've got 100% positive feedback. But the only reason I have 100% positive feedback is because I wasn't willing to risk a retaliatory response from a seller when what they sold me wasn't as advertized. I worked out the problems outside of the feedback system through email with the seller. In a handful of cases I simply had to swallow the problem and move on. Now, because of the changes, I do have the ability to effect a seller who isn't honest in their transactions. It isn't much, but at least I can do something without worrying about my reputation as a buyer being unfairly damaged.

On the other hand, eBay IS less than responsive to seller or buyer's complaints. In one transaction, after buying and paying for a camera and leaving positive feedback for the seller, the seller left this comment, "Buyer did not pay. Avoid!" I contacted the seller to ask what was going on, and his response was he'd meant that for a different buyer and had made a mistake. I contacted eBay about this, and the only solution was to withdraw both of our comments which showed up in my online record as withdrawn, which could be misinterpreted by others. Not an optimum solution.

Anyway, as someone who lives overseas and have very limited access to the things I want to purchase, eBay is a necessary evil. It sure beats the alternative of flying around trying to find stores that sell what I need.



In response to the first reply I completely agree. At lease half of my buyers have not contacted me for several days after auctions end since this new feedback rule. They also take their sweet time paying even though my policy states payment due within 7 days. I never had payment problems until now. The new rule is ridiculous. How can negative feedback be left for one party only, are you telling me that buyers are all perfect? The buyers can say whatever they want, be it true or not. There are plenty of scammers, liars and cheats who are now using this feedback rule to full advantage! You cannot get a hold of Ebay and state your case if wrongfully accused of something. I also buy my fair share of items on Ebay and I was more than happy with the old method of feedback. I have been a member of Ebay for 9 years with 100% feedback and will be cancelling my account at years end. Bad move Ebay!

[cblurton]

I've talked to several long-time sellers who are bailing. It is much easier to open your own e-commerce site these days, the cost of entry is next to nothing, so for sellers who do a couple of hundred items per year that makes sense. For horse-traders like most of us here, why not just use the niche forums like the one here? You can offer a lower price and still make about the same money so it's all good.

Frank, I understand what you are saying and truly wish this could be a competitive solution but the problem with the suggested approach, as I see it, is the number of eyeballs on products. Ebay has an enormous global audience (see "eBay Growth - Last 6 Years" at http://www.webanalyticsworld.net/2008/01/ebay-performance-increase-6-years.html) who are spending more and more on eBay ("revenue per visitor has steadily increased as well").

Opening an e-commerce site to sell goods is possible, but the likelihood of such a site drawing in buyers in large numbers is very low (there is an entire industry that feeds on website owners who want to make their sites more "visible"). Using this forum to sell items faces the same "exposure" problems. Not that many people, relatively speaking, will learn about the product who might want to buy it and the odds of a seller selling it at the price he or she wants in a timely fashion are probably proportionally less.

In my opinion, as others have already said, what might work would be an alternate online auction site dedicated solely to photographers and photography, a sort of "Ansel's List" if you will. But this is unlikely to happen because the costs of setting it up would be significant and the odds of it successfully competing with eBay pretty small. But, who knows - perhaps there is some young, entrepreneurial photographer out here with enough resources and gumption to give it a go.

Best wishes,

Craig

[starrlara]

Hello,
Yes, I've noticed Ebay has changed. I've been selling on Ebay nearly since the beginning, since 1999. Just a year ago, anything I put on sold, no matter the price, no matter the item. Now, no matter what I try, 99 cent auctions, no reserve auctions, low buy now auctions, or free shipping, the fish just aren't biting. I do
believe it's got to be the economy. I could even give it away, and it wouldn't sell. LOL.

Of course, I do sell vintage things that aren't truly a necessity.

I sold a 1963 cookbook at Christmas time for $210.00. Was it worth it, no. Now,
the same book is going for $10.00. Ebay is fluid and always changing as to what sells when and for how much. It's a daily research game. I've also noticed that some buyers seem to believe if it's a low bid of .99 cents, then it's not worth as much as some other seller's same item in which the seller has a beginning bid of $100.00. It's the psychology of it, and that too is constantly changing.

It's not just me. I'm watching other sellers items, and they aren't selling either.

The new feedback system is horrible too. I say it's time for some competition with another on line auction house as big as Ebay, because Ebay's fees are way too high, and the feedback system allows buyers to take 7 days to pay, and not respond to emails, and then refuse to leave any feedback. I always leave positive feedback for my buyers as soon as I receive payment. It's not right what Ebay has done to us sellers anymore.

Anyone want to start a new on line auction house?
Comments greatly appreciated.

[starrlara]

I totally agree. As a buyer and seller, I have 100% positive feedback of over 730.
I do not like Ebay's new system that favors only the buyer. Granted, the old system held the buyer hostage until they left good feedback, but I never did that to my buyers. If they pay right away, I leave feedback the day they pay, and I hope they return the favor for me as a seller. I also didn't leave negative feedback to sellers easily, and only did so 3 times in 10 years. I always try to work things out whether I'm a buyer or seller.

Someone here mentioned that Walmart doesn't know anything about a buyer, so why should Ebay. Walmart is a pay up front place. It's not an auction house. We sellers suffer fees anyway when buyers don't pay or are slow to pay, and our time is worth something. Why can buyers take 7 days to pay, but sellers who ship right away risk negative feedback at the whim of a buyer. Buyers no longer have much of an incentive to leave positive feedback, except just for pure kindness, and not too many are into that like I am. LOL.

[Patrick Dixon]

Fixing the feedback system was a simple matter of eBay escrowing the feedback until either both parties had left it or after a cutoff period.

Much better then either the previous or present system.

[Aahx]

As a pure ebay buyer myself I only leave feedback after I recieve the item and inspect it. And only on two occasions did I not leave feedback, and that was when the items I recieved were questionable on the quality vs described. On the other hand.. as a buyer... that usualy pays within the hour of bidding, I have only recieved feedback from sellers about 1/5th of the time in the last year. Where before that on the previous system I recieved it more frequently (about 2/3).

[walter23]

I had an annoying experience buying from a seller named "cupog" (lots of you have probably run across his store). Guy originally sent to a three years outdated address because his in-house database pulled it up and associated it with my ebay account automatically. I paid for the thing on around Feb 8th and it's still not here (had to sit in a post office in my old city for a month, then get returned to him, etc). Now I've lost the ability to leave feedback or enjoy paypal buyer protection, grr. It'll probably be in crummy shape too with my luck.

Anyway I'll consider this my negative feedback for him since I can no longer leave it on ebay.

[Brian Ellis]

The 2nd chance thing is bogus also. Case in point last week I was bidding on an older camera. The bidding was for $25 I placed a bid to go higher with a max bid of $40. I was then the lead bidder at $28 where I stayed until about 2 minutes before the aution ended when I was out bid. No problem not a big deal. The winning bid was $41. Then a week later I get a 2nd Chance notice that I could buy the item for $40. Why should it be $40 and not my bid of $28 which was the last legit bid on the item? This system just makes it easier to have schills, and get buyers to pay the max.

If they would cancel out the bad buyers bids and revert the price back down to the last legit bid that would get rid of the schills entirely

I'm assuming you used a proxy bid. If so, the last "legit" bid wasn't your $28, it was your $40. The seller could see how the bidding went and so offered to sell it to you for $40, your highest bid. Why would you expect him or her to sell it to you for $28 when you had bid $40?

I'm sure that like everything else on ebay there are fraudulent schemes involving the 2nd chance system but I wouldn't call it bogus. I've used it a couple times both as a buyer and a seller and it's worked fine each time.

[BarryS]

The flaw in the second chance system is sham or invalid bidding because the bid flushes out the maximum bid of the real high bidder. If the high bid is a sham or later invalidated, it should not have raised the bid of the eventual winning bidder. Only a legitimate bid should raise the bid of a competing bidder. Of course, the buyer can just say no to the second chance offer.

[eddie]

what barry said. the 2nd place winner ( i say winner as he won cause he did not have to pay anything) should get a 2nd chance for what his bit was before the 1st bider pushed him up.

sounds like a shill for sure

[walter23]

I had an annoying experience buying from a seller named "cupog" (lots of you have probably run across his store). Guy originally sent to a three years outdated address because his in-house database pulled it up and associated it with my ebay account automatically. I paid for the thing on around Feb 8th and it's still not here (had to sit in a post office in my old city for a month, then get returned to him, etc). Now I've lost the ability to leave feedback or enjoy paypal buyer protection, grr. It'll probably be in crummy shape too with my luck.

Anyway I'll consider this my negative feedback for him since I can no longer leave it on ebay.

Just to clear this guy's name a bit, while I was really annoyed that he sent it to an outdated address, I got the package (finally) today and it was in great shape. So I'm going to rescind my scathing comment and just chalk it up to an honest mistake.