Re-listing fees

[robbtyke132010]

Can someone please explain to me why the seller has to pay the relisting fees if a buyer cancels or fails to pay for an item. Thankyou.

[keepsakesandkollectables]

I would like to know that as well.

I have had 3 cancelled sales in the last 2 weeks.

May not sound like a lot in all honesty as it amounts to  3x36p = £1.08.

However if that continued over the course of a year at the same rate that's a total of £28.08.

Now again that may not sound like a great amount, but if you are selling low value items, where in many cases the "Profit" made is around £3.00 per item, it means that over the course of a year approx 10 items sold make nothing at all & end up costing a seller money.

I am sure there used to be a thing in place that if an item was relisted ( As did not sell the 1st time around ) the listing fees were credited back on the future sale, but that looks like it has changed & no longer exists ( I could be wrong ).

But I see no reason wht a seller should have to pay an additional listing fee for an item when the buyer cancels, through no fault of the seller.

Perhaps in such cases if ebay desperately need this revenue, they should charge the buyer & not the seller?

I get that some will argue, its almost the same as a change of mind reason & far better to cancel prior to an item being posted & incurring those costs as well as time & effort.

The simple way around it, would for ebay to allow say a set amount of say 52 ( I per week )  "Free" listings to sellers, or 1 free listing for ever 50 items listed, especially business sellers who don't get the benefits of free listings that Private sellers do ( At least I think thyey still do ).

[papso22]

The reason why they have to pay again to list is simply because ebay don't have a system to credit them, as they do with final value fees.  Ebay states that 'listing fees are not refundable' and that's that.

Now as to why ebay has gone down this route, that's another question and anybody's guess. 

[vinylscot]

eBay did its bit - it gave your item exposure, and helped to arrange a sale. It's not eBay's fault that your "buyer" didn't pay.

By asking to re-list an item, you are asking eBay to do more work (albeit all automated).

It would be nice if they didn't charge in these circumstances, but I think it's quite clear they are entitled to do so.

[myriad*seller]

If you placed a card in a shop window and paid your £1 a week and a buyer messed you around, would you ask the shop to reimburse your fees? 

No.

The same applies here. eBay advertised your product, they provided the service you paid for.

[keepsakesandkollectables]

eBay did its bit - it gave your item exposure, and helped to arrange a sale. It's not eBay's fault that your "buyer" didn't pay.

By asking to re-list an item, you are asking eBay to do more work (albeit all automated).

It would be nice if they didn't charge in these circumstances, but I think it's quite clear they are entitled to do so.

I was not it is saying it's ebays fault, for the error of a potential buyer & yes it did indeed give the item exposure.

However therein is part of the problem, when a buyer cancels.

Lets just say you list an item on a B.I.N / B.O.

It may take a week or so to build up potential buyers, who may want the item, but for some reason are waiting to make an offer or buy it outright ( Maybe waiting for payday etc ).

So it's been on say 15 days, built up 20 watchers / potential buyers under that example.

The item then sells, but the buyer cancels.

So you have to relist ( And pay again ), but you also more importantly lose those potential buyers, who will possibly go elsewhere, or even if you relist, may think it's a scam as they can only see the original listing sold & now you are listing another ( Even though it's the same item ) & in some cases then not bother.

Why can't ebay if a sale is cancellled offer the seller the option to ( Not relist ) but continue the original listing with the time that is left on it to run, with all the potential buyers still able to see the item on their watchlists?

That would seem the logical & fair thing to do.

As to your comment "Entitled to do so" , we all know about the downfalls of self entitlement, don't we.

[keepsakesandkollectables]

Ahhhh those were the days ........ Placing a card in a shop window........Brings back a few happy memories.

Still see it about in some places, but nowhere near what it was back in the day.

[robbtyke132010]

I would ask the newsagent for a free week.

As for eBay doing their bit - I have also done my "bit" but was penalised. Not a level playing field.

[superchallenge]

---

As for eBay doing their bit - I have also done my "bit" but was penalised. Not a level playing field.

---

And where's everybody else's level playing field if you were to get a free listing for your item? It wouldn't be my fault that your buyer messed you around, but yet if I was to list my item at the same time as you relist your item, I would be charged whilst you wouldn't - for the exact same service.

They can't really win either way, to be honest.

The only solution would be if they either a) made all listings free for everyone (which would be a nightmare) or b) somehow automatically charged the buyer that messed you around (which would be an equal-sized nightmare.)

[robbtyke132010]

How can it be a "free" listing? I have paid once already - now if I sell the item then I have paid double fees. I am sure you would squeak if you had to pay twice!

[papso22]

Everyone 'pays twice', only you are 'squeaking'.

[superchallenge]

Because you're paying for exactly that - the listing. It's called an insertion fee. It's not a completed sale fee. That's what final value fees are for.

Imagine you and I each pay to list an item on the same day. Both are listed for a week and both sell on the same day. Your buyer doesn't pay. Mine does.

I now want to list a second item. I have to pay. You want to list your item again - which uses the exact same amount of resources and takes up the same amount of space as my new listing - but you think you should get that for free because you're relisting.

Why?

And no, I wouldn't "squeak" if I had to pay the insertion fee twice. I'd just consider the extra 30p (or however much it is) to be another business expense and carry on.