How we’ve acted on your feedback in 2023 & what’s in store for 2024

[vintagewatchpart]

Just finished watching the video, will keep this fairly simple, I am sure many of you will have comments...

At around 1 Minute:

"my management team and I are already looking at what we can do in 2024 to remove more barriers, advocate for your interests and give you access to more information to help you keep growing"

I've got a great idea, you don't need a management team at all. Just read these message boards.

Stop putting up barriers in the first place then perhaps there would be none to remove?

You are just so out of touch with what everyone things, says and feels it is unbelievable. Look at the YouTube comments on the video after a few minutes.  

If you really care EBay, then reply and engage properly with some of the comments and evidence based issue reporting people are leaving on here.

[ojewellery]

That is where there is a feedback loop missing.  Somewhere that simple logical quick changes could make selling easier.  No big cost implication.  Its like the frustrating examples PGKicks gave earlier in thread - some simple fixes could really improve process flow and reduce eBay and seller overhead.

It's how a system could work thats not abused by people and filled up by requests of every random thought of eBay could....

I had hoped that the Wednesday chats could be a bit more constructive in this area but they appear to have become very cut and paste, as so many people say.  I have ocassionally been on, but felt patronised by responses.  Its not worth my time to go this route.  But it'd be a shame to see them go, as some issues (particularly it appears customer service transactional type simple fix ones) are resolved.  Its almost as though business seller issues need their own chat.  

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@thebeautician wrote:

I'm not sure why you think it would have been foolish to say that; it depends on the audience and the words you use to say it.

---

I agree completely. That was why I wanted to read eBay's context.

I know Pareto's law - I constantly use it to re-invent my business and increase my profitability.

And my old job was equity analyst - analysing companies, attending capital market days and reading shareholder info and accounts etc

But my point is EBAY (as opposed to most corporates) shouldn't be 'focusing on the 20% of sellers that bring in 80% of its revenues' because the big boys probably don't contribute much to ebay's USP in comparison to the tiny sellers; each of which, true, is very expendable on a stand-alone-basis, but en masse all of the tiny sellers are ESSENTIAL to eBay's USP (and the  ONLY thing which it has vs Amazon, Etsy, Vinted etc etc etc which is why Ebay shouldn't apply Pareto)  and something I have always been very certain that ebay understood. Hence my surprise, shock and, yes,  disbelief.

I suspect you have mixed ebay up with a different corporate - but if you could find the quote I would be eternally grateful - it would give me full warning that ebay HAS finally lost the plot and its raison d'etre. 

[thebeautician]

What part are you struggling with? 

The distribution is in the first link.

The main sellers' focus is explained in the main speech and the Q&A (second link).

If you read Business Insider, or some other site which ends with "bytes" (which I am not allowed to put on here) or stock market articles, you must have seen this before, which makes sense if you actually "analysed" companies, whatever that means to you. 

Cheers.

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@thebeautician wrote:

What part are you struggling with? 

The distribution is in the first link.

The main sellers' focus is explained in the main speech and the Q&A (second link).

If you read Business Insider, or some other site which ends with "bytes" (which I am not allowed to put on here) or stock market articles, you must have seen this before, which makes sense if you actually "analysed" companies, whatever that means to you. 

Cheers.

---

Sorry I couldn't see the 20/80 bit... I was rushing... I'm in the North and have had no electricity all day so catching up on all things online. I will look again when I have time.

I don't understand your attitude to me. 

Whilst you have attacked me on these boards many times (and me personally, not my business), I can assure you I have NEVER reported you (or anyone else for that matter). Despite being reported myself. It isn't my style. Surely it is pretty clear, if I have something to say, I say it. 

And besides, I prefer people to hang themselves by their own words.

[theelench]

I don't know much more than the basics about Pareto's Principle but I've always struggled to understand how it can be applied to ebays model of "you can find anything on ebay" and hosting the myriad tiny sellers that model requires.  

Returning to your request for the context.  I can't swear to this but definitely remember something along the lines mentioned by @thebeautician back when targeting certain Collectables categories (such as high-end Sneakers, Handbags and Sports Cards) was first announced by the CEO.   Along with a hoped for reduction of "low value buyers" in favour of "high value buyers" who (allegedly) would return multiple times a year to buy $1000 sneakers etc. 

If  I remember rightly, the CEO announced what a wonderful opportunity it was and the CFO's developed this by using Pareto(ish) numbers.

If you remember which year that announcement was made the un-nameable blog has a year-by-year archive which will contain items about it.

I have to disagree with your certainty that ebay understands why it shouldn't apply Paretto's.  In some ways I think it does (e.g lower fees, free listings) to encourage them to stay.  But amid the rush to make the site attractive to businesses, IMO, it has more or less entirely lost sight of how unpleasant and difficult ebay is now to so many non-business sellers and why they are leaving in such numbers.

[exponential_developments]

By default ebay is putting its eggs in fewer baskets, you would think the loss of Argos etc would be the moral to that story.

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@thebeautician wrote:

Although you can't get this distribution data from eBay, it can be estimated by the feedback.

If you want to understand a bit more of what's going on you have to listen to what eBay says to its shareholders and know how to read the information. Most of what is happening now it's partly a result of the shift announced years ago. Despite not everything going as planned and more recent changes, at least they were successful in one of their goals: they successfully managed to make money from selling advertising solutions to sellers (PLs). But if you look closer at their remarks, they will give visibility to items that are in high demand (promoted or not). I suspect this is the reason why promoting only gives you a limited boost and explains the weird selling patterns, but I'm only guessing. Naturally, larger sellers (the 20%) already plan their businesses to sell items in high demand. The small business seller who buys stock and waits for it to sell over the years is now more vulnerable than never because if their items are not in the "high demand" categories or are not favored by the algorithm for some reason(s), they will lack visibility and may see their sales drop very quickly and have their business at risk (hence the important of not making your business rely solely on eBay).

---

Having concerns that ebay truly had lost its USP focus, I bothered - at the end of a long day - to take a look. These details are from 2016-2018. And 2016 just a few figures taken without context.  Crisis over. I'll sleep soundly.

[btr.style]

A tough economic climate and yet not a single fee promo for business sellers since around October last year (25% off fvf). Whereas they are handing it on a plate every 2 weeks with 80% off fees to business sellers using private accounts. You can be sure with huge certainly that when they run this promo, the majority of fees they lose out on via the discount is from these type of sellers and not genuine private sellers who probably have way less to list anyway. Here's a thought, why don't they lower the promo %, or at the very least get their staff in order to make private account business sellers have business accounts instead of carrying on with things as they are and punishing business sellers with selling/shop fee increases. 

On the contrary to supporting businesses, they've put me off business altogether. Paying £1000's a month to eBay puts a downer on the whole thing, especially when they don't act on so many breaches by private business sellers (not just taking advantage of the fee promo but doing loads of dupe listings as qty can only be 1 to qualify for the promo). I don't enjoy it anymore because of eBay's take take take with fees when we do all the hard work and get no promos at all. Wouldn't that have been nice? A fee promo before Christmas so us business sellers could get a bit more in the bank to treat the staff, support a charity or even have an extra Christmas treat for all the hard work we do. No chance but those breaching the rules had their usual promo every 2 weeks. 

I've even reverted back to packlink for the time being for the 30% off postage to gain that little bit more from our sales.

[thebeautician]

(Fed up with being reported now for no reason...)

Anyway, just to summarize:

 - It is worth taking time to read what eBays say to the shareholders, you learn more in one hour than in all the communications directed to sellers. 

 - If it's easier, you can easily reach the same conclusion by noticing that promotions launched on the top of the page only include a tiny % of "selected sellers", usually large businesses/sellers. Sellers are not treated equally in this sense, and visibility is directed primarily to these big businesses.

 - The vast majority of the small businesses are secondary, they get visibility (with or without paying promotions) if their items are in high demand and this visibility also varies to suit certain periods of the year (and according to other factors that we probably don't know).

So, the conclusion I take from all this is that individually none of us matter and they don't care if we lose our businesses. BUT collectively, if smaller sellers can organise, they can have their voices heard, so DO speak out. Also, they should not be bullied when they express their frustration on these boards or anywhere else.

I will also point out that nowadays buyers are more sensitive to ethical business practices than ever before. I think the public should be aware of how small business sellers are being treated, how they are struggling, some working 7 days a week to end up with their businesses ruined. Not because they are not managing their business well, but because they sell on a platform that is taking advantage of a position of power to manipulate the market's natural rules. If it's understandable that they want to make money for the shareholders, the means you are using to achieve it matters.

Another issue (if I'm not mistaken the EU is taking a look at this), is that the buyer's rights should include free access to all information available, therefore they should be able to see all the items listed when they change search settings. Personalization algorithms are causing really serious problems in other areas (such as mental health) and are shaping buyers' habits. I would welcome the rise of public awareness on how platforms treat buyers and sellers and  I hope legislation comes sooner rather than later.

Pay for play if you want, but you're not playing, you're being played. 

[bravergrace]

---

@ojewellery wrote:

I had hoped that the Wednesday chats could be a bit more constructive in this area but they appear to have become very cut and paste, as so many people say.  I have ocassionally been on, but felt patronised by responses. 

---

Have you noticed that although most of the answers in the Wednesday chats are cut-and-paste, eBay staff strenuously object to being asked cut-and-paste questions?  

[ojewellery]

It does feel a bit them and us - I try to understand their slightly militant stance as being defensive on their/ eBays part, but I don't think the frustration that comes out in many ways not all pleasant is respected for what it is.  They (eBay staff) get to go home and get paid regardless of number of problems solved on weekly chat, where as we see lightening bank balances and challenges of what when to reorder when the platform has one of its little tweeks that turns our business' into termoil.  Creating more frustration/ stress/ aggression and higher barriers build between two sides.  Stressed people are less able to be dynamic, diversify, find the energy and resource to change.  I think we've seen quite a few very long term sellers recently who come across as burnt out.  Not got the energy to reinvent themselves.

It almost sounds like @thebeautician you're thinking of unionising platform sellers.  I smiled at the idea, and do believe in solidarity but I'm not a big fan of unions.

I think ebays filter that enables 'view all' would get round the proposed legislation.  They may have to have it opt into what eBay wants to show you as a select view but I don't think it'd go the way I think you're saying.   The investigation has been based much more around the Amazon buy box.  Monopolies and mergers looking at unfair advantage given to using prime fulfilment, unfair advantage to Amazon shopping as it has access to a large market share of data that is commercially sensitive.  It should be owned by the smaller organisations who have created the market within the marketplace, not be available for Amazon to take the buy box with their own sales on the same seller created listing.  But the buy box changes introduced in EU haven't all been rolled out to Amazon UK so I think we'll have to wait and see how legislation rolls out here.

If you are interested in writing to people monopolies and mergers are interesting.  Kevin Hollinrake,  Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Business and Trade, also appears to be taking an interest in these areas so would be a good person to email with constructive thoughts.  But many of these people may never have been on the selling platforms as a buyer or seller so you need to give a very basic overview of the complete scenario, assume they know nothing and you've got a better chance of being heard.

[pg_kicks]

This is the biggest annoyance for me, I sent a list of 25 accounts (I have a lot more) who are selling either fake items or businesses on private accounts, not even the ones who are borderline hobbies selling stamps, but selling clothing or footwear all brand new in different sizes, this list was sent to the CEO so it was passed to executive escalations, a week later and not a single account had been stopped from listing or removed. All I got was a thank you your list has been passed to the relevant team but we can not talk about single accounts, so basically we dont care if they are breaking our policies and the law.

It makes me think whats the point of having a business account? I could start a new private account and just sell without accepting returns and using the promos, I could even get 4 or 5 accounts take out different Internet contracts so they all have a different IP address (like eBay would care) and keep every one under the VAT level as thats the only time they actually act on it.

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@pg_kicks wrote:

It makes me think whats the point of having a business account? I could start a new private account and just sell without accepting returns and using the promos, I could even get 4 or 5 accounts take out different Internet contracts so they all have a different IP address (like eBay would care) and keep every one under the VAT level as thats the only time they actually act on it.

---

Please don't think I'm not with you here - I am - I totally agree the apparent disparity between being a business and private seller is maddening. And, in my category, since COVID/end of furlough/cost of living crisis, the amount of 'private sellers' having 500+ items is ridiculous. And yes, I know this is small fry compared to the serious private-really-business sellers, but it is the volume of these sellers in Preloved that gets me. Sometimes it feels like a tenth of the population is making a march on my market because clothing is so accessible.

Having said - I'm not sure it is quite as uneven as we suspect. I know a couple of these types and they tell me they can't sell anything without ludicrous PL fees. In addition, I have great faith in ebay's ability to wring fees out of everyone. Why would ebay let a private seller make the sale, if a business seller had the same item and would pay more in fees? That isn't the ebay we know (and love, I mean loathe). 

I wouldn't be surprised if ebay looks at FVFs as a whole (FVF + PL) eg: a business seller with 11% FVF + 2% PL scores the same in visibility (on the fee stakes)  as a private seller with 2% FVF (80% off) and 11% PL. 

I don't know this. And I would still prefer a more transparent model. However, I get some reassurance from my faith in ebay's ability to keep its eyes on the fee income. 

Another bit of good news is that these private sellers are all going to be run down by HMRC in Spring of course. I suspect a good few of them don't pay tax. As soon as they have to pay tax, a fair few might throw in the towel - or else put up their prices to cover tax - and then they lose competitive edge. Fingers crossed anyway.

[sheba-knows-best]

I also wanted to say - I think the fact that ebay hasn't publically evened-up the private/business seller divide is a sign of not wanting to alienate its army of private sellers - many of whom do provide a huge variety of items.

The fact is - when pepole get their 80% off FVF offers - they think they have a deal - even if ebay is getting it out of them via PL instead. It makes then think they can afford PL. (Just like every other sale where people think they have a deal, but actually the item was deliberately overpriced in the first place)

Just food for thought and a bit of hopeful thinking

[the_book_seekers]

With regards to the 20/80% thing. I can remember reading an article in 2021/22 (too much time in lockdown) in which top management discussed the loss of low value buyers, saying the company was concentrating on the 20% of high value buyers (defined at the time as six purchases a year or spending $800) who were responsible for 75% of sales. ebay was being criticized for failing to make efforts to keep buyer numbers up. At the time I thought ebay's attitude towards low value buyers was a mistake - the site needed/needs as many buyers as it can muster. 

[pg_kicks]

I dont for a second think eBay arent pushing the PL onto them, but just a business v private account if only 20% of your sales were coming during the promo time its still 80% of 20% in your pocket over eBay, add in the 7% returns rate I have which would drop to 1 or 2%, all small(ish) figures but the small figures soon add up.

I'll nto hold my breathe for the HMRC, I cant really see them making much of a dent in the accounts on here, but even if i resorted to breaking eBay policy I'd still pay VAT but I could just have multiple accounts as we all know there are many of those already operating on eBay. Breaking the law is a no go but breaking eBay policy doesnt seem to have many downfalls as my research (I will happily share with any ebay team member at their request) proves.

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@pg_kicks wrote:

I dont for a second think eBay arent pushing the PL onto them, but just a business v private account if only 20% of your sales were coming during the promo time its still 80% of 20% in your pocket over eBay, add in the 7% returns rate I have which would drop to 1 or 2%, all small(ish) figures but the small figures soon add up.

---

I'm not sure you understood what I meant... the 80% off FVF does not apply to PL. So I suspect a lot of private sellers end up paying 15%+ on their sales. They think they have a deal because of the 80% off FVF offer so up their PL % which is NOT discounted. Or maybe you understood what I meant...

Regarding returns... mine is at 12%, yeah a pain in the bum - but again, I wonder if private sellers take a lot of SNADS and also get low visibility because of no returns.

I dunno. I agree I would like more transparency, but I suspect ebay is more 'on it' than we know. I guess, with situations like this, I think "why would ebay keep irritating its small businesses with this disparity?". Despite what people think on these boards. EBay isn't an idiot. It is a survivor in a super competitive market place. It must have its reasons. I suspect: 1) it is charging the private sellers via PL even though they think they are getting 80% off deals, 2) it knows when they sell here they buy here too, driving sales for all of us, 3) they are the providers of oddities that keep bringing new buyers to ebay (and some of them to us)

I rarely - in business - 'waste' my energy fighting what I can't change. I just have to hope ebay has its reasons.

Fingers crossed. Pretty please. Touch wood and whistle a merry tune.

[pg_kicks]

Yeah I understood what you meant but I already use PL so if I was to use a private account I'd just use the same PL, the cost would be the same, its not like I'd be any worse off on a private account using PL over a business one. Its not like the old days when offering returns, good customer service and fast shipping got you higher up the listing, its all down to PL now.

From the sellers I have on my lengthy list over 50% have 100% feedback, you'd think if they were getting SNADS they would also be getting negs to match.

I know I should just give up the fight but if we just let eBay get away with it then nothing will change, at least if I carry on with my (pretty pointless) emailing and complaining something might change, its only a daft 15 minutes a day I spend on it, would just be wasted doing something else equally as worthless. 

[bravergrace]

---

@sheba-knows-best wrote:

---

---

I dunno. I agree I would like more transparency, but I suspect ebay is more 'on it' than we know. I guess, with situations like this, I think "why would ebay keep irritating its small businesses with this disparity?". Despite what people think on these boards. EBay isn't an idiot. It is a survivor in a super competitive market place. It must have its reasons. I suspect: 1) it is charging the private sellers via PL even though they think they are getting 80% off deals, 2) it knows when they sell here they buy here too, driving sales for all of us, 3) they are the providers of oddities that keep bringing new buyers to ebay (and some of them to us)

I rarely - in business - 'waste' my energy fighting what I can't change. I just have to hope ebay has its reasons.

---

Your attitude to businesses trading illegally as private sellers is sensible and admirable.  

But I find it hard to be as sanguine as you.

Just out of interest, do you think you'd feel the same if you had an actual shop in an actual shopping centre, and the shopping centre management allowed one of your competitors to rent the unit next to yours, and helpfully put notices in the window saying:

FROM THE SHOPPING CENTRE MANAGEMENT: this shop isn't a shop.  It's just Joe and Madge selling off their own old brand new coats, all 17000 of them.  You don't have any consumer rights, because it isn't a shop and they aren't running a business.   You'll be pleased to know we give them free rent, because we like to support people clearing out their wardrobes.  And they obviously don't need to pay tax either because it's just their own old coats.

We all know that a shop that puts up a sign saying consumer rights don't apply because they've self-identified as not a business, would be breaking the law, and would be prosecuted.  That's why I regard it as adding insult to injury when eBay tells consumers that they have no consumer rights if they're dealing with an unregistered business.  Perhaps they should put a little effort into identifying obvious businesses and encouraging them to comply with the law.

[sheba-knows-best]

---

@bravergrace wrote:

---

@sheba-knows-best wrote:

---

---

I dunno. I agree I would like more transparency, but I suspect ebay is more 'on it' than we know. I guess, with situations like this, I think "why would ebay keep irritating its small businesses with this disparity?". Despite what people think on these boards. EBay isn't an idiot. It is a survivor in a super competitive market place. It must have its reasons. I suspect: 1) it is charging the private sellers via PL even though they think they are getting 80% off deals, 2) it knows when they sell here they buy here too, driving sales for all of us, 3) they are the providers of oddities that keep bringing new buyers to ebay (and some of them to us)

I rarely - in business - 'waste' my energy fighting what I can't change. I just have to hope ebay has its reasons.

---

Your attitude to businesses trading illegally as private sellers is sensible and admirable.  

But I find it hard to be as sanguine as you.

Just out of interest, do you think you'd feel the same if you had an actual shop in an actual shopping centre, and the shopping centre management allowed one of your competitors to rent the unit next to yours, and helpfully put notices in the window saying:

FROM THE SHOPPING CENTRE MANAGEMENT: this shop isn't a shop.  It's just Joe and Madge selling off their own old brand new coats, all 17000 of them.  You don't have any consumer rights, because it isn't a shop and they aren't running a business.   You'll be pleased to know we give them free rent, because we like to support people clearing out their wardrobes.  And they obviously don't need to pay tax either because it's just their own old coats.

---

Possibly I'd feel fine if - to reiterate my point - I popped in on Joe and Madge and (with a lack of empathy for who they were talking to which I'd probably find mind-blowing) they started moaning to me that the Shopping Centre Management was all well and good but strangely they never sold any coats unless they offered management 17% commission; so having a free unit was pretty rubbish really. And as to returns, well the Shopping Centre Management kept telling people they could return if Joe and Madge hadn't described correctly - and charge Joe and Madge for their inconvenience! -  and so, of course, people kept saying their coats were incorrectly described, when really they didn't fit, well of course they did, people would, wouldn't they? What a rip off!

After listening wide-eyed, I'd probably slope back to my own shop and allow myself a quiet snigger and thank heavens that the Shopping Centre Management was a wily old dog after all.

And ebay is, you know... a wily old dog. Why do we imagine ebay is all over us for every penny, but somehow think its a complete idiot when it comes to private sellers? There has to be more to why it doesn't sort the private/business seller issue.

Avoiding VAT with separate accounts is different. Hopefully HMRC will catch onto that.