kat@ebay
Sorry, but another request related to the above:
Could you please consult with the shipping team and ask them to provide, through you, a comprehensive list of circumstances under which eBay would override the buyer's/seller's original SD choice? Please note that I am requesting a list of specific situations where this would occur, not something vague, circular or self-evident like "eBay would do this in situations where it was deemed necessary". I see no good reason why such a list should be withheld; quite the contrary, such information would be very useful for private sellers.
[Kat, the rest of this post is just me offering some thoughts and opinions. You may choose to ignore it, although I'd be grateful if you could pass it to the relevant team as general feedback (in which they must be drowning by now, if feedback really is passed on).]
The only situation I can think of where eBay would be justified (from a buyer's/seller's perspective) in overriding the buyer's/seller's choice of courier/service would be where the selected courier does not deliver to the buyer's address, e.g. buyer/seller selects Evri, but the buyer lives in a remote location not covered by Evri.
But - and it's a big 'but' (no jokes, please!) surely, if Simple Delivery was set up correctly, then in the above scenario Evri would simply not appear as an option for the buyer/seller to select in the first place. The SD code/algorithm would have already ascertained that the buyer's address was one to which Evri will not deliver, and thus only Royal Mail would be presented as an option (okay, not technically an option if it's the only choice, but you know what I mean).
The only other reason I can think of would be to do with eBay's contracts with RM and Evri. We are obviously not privvy to whatever arrangements have been agreed upon between these parties, but it's pretty obvious that one contractual stipulation would be that eBay guarantees a certain level of business for both of them. So, it might be, for example, that eBay is not achieving the required level for Evri, and so changes some buyer/seller-selected RM options to Evri in order to address this.
But that's all 'internal' stuff - nothing to do with what is best for the buyer and seller, and everything to do with eBay's contractual requirements.
If a buyer's/seller's chosen courier is one that can deliver to the buyer's address (bearing in mind that they should only be presented with suitable options anyway - if SD worked properly), then eBay should honour that choice - but, evidently, eBay's contracts take precedence over this, hence the caveat that the selected courier can be overriden.
For eBay to not even bother informing the buyer and seller that their chosen option has been switched is just... well, to use an Americanism, "it sucks".
There was already little doubt in the minds of most members who have been following SD's somewhat 'wobbly' progress that the programme was developed primarily as an additional revenue stream for eBay (this came straight from the horse's CEO's mouth). It does have some clear benefits to some members under some circumstances (I'm not 100% opposed to it myself per se - but I am 100% opposed to its being mandatory, not optional), but the needs of buyers and sellers were very clearly way down in the list of considerations.
eBay's negligence in not even informing buyers and sellers that they have changed the courier only reinforces that conviction.
eBay should - and still could (if only the decision-makers would deem to listen to us little people) have a mutually beneficial relationship with private sellers. It could profit so much from us - not only in purely monetary terms, but also from our requests, observations, ideas, reports, etc. Members such as myself would happily provide suggestions for improvement for free (in fact, many of us are already doing just that) - suggestions that could potentially lead to increased profits for eBay, not just an easier selling experience for ourselves. Words cannot express how utterly frustrating it is that eBay management are so distanced, arrogant, and short-sighted that they refuse to listen and engage, and fail to avail themselves of such a rich resource, this vast untapped well of information and ideas from the very people who use and know the platform enough to spot bugs early, identify potential improvements, and so on. The most positive thing I can say about this is that eBay are far from alone in holding this corporate mindset - it is evident everywhere, and seems to be pretty much an inevitability.
Imagine if eBay bucked this trend! Imagine if they engaged with sellers, private and business alike, encouraged reports and feedback, genuinely listened to our concerns and suggestions (not just paid lip-service to the notion, which is one of the laziest and most offensive tactics in the corporate playbook), acted on them where appropriate, and generally made members feel both valued and involved (while simultaneously profiting in various ways from our suggestions, etc.). Disillusioned members would gradually re-join the flock, other people would join the platform in vast numbers, and eBay would be an absolute behemoth whose success other selling platforms could only dream of achieving. Isn't that exactly the type of goal that management would be hell-bent on pursuing?
Well, there I go again on another flight of fancy. The harsh reality is that an increasing (and therefore increasingly significant) number of members are feeling more and more exploited, ignored and sidelined, leading to frustration, confusion, resentment, and, ultimately, refusal to use the platform. Many members, sellers especially (and private sellers in particular when it comes to SD) feel like soldiers running into streams of bullets while the generals sit back sipping whiskey as they casually devise yet another tactic "bound to succeed". In short, cannon fodder.
Why does eBay cut so many corners in so many areas? Bugs, glitches and other technical limitations abound. Some of them have been present and unaddressed for so long that their existence is now part of the furniture. The mostly abysmal customer service - don't get me started! Advisors hanging up / ending the chat while you're mid-sentence pretty much sums up the quality of that. Again, such a common occurence that members mention it almost in passing, with little apparent outrage at such treatment; it has become normalised, just 'one of those things'.
I thought that an indicator of a healthy, thriving company was that it re-invested a significant proportion of revenue in improving and strengthening its own systems and generally acted in ways intended to ensure its own robustness and longevity. Where is eBay's revenue going (rhetorical question)? It certainly isn't being spent on fixing bugs, making genuine improvements, or developing a customer service team that doesn't make me want to smash my head to a pulp against the wall or gnash my teeth to the point where I'm eating my own mouth!
Why, for the love of everything holy (and perhaps unholy), does eBay seem to be so singlemindedly intent on acting in ways that not only drive users to distraction, but that ultimately sabotage their own prospects of being an innovative, cutting-edge marketplace for years to come?
I admit that some of the above is a tad over-dramatic, but I don't think I've gone totally over the top. And, yes, it's another long post from yours truly, one to which the TL;DR crowd will no doubt take exception, but SD and other things (eBay generally) get me so wound up that I feel I must vent if only for my own sanity!
jBQw8yPVRi!~~60_7.JPG "lucy_farmer"){kind=avatar}
