Why are buyers being forced to pay 79p to "protect" a 99p item from private selllers?

[action_man]

Why are buyers being forced to pay 79p to "protect" a 99p item from private selllers?

Simple question.

My answer is that it makes no sense other than it's a greedy cash grab for eBay. Also, how many items will now go to landfill rather than going to a new home? eBay talks a good talk about reducing carbon footprints and climate action. But with this new buyer's protection racket is actually making it virtually impossible to sell low value items and condemning them to landfill. A lot of people preferred their items to find a new home rather than contribute to the growing mountain of waste. Yes, you could say eBay is a business and it isn't their job, but they make a big song and dance about things like sustainability and climate action. Is it just lip service?

I have seen people say things like, "You will still get the same money as before. The buyer pays the BPF on top". But on very low value items there is a ceiling to what people are prepared to pay. Anyone who has sold low value items knows that there is a psychological threshold that buyers do not go above. If you price even a penny over that threshold, you won't sell. You can study the sales history of items to see these trends and discover the highest price possible for those items.

But the point of this post is to highlight that it is ludicrous to charge a mandatory 79p insurance on a 99p item.

Also what was pretty disgusting was to suddenly impose this with little warning, so anyone who had items listed, suddenly found their prices effectively almost doubled overnight and forcing them to give up selling. Was that the whole point?

If a huge volume seller sells a music CD for £2.99 including delivery, a private seller who wants to match that price now has to list at around £2.15 for the buyer to see £2.99 - Then out of that £2.15, the private seller has to take the postage out which is £1.90 - That leaves them with 25p!

Some people will say you should list at £2.99 and the buyer will pay the 75p + 4% on top. But that isn't the case in reality. These things are price sensitive. But let's go with that suggestion for the moment......

Business seller lists at £2.99 - The buyer sees £2.99
Private seller lists at £2.99     - The buyer sees £3.86*
(*approx. calculation)

That is pure discrimination.

Is it designed to encourage buyer's to buy from the business seller?

Prior to the changes, both items would be shown to the buyer at £2.99

I stopped all buying and selling for now. I can't support a platform which discriminates against people in this way, let alone all the other crazy shenanigans going on. eBay used to be great. I've no idea what happened, but it seems to be focused purely on those who make the most money for eBay and to hell with the rest of us..... and to hell with the impact on the planet it seems.

[action_man]

I think you're right. eBay are pushing people out in an underhanded manner, all the while advertising how it's free to sell on eBay so they look like such nice people.

The average person off the street just wants to clear some things for a reasonable bit of money. It's not asking the earth to be left with something more than 25p out of something a buyer paid £2.99 for.

I realise I should just stop posting, because it won't make any difference. I'm just annoyed by the way eBay have gone about this. They have literally shafted us when they could have been more honest. All they needed to do was make an announcement that from next year eBay is changing it's business model and outlining what those changes are. Instead they have played manipulative games with people and hide behind smoke and mirrors.

People are rightly venting. We know it's not going to make any difference. It's just the same few people reading this forum anyway.

It at least feels like you're doing something to say "Hey, you've shafted us and we're not happy", but I'm fully aware that nobody cares. Sometimes it's enough to just express yourself for a bit before going on your own merry way.

I think the only point for me has been some solidarity amongst like-minded souls. But, I know what I think of it all now. It's all very ugly and any day now I'll just stop posting and move on.

What I would say to those smug people who think it's ok that private sellers of low value items are getting pushed off a cliff is that one day your turn will come. Jamie Ianonne has said that he's only interested in "high value buyers" and he wants the platform to be more about luxury goods. Even typing that makes me laugh. Why would anyone trust eBay with luxury goods? LOL

My original post said everything I wanted to say anyway. So, I'll try to leave it at that and just let the usual crowd come in and 💩 all over it. Haha. It doesn't really matter. I've got a lot I could/should be doing elsewhere, so it is onwards and upwards (elsewhere) for me. The closing of the eBay doors actually has benefitted me massively as another door of opportunity has arisen that I would not have found otherwise, so I should actually be thanking eBay really.

At the end of the day, it's just ONE platform. The eBay addiction has become the eBay forum addiction... so, I need to stop that.

Thanks, Jonat.

[sebastian4ever]

Luxury goods on feeBay!!

[action_man]

I thought I would go to eBay's customer service to find out how they would answer this simple question. But guess what? You can't. There is no option to ask the question. So, I went direct to the "Have us call you" section and it is greyed out and underneath says "closed". What happened to the 24/7 human customer service that is supposed to be included as part of the Buyer's Protection Fee? Yet another con.

[suelel1968]

Action man, 25p is more than  business seller would get, and they buy the item as well!

I will leave you to your crusade, but changing your strategy would be easier than changing a Global company who, lets face it, have every right to run the company as they wish. They are not a charity, they also do not hold you hostage to their site. 

[smartsgaming]

Im sure someone could build a hell of a lawsuit against ebay with all the recent changes. They dont even make it clear and obvious what the changes are, its so hard to find correct information or ask questions about anything. People shouldnt have to resort to a discussion page to find out how things work. 

Lile how about when someone offers you 20 quid, but then you accept, and you only get like 17 quid. You would assume the BPF would be added after but no. And theres no way of knowing this before you accept. Thats surely illegal. If you are offered a value of 20, you should receive 20. It should be taking fees etc out of that BEFORE the amount offered is sent to you. 

[action_man]

Funny. So you think business sellers are buying in items to make less than 25p. Hahahaha.

I hardly think a legitimate question ("Why are buyers being forced to pay 79p to "protect" a 99p item from private selllers?") is a crusade.

[missdollydaydream]

 they also do not hold you hostage to their site. 

Really? What about the people who can't withdraw their funds or cancel their accounts because they are unable/unwilling to trust eBay with sensative information?

[action_man]

It's revealing to see who marks certain posts as helpful. The same people mark each other's posts as helpful and back each other up on the threads. Sometimes there's a swarm of posts, so maybe there's a little Whatsapp group or something similar somewhere too. It wouldn't surprise me. Forum friends. It's a lovely idea really.

[the-nutwood-collection]

You could be right, maybe eBay don't want low value orders.  I don't want low value orders, they're a nuisance but, because of the items I sell, there's nothing I can do to prevent them.  However, eBay's charging 75p to process that low value item, so that should adequately cover their costs.

However, if the object of eBay's exercise is to deter low value orders, I think it's a big mistake.  Buyers come to eBay looking for a item at a price they're comfortable with and, if they find it, they're happy and they'll visit again.  eBay's objective should be to make eBay the first port of call for any requirement, and this is where they're failing and losing buyers.

That 2.99 buyer one day could be a 29.99 buyer another day if they're encouraged to visit eBay first.  An online entity should always strive to be the first place buyers look.  Once buyers get out of the habit of visiting eBay for odds and ends like CDs and egg timers, not only are the low value sales lost, the potential for higher value sales is also lost.

Of course, the search manipulation to favour PL listings doesn't help to gain and retain buyers, in fact it's a deterrent to a buyer quickly finding what they want at a price they're comfortable with, but that's the subject of many other threads.

[sebastian4ever]

They are probably trying to free up space on their servers by getting rid of low value listings which just sit there for ages.

[*devils.advocate*]

Can I take this general fixation on 99p items (the same applies to all items before and after “free fees” - up to you to do the sums).

(And I’ve always said that eBay wants rid of low value items - certainly now with the 75p per item part of the fee)

But before, if someone listed an item at 99p (+ say, £1 postage) - with fees at 13.22% + 30p - they would have received 43p (remeber to include the Regulary Fee amount in calculating fees).

Since “free to sell”, how many items have there been listed at 43p?

Let me guess - any? - none?

So, if the item was now listed at £1.23, the exact same result would be achieved?

Let’s call it £1.25 for the “perception” brigade.

Lets say a massive increase of around 25% - but, in reality, an increase of 25p - really only this causing a deluge of toys out of the pram?

And all because people don’t look at the end amount of money they’ve actually had, and would still have, in their hand.

Adapt - do your sums.

[action_man]

Such a lovely tone from you as usual.

Well, like most people I used to list my cheapest items on the 70% off listing days. So, that throws all your calculations out completely. You may need to do your sums again.

The difference between being able to sell low value items on the 70% off listing days and now is massive. But you probably wouldn't get that, or care.

[alexis*27]

Just a couple of points.

1. The terms are potentially unlawful, but not illegal (there is a difference).

2. Just because someone has agreed to a set of terms and conditions, it doesn't necessarily mean a particular term doesn't fall foul of various fair terms legislation and/or is automatically enforceable.

Sadly I doubt much of this applies here. eBay is effectively the landlord of a shopping centre, and is entitled to charge 75p+ to everyone who leaves with a purchase. 

Nothing to stop a seller refunding 75p+ to every buyer to make them more attractive than their competitors' "shops" (even though they are private sellers).

However, there is the question whether private sellers are unfairly disadvantaged considering if you can walk out of the shopping centre without paying anything as long as you purchased from a shop that, for example, had a red sign because they were a limited company as opposed to a sole trader (for example).

[andha-21]

---

@missdollydaydream wrote:

 they also do not hold you hostage to their site. 

Really? What about the people who can't withdraw their funds or cancel their accounts because they are unable/unwilling to trust eBay with sensative information?

---

That's not even the best example. If you want to close your account, you have to wait the full chargeback timeframe from your last sale before they will let you.

[*devils.advocate*]

Such a lovely tone from you as usual.

Thank you - a compliment - I try my best,

Well, like most people I used to list my cheapest items on the 70% off listing days. So, that throws all your calculations out completely.

You were very lucky then.

There were many - and i mean many - private sellers complaining that they didn't receive any offers at all.

There were just as many threads about it than the current situation.

Did they reduce their price?

No.

Consider yourself lucky and fortunate that you had these offers.

The way eBay have gone about this, as I've said before, is just plain stupid.

If they are to continue with a buyer's fee, then it should be shown separately - seller's prive + BPF.

That's what people are used to if they use other sites.

[*devils.advocate*]

If you want to close your account, you have to wait the full chargeback timeframe from your last sale before they will let you.

Hasn't that always been the case?

[andha-21]

I haven't been at eBay since it opened so no idea. 

But it's something they don't make clear before you start.

[action_man]

They don't make much clear before you start...... or at all.

eBay has become like a big thick fog where people who are unsuspecting stagger around for a while before things become clearer.

It's interesting to study though.

[action_man]

It wasn't a compliment as well you know. There's really no need to be so unpleasant. What do you gain from it?

[*devils.advocate*]

I'm not being unpleasant, as you put it, I'm being honest from a buyer's point of view.

What does prevaricating about the shrubbery achieve?

It isn't all about sellers - it's about buyers as well - but sellers are so wrapped up in themselves, they don't view things as if they were only the buyer.

All sellers want to do is make as much money as they can - that is the whole point of it, isn't it - but there's a right way and a wrong way and a proper way to please themselves, as a seller, and their potential customrers, as a buyer.

Not many, regretfully, follow the proper way.