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]

As you said ""There comes a time when you have to stop blaming clowns for being clowns and just stop going to the circus!". Very timely. Send in the clowns! 🤡🤣

I love that. It's a great final post for me to read as I leave this ridiculous platform.

[moldosgifts]

@action_man  wrote

That is pure discrimination.

Should have wrote victimisation. A seller cannot have a protected characteristic from just selling

The pandoras box of victimisation started the moment Ebay open the free to sell for private members.

And though you wanted to delete your account?

Its like a box of chocolates "oh go on just one more"

Stop nibbling 😀😀

[action_man]

🐭🧀OK, if you insist. Just a little more nibbling..... 🐭🧀

[Anonymous]

Look, my lad, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

[julies829]

With you 100% I too ended all sales and refuse to buy on EBay anymore. Why should I pay 75p For a low value item? Really feel eBay doesn’t want private low cost item sellers on the platform. It is not free at all. Keep checking these community posts in the hope that something changes but can’t see a happy ending 🙁

[ratrog]

Simple fact of the matter is Ebay dont want private sellers...we are too much hassle for them nowadays they just want business's and the bigger then better for them..a bit like there are not many privately run small family run high street stores left..the government just want big business's paying its easier to control for them and less tax/money evasion.. its basically over for private sellers. You dont even get your money as a seller until the buyer receives it..one item I just sold the buyer didnt tell me he was on holiday and I had to wait 10 days for them to get it and my money..just one big joke ebay is..its all about as much easy money as possible for them and no care for the minions any more..

[henley-theatre-services]

Ebay is a pure rip off site now - what was once fun to use and sell unwanted items has become a frustrating not economically viable painful complicated process with little return

[motluk2]

I totally agree. What does the buyers insurance actually cover,?

I used to always use royal mail and now have to use evri. They've already lost one parcel. I presumed ebay would give the buyer their money back under this new insurance but not so. The buyer took out a case and after several phone calls from me, they finally gave her the money back "as a gesture of goodwill" ??!

I think you are right they they just want business sellers  I just checked general fashion listings under size 14 - 80% seemed to be business sellers selling under buy it now. Auction had more private sellers but I noticed that there were hardly any bids on anything.

I am sure this insurance is putting buyers off.

[papso22]

You need to read what the buyer protection fee actually covers.  It doesn't do what you think it does, it's just badly named.

[akemp1]

---

@papso22 wrote:

You need to read what the buyer protection fee actually covers.  It doesn't do what you think it does, it's just badly named.

---

I have no idea why are ebay are persisting with the awful name as it causes buyer distress and seller offence. It also creates general confusion with people thinking it's an insurance product.

Ebay seem tone deaf on this issue. Maybe they are stunned like rabbits in a headlights with how poorly changes and their reputation have gone down this year.

It would have no business consequence to call it a platform or marketplace fee and people would better understand and some of us would respect ebay for being candid. An easy win they are avoiding. A neutral name could then also open up the possibility of offering an option for the seller to pay it like they can with postage.

Maybe in their dreamy echo chamber they don't even realise the poorly chosen name is a problem?

[jonatjonatjonat]

I agree. if the MBG had been rolled into it for Private Sellers you could have probably argued its name - but as it stands, its 'we copied our competitor poorly'. The fact the MBG stands SEPARATE to the Buyer Protection is just a mess.

I would assume some of the issues are...

- they need to be careful it doesn't sound like a surcharge

- I think they are trying to tread a very thin line between obviously having to have a fee in place but also make it sound like the buyer is getting something tangible for paying it. if they did call it a marketplace fee, I think ebay feel this would put customers off MORE because...well look at some of the assumptions on what the BPF actually is. 

[akemp1]

---

@jonatjonatjonat wrote:

- I think they are trying to tread a very thin line between obviously having to have a fee in place but also make it sound like the buyer is getting something tangible for paying it. if they did call it a marketplace fee, I think ebay feel this would put customers off MORE because...well look at some of the assumptions on what the BPF actually is. 

---

Yeah perhaps their fears of getting the fee accepted has caused them to over-justify it which has resulted what turns out to be a fairly unacceptable name. Or it's just a straight copy of the other place that also has the name wrong.

It's like playing crazy golf with all the weirdly placed holes they have dug for themselves.

In practice then any buyer that looks at the charge breakdown will feel it's a surcharge and be put off by the fee anyway so they might as well be straight with people and not upset them as most people would understand ebay are a business and need to charge someone a fee for the service.

My experience buying at the clothing marketplace is that it doesn't feel like I am paying the fee as I tend to buy bundles where the bundle discount often covers the fee so it feels like the seller is paying it. Ie the grand total at the bottom is less than the sum of the item costs so I'm cool with that. But ebay don't have bundle discounts and charge the fixed element of the buyer tax per item not per order so it's not going to be a good experience for buyers.

So it's just a bad copy - they misjudged how to make it work.