Archive for the ‘Avenues of Opportunity’ Category

The eBay Feedback Theory - Busted

Sunday, February 17th, 2008

Back when Pierre first conceived the eBay idea, he decided that the community should police itself. He did not have time to mediate disputes between buyers and sellers, so he instituted “feedback.” The concept was that buyers and sellers would leave each other honest feedback, which would weed out the bad community members.

New ebayers could easily see the feedback of a seller and decide whether or not to buy from this seller. The theory was if the seller had a lot of negative feedback, the buyers would go elsewhere to bid. In other words, Pierre made the assumption that humans are able to look out for themselves.

It is my opinion this theory has been proven wrong over and over again. One only has to have seen the feedback for the now infamous seller “Bargainland” to know that people cannot look out for themselves. With feedback at 90% and many times lower, they continued to sell 100’s of items a day. Burned buyers would post to the eBay boards regularly whining that they got “taken” by Bargainland. Seasoned eBayers would ask these buyers why they didn’t heed the feedback? It’s right there, pasted in the auction, why didn’t you heed it?

Maybe for the same reason the government had to make it a law that motorists wear seatbelts, or that manufacturers of hair dryers put a warning on the cord not to use it in the bathtub. What appears to be common sense, is not always so.

Because the Feedback theory has been busted, eBay is now taking matters into their own hands, well, sorta. Sellers will no longer be able to leave negative feedback for buyers, even if the buyer threatens and harasses the seller, or files chargebacks, or doesn’t pay for the item. eBay is also stating they will “disadvantage” sellers with poor DSR’s in search. DSR’s are not even a year old, yet they are being given more importance than a sellers feedback, which in many cases has been built over many years of selling on eBay. That feedback you worked so hard to build will now basically get you nowhere, except kicked out of the Powerseller program if it falls below 98%.

So the Feedback myth is busted, and DSR’s are now the wave of the future. Since they are anonymous eBay feels they are more relevant. However, with only a 10% difference between sellers with the highest DSR’s and those with the lowest, how relevant are they?

That’s my opinion, what’s yours?

Cyn

Looking at eBays DSR (Detailed Seller Rating), part 2

Sunday, February 3rd, 2008

written by Steve Grossberg, IMA President

Back in September 2007 I posted to this blog, a piece titled “Looking at eBay’s DSR (Detailed Seller Ratings), Click Here to Read Part 1.

Yesterday I did a podcast interview with Ina Steiner from AuctionBytes, Click Here to Listen To Interview Some of the points and more I am going to be talking about below are covered in the interview. I encourage everyone to listen to the interview.

Okay for starters ebay says 15% of sellers currently qualify for the 4.8 DSR bonus. My question is what percent of the ebay listings or GMV does that represent. This has yet to be answered by my best guess is somewhere less then 2%. Of the top 100 seller date as referenced in post 1, there is only 1 of the top 100 USA based sellers according to the Nortica 500 that has a 4.8 DSR is shipping and handling. There was another 19 who had 4.6 or better. Ebay stated over and over how 66% of sellers have a 4.6 or better but again what percent of listings and GMV is this? Certainly it is not 66%, so always do you own due diligence. As the old saying goes trust but confirm.

The eBay Flip Flop

Saturday, February 2nd, 2008

Wasn’t it just 2 years ago that eBay wanted to bring back the “vibrancy” to core by encouraging 99 cent starting bids? In 2006 they decreased the listing fee for the 99 cent starting bid while increasing the costs for eBay store listings. eBay felt the need to go back to their roots - the auction format.

So it was with shock that I read the new fee structure. eBay’s 99 cent auction sellers are no longer the darlings of eBay. They have been hit the hardest by the new fee structure. Because the traditional 99 cent auction sellers generally have a very high sell through rate, they are being hit hardest by the large increase in Final Value Fees.  Although their insertion fee has decreased by 5 cents it’s nowhere large enough to make up for the 3.5% increase on the backend.

Yet Fixed Price sellers, who generally have a low sell through rate, have seen their insertion fees decrease greatly, especially the majority who use gallery.  They still pay the increased FVF, but the decreased insertion fees will more than make up for the increase in FVF’s for those seller with sell through rates below 50%.

I call this the “eBay flip flop”. Just like a politician, eBay can’t make up their minds if they want to be an auction site or a fixed price site. They tried to have a separate format for fixed price, ie eBay Express, which has been such a failure that it is being discontinued in the UK.

When did eBay make this sudden turn to woo Fixed Price sellers? Was it in 2007 when they noticed Amazon’s third party marketplace suddenly grow by leaps and bounds? eBay started getting worried that they were losing market share, not auction market share, but Fixed Price market share. This seems to have come as quite a surprise to eBay management. Suddenly they realized that Fixed Price listings make up 40% of all listings. Yet sellers are flocking to sell on Amazon.

In order to compete with the Amazon Marketplace, it appears that eBay has decided to throw their true auction sellers to the wolves and woo back the Fixed Price sellers. Yet this does not seem to be a very good long-term strategy. Has eBay not noticed all of the niche auction sites? There are auction sites for baseball cards, shoes, liquidation items, etc. What are you going to do eBay? Wait for these niche auction sites to take away your true auction sellers and then do another flip flop in order to woo them back? At least one very large traditional auction seller is seriously considering either starting his own auction site, or negotiating with other auction sites to move all of his auctions and customers away from eBay. It’s been done successfully before, and it will continue to be done until eBay gets a clue and starts treating these two formats differently.

What will it take for eBay to realize that pure auctions and fixed price listings are two different animals that require different fee structures? They seem to understand now that there are buyers that prefer auctions and there are buyers that prefer Fixed Price, yet they still charge the same fees for both.

I say this because I was recently thrown into one of eBay’s search tests. My results were shown in two columns, one with Fixed Price listings and one with Auction listings. This is a good start, but does not go far enough. Different fees should be charged to recognize the differences in selling in each format. If eBay doesn’t realize this and make this needed change, they will continue to lose their large sellers. Last year they lost Fixed Price sellers, this year they will lose large auction sellers.

Why different fees?  Because the needs of Fixed Price sellers are different than true Auction Sellers.  Sellers with multiples of items need lower insertion fees so they can afford to list all of their items at all times.  Let them pay for success - when an items sells.  eBay has started to “get” this.

However, true Auction Sellers have close to 100% sell through, so why penalize them for  selling by charging such a high back end fee?  Charge them a higher insertion fee, since you know their item will sell, and lower back end fees.  This will encourage the auction sellers to stay and to list higher value items at lower starting prices which will encourage auction buyers to stay on the site and continue bidding.  The auction buyers are the backbone of eBay; by chasing away the true auction sellers, eBay chases away the auction buyers.  And that is bad for every eBay seller.

Cyn

Looking at eBays DSR (Detailed Seller Ratings) - I am concerned

Monday, September 17th, 2007

written by Steve Grossberg, IMA President

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

I was looking at eBays DSR’s this morning. I pulled up the top 100 active ebay sellers in the USA and compiled a list of their respective DSR’s

Here are my findings

Item as described - average score 4.79
Communication - average score 4.66
Shipping Time- average score 4.58
Shipping Fee- average score 4.41

Below is percentage of top 100 scoring 4.5 or better in the respective category

Item as described - 99% scoring 4.5 or better
Communication - 93% scoring 4.5 or better
Shipping Time- 81% scoring 4.5 or better
Shipping Fee- 44% scoring 4.5 or better

What is really disturbing here is looking at the shipping and handling. When eBay announced the DSR strategy, sellers were voicing concern that eBay was going to use shipping and handling as a rating category.

This is totally unfair of eBay to do since it is human nature when something to do with prices consumers pay, the ratings would always be lower than what is probably realistic or true. Consumers always want a better deal when it comes to pricing.

Also it is disturbing that of the 4 DSR categories, shipping and handling is the only category that buyers know 100% for sure upfront in advance what they are getting before they purchase or receive service or item from a merchant. The other 3 DSR categories the buyer will never know before the transaction is completed and item received the service they will get. Shipping and handling fees are known and it is totally unfair for a buyer to rate someone on something known in advance with 100% certainty. It is fair on the other 3 DSR where the buyer would never know in advance.

Not only that but I cannot find any other venue or seller rating system on the internet where buyers rate sellers on shipping and handling fees charged.

Whoever thought of putting down shipping and handling as a DSR category should be fired, in my opinion. This was an idiotic move on eBay’s part and something that will hurt sellers and hurt eBay. What was this person smoking who came up with this?

I encourage everyone to look at their own DSR and I would be willing to bet 90% plus have the lowest DSR rating on shipping and handling regardless if you are actually losing money on your shipping and handling fees charged.

As we all know eBay is the highest cost place of doing business on the internet.

Looking at my personal numbers, in the month of May 2007 my combined ebay/PayPal fees were $26,052.00 and sold 4800 items only that month on ebay, but 400 were never paid for, leaving 4400 paid item. My average ASP was $15.54, so simple math taking $26,052 and dividing by 4400 items sold gives me $5.92 paid to ebay/PayPal per item sold. Average ASP again was $15.54 so divide $5.92 into $15.54 – 38% ebay take rate.

And eBay has the audacity to allow buyers to rate sellers on shipping and handling? I would gladly lose money on my shipping and handling if eBay was to lower their fees or take rate. As we all know eBay fees are a function of buyer demand or sell through. The higher the buyer demand or conversions, the less per item we pay in eBay fees or lower take rate per item.

I think we all need to take a strong stance against eBay having shipping and handling as a DSR category as it will ultimately hurt most sellers and eventually hurt eBay. It is a DSR that is destined to backfire and consistently be the lowest scored DSR.

I would rather see ebay replace this DSR with Would you buy from this seller again?

What eBay is doing here by adding shipping and handling as a DSR category is encouraging sellers to lower the shipping and handling, regardless if they are actually losing money on the shipping and handling fees charged vs. paid. I am willing to bet the vast majority of sellers will still be rated lower on the shipping and handling DSR then any other.

If eBay does not change their ways I think it would be great for all sellers to show their eBay fees paid in every listing. In other words, in my listings I could add to the template:

“In May 2007 $5.92 of the total purchase price of this item went to eBay for eBay/PayPal fees.”

This would be no different from what eBay is doing to sellers by having a DSR rating, than it would be for sellers clearly alerting eBay buyers of the factual information regarding the fees they the buyer pay eBay. Because ultimately it is the buyer paying those fees to eBay since sellers who are not recouping their eBay fees, will obviously not be selling on eBay.

Now honestly I do not think the best way of handling things is doing what I described above as I would be disparaging my business partner eBay. But obviously eBay has no problem in disparaging their business partners, us the sellers by having shipping and handling as a DSR category.

My eBay’s fees are my biggest expense next to cost of goods. Looking at my expenses of running budget video games, in eBay is 33% of my total expenses paid. Ebay is by far the biggest expense and eBay gets a lot more then I pay out in payroll even. How can our highest paid employee stab us in the back like this? Do they not know where their bread is buttered? Ebay, wake up and smell the coffee, stop disparaging and working against your sellers (customers) and start working with us. Our pain is ultimately your pain, what don’t you understand about this?

I would love to hear your thoughts and ideas.

Click Here To Read Part 2

The “e” in eBay

Sunday, September 9th, 2007

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket written by the Lively Prognosticator

When I got suckered in, I mean asked to write a blog, the first thing I had to do was select a subject. Initially, I thought to myself that I would keep it positive, and pick a topic where maybe I could give some great suggestions on how to increase effectiveness as an internet marketer. But a couple of mojitos later, I said naaahhh, what fun is that? So I decided to go for the gusto, pick a topic, and share my thoughts in a manner reminiscent of Bill Maher, with a little Geraldo Rivera thrown in. Not that I’m as witty or talented as either of them, but I gotta aim high, ya know?

Just a few more things about me before we get started. I choose to remain anonymous. I’ve been told by many naysayers that eBay doesn’t get mad, they get even. But many of you know me. I have been selling items in my category for over 25 years, using many different methods, including mail order, face to face sales, and ecommerce. For many of those years, I was also a senior manager for a Fortune 500 company. I’ve been selling on ebay for almost 10 years, and became a PowerSeller almost immediately. I’ve got a wealth of knowledge, and people often seek out my opinions on a variety of subjects. OK, enough said. Let’s get into it.

My first thought about eBay is that they have a business philosophy that is counter to the philosophy of every major corporation in the United States. Every major business in the country is built upon Customer Satisfaction. Mission Statements, Core Values and Corporate Philosophies are built upon the foundation of providing world class Customer Service, and treating the customer in the manner you would like to be treated. So how does eBay measure up? First off, who is their customer? Who put over $6.7 billion into their coffers last year? Well, let’s see, buyers don’t pay for membership or the right to bid, they pay eBay nothing when they buy something, and they pay zero when they use Paypal. Total cost to buyers for using and buying on eBay? Zip, nada, bupkis, nothing. How about sellers? They pay a listing fee whether the item sells or not. Then eBay charges extra for everything from Gallery to featured listing to store fees. Then the seller pays a final value fee if it sells, and pays another fee to Paypal if the buyer pays that way. So it’s pretty clear that eBay’s customer is the seller, who is putting almost all of that revenue into their pocket.

OK. Now we’ve established who eBay’s customers are. So how do they reward those customers? They’re rewarded by the “e” in eBay. eBay’s entire Corporate Culture is built upon these 4 “e’s of eBay:

Excessive Fees – If you are a seller on eBay, you don’t need to be reminded of the outrageous fees that ebay charges. But let’s do a quick analysis. A seller lists an item for $9.99, and it sells for the opening bid. He pays a 40c listing fee, a 35c gallery fee, a 53c Final Value Fee, and a 55c Paypal fee. Total fees $1.83 or 18.3%. But wait, it gets better! That’s assuming a 100% sell-through rate. Every time one doesn’t sell, you still pay that 75c listing and gallery fee. When a buyer doesn’t pay, you STILL pay that 75c listing and gallery fee. And if you use eBay tools, or selling enhancements, you pay, pay and pay some more. Stores cost money, listing tools cost money, other features cost money. And you can be sure that eBay is constantly looking for methods to increase their take rate. For example, there’s a promotion going on now offering free listing fees for a whole month. Why? Rumor has it that eBay will go the route in the US that they went in France. Force all listings to have gallery, and increase the listing fee. eBay NEVER reduces fees unless there is something in it for them. So while this is a great benefit for some sellers this month, enjoy it while you can, because come early 2008, it will be BOHICA (Bend Over, Here It Comes Again).

Extraordinary Attention to Wall Street Analysts – eBay spends an inordinate amount of time, energy and money courting Wall Street analysts to make sure investors will continue to be confident in purchasing and holding eBay stock. And while this is normal for any large corporation, once again, ebay handles this by going over the top in their effort. Stock analysts know that if their opinion is Buy or Outperform, or if they upgrade their opinions, there’s a good chance that Meg will be at their next investor meeting. If their opinion is Underperform, or even Neutral, Meg is usually previously booked, and unable to participate. And if they have a sell opinion, they probably won’t even be invited to eBay’s analyst briefings.

Extreme inflexibility – This is the large sellers’ biggest complaint. Large sellers are treated the same as small sellers by eBay’s Trust & Safety Division, who make business ending decisions, with little forethought, and strict adherence to rules. When eBay takes down an item, they generally follow a “three strikes and you’re out” format. Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? NOT! They don’t differentiate between the seller who lists 50 items a week, and the seller who lists 5,000 items a week. This is not about the large seller generating more volume. It’s about the fact that in this case, the small seller had problems on 6% of his listings, and the large seller had problems on less than 1/100th of 1% of his items. Or more recently, eBay decided that a neutral should be treated the same as a negative in terms of making decisions on whether to restrict a seller. While I agree that in some cases a neutral truly IS a negative, in many cases it’s not, and there’s no thought going into this. It’s just a “count up the numbers and do what the chart tells you to do.” I’ve had a number of situations where a customer bought something, there was something wrong with it, I immediately offered and issued a refund, and they gave me a neutral, with a comment stating that I took good care of them, and they’d buy from me again, but they didn’t get what they bought, so they didn’t feel I deserved a positive. You can’t levy penalties for every situation in exactly the same way. If we did this in the real world, we could eliminate our entire system of jurisprudence. A good thing by eliminating lawyers (Oh lord, do I wish), but a bad thing by not giving the accused a chance to state their case.

Every seller can be replaced – This is the final “e”, and I don’t think it needs much explanation. eBay has repeatedly set policies, taken positions, and conducted themselves in a manner that demonstrates a blatant disregard toward sellers. They are currently focused on the Buyer experience. They are also clearly focused on the stock, and the Wall Street experience. And you can bet their yearly bonus that they’re focused on their employee experience. The seller experience? Sorry folks, there’s just not enough resources to help you.

Experienced sellers are getting smarter and smarter. Many are having positive selling experiences on sites like Amazon and Overstock, as well as their own website. A recent survey of sellers by a leading financial institution found that approximately 80% of eBay Powersellers plan to do more of their eBusiness off eBay over the next 12 months. And this is not a particularly new trend. It’s only going to take one company, with the right concept, the right timing, the right philosophy to come along and put it together. You can bet your house on the fact that a Google or a Microsoft or a Yahoo will snap them up, giving them the financial background necessary to mount a formidable challenge to eBay. And when that happens, the sellers will move faster than warp speed. And eBay will have nobody to blame but themselves. It’s coming folks. Be prepared!

This is the Lively Prognosticator signing out. If you enjoyed my diatribe, please let the IMA folks know. If you didn’t enjoy it, please keep your thoughts to yourself or I’ll buy something from you just so I can leave a neg!

When Is a Neutral a Neg?

Sunday, July 22nd, 2007

When eBay reviews your account - that’s when. At least that’s what was told to sellers recently on an Ebay forum by an eBay employee:

“If more than 5% of a seller’s buyers are dissatisfied, as measured by negative and neutral Feedback left or Item Not Received complaints during a 90 day period, the seller is in violation of the Seller Non-Performance policy.”

It has always been thought that Neutral Feedback was just that - the buyer was neither happy nor unhappy. Now eBay is using Neutral Feedback against sellers. <--more-->

For most sellers, receiving a neutral feedback is almost as bad as receiving a negative feedback. However, many buyers feel that a neutral feedback is akin to leaving no comment - it doesn’t count towards the seller’s positive feedback, and it doesn’t count toward the seller’s negative feedback. Additionally, some buyers use neutral feedback as a means of communication.

In the past sellers have been wary to request mutual withdrawal for neutral feedback as they feel it will look like they received a negative when buyer’s review their “mutually withdrawn” totals. So sellers advised each other to leave neutral feedback alone.

Is that advice no longer relevant?

Just exactly how is eBay determining that a seller falls into the bottom 1%? Is there some kind of rating system for negative feedback, neutral feedback and INR’s? Say you have two sellers, both with 2500 total feedback. One has 50 negs and 25 neutrals, and the other has 25 negs and 50 neutrals. Are they rated equally? Or are more demerits given to the seller with the 50 neg/25 neutral ratio?

And how are INR’s determined now that eBay no longer offers any protection to buyers? Most buyers filing INR are going straight to Paypal since filing an INR with eBay will forward them directly to Paypal anyway. Is Paypal forwarding these records to eBay?

Should sellers now go through the mutual withdrawal system for neutral feedback? From other posts I’ve read on eBay discussion boards, eBay phone reps are encouraging sellers to go through the mutual withdrawal system - leaving me to believe that eBay feels a bad transaction is wiped clean upon a successful withdrawal.

It would be nice if eBay would publish specific standards, so sellers know where they stand. There have been reports of sellers with FB above 99% receiving the dreaded “Poor Seller Performance” emails. These sellers thought they were doing a good job, but eBay didn’t. Ebay - why such secrecy? Why don’t you publish the standards so all eBay sellers can monitor their ratings the same way you do?

Cyn