posted on October 20, 2000 01:46:50 PM
Like it or not, there is only one (1) solution to the Deadbeat problem and that is for Buyers being required to pre-pay before placing their bid anywhere.
What I mean by this is to imagine that eBay's banking Partner Wells Fargo Bank would create a savings-type account at eBay for each user. A user who wishes to place bids on eBay would first have to deposit the money into their eBay banking account. Then, as a user places a bid for a certain amount of money, that amount would be frozen in their account until either the auction is over or the bid is retracted. Once the auction is over, Wells Fargo could issue the Seller a check or an electronic transfer of some sort for a minimal fee.
Could it work? Sure it could! Does it have pits and downfalls? You bet! Does it create new problems? Sure it does!
It could work sort of like how PayPal is right now. Wells Fargo gets to make money off of the float and miniscule fees Sellers pay for this payment-secure privilege. Wells Fargo could even offer a tiny amount of interest on the money deposited as well. Wells Fargo could imagine the 10 MILLION NEW CUSTOMERS opening up deposits into their bank and then the many fee-based services that they have would be accessed by many new eBay users. Wells Fargo wins out BIG TIME; The Sellers win out Big Time as well; and the Buyers get to put their money into a REAL BANK that's FDIC insured, unlike PayPal is.
Another nice fact is that the push towards making users Verify themselves will go away. Simply by making a Federally-protected confidentiality on a Wells Fargo Bank account should be plenty of verification for anyone.
Of course, this doesn't do much or anything at all for the Buyers. But then again, if a Seller Deadbeats and cheats the Buyer, the FBI, the Secret Service, State and local law enforcement agencies and even the US Postal Service often get involved. But if a Buyer deadbeats? Oh, well!
I know it's an extreme fantasy: eBay able to assure Sellers that their investments are much safer - what a laugh! Never happen! Wells Fargo taking advantage of haven 10 Million new accounts practically overnight and the billions in funds that might add up to? Forget it! Banks aren't that smart! And Buyers would run screaming away into the night in total fear, shock, and outrage at actually being required to have the money before they can place a bid! For Shame!!
posted on October 20, 2000 01:51:31 PM
Why not just make the deabeats pay the listing fee's?
Ebay would be happy cause they still get paid & the seller wouldn't have to foot the bill.
Seller pays to list
Seller files a NPBA
Seller asks for credit & then the buyer gets charged the closing fee!(same as if it did not sell)
posted on October 20, 2000 02:00:19 PM
No need for a complicated account system, a credit card will work just fine. Like at Onsale, you enter a credit card when placing your bid. When the auction ends, that credit card automatically gets charged. Funds go the the seller. No collection needed.
I don't want to hear the credit card whiners. If you can't or won't use a credit card then you shouldn't be online shopping. How does a person pay for internet connection without a credit card?
posted on October 20, 2000 02:00:55 PM
I'm with you 100% on this one Borillar.
DollBaby: You might want to rethink what you just posted. Deadbeats are deadbeats because they don't pay, listing fees or anything else for that matter.
DoctorBeetle: "They ain't no prefect wurld!"
Edited to add: You got in just before I posted this Jake, but I like your idea a lot. I think you will see the top internet sites reverting to this kind of strategy in the near future. In fact, if I could find an auction site that implemented this procedure I would move there in an instant.
posted on October 20, 2000 02:09:52 PM
I agree with jamesoblivion. I don't use my CC to shop online. I used it for verification purposes with eBay and PayPal and Amazon and Yahoo. We have rarely used it to shop online. I keep funds in my PayPal acct and beam $$ that way.
Why would I want to charge a five dollar purchase to my credit card and pay interest on it?
posted on October 20, 2000 02:17:37 PM
A classic case of "Penny-wise and Pound-foolish".
--------------
Don't take life so serious, it ain't nohow permanent.
posted on October 20, 2000 02:27:50 PM! Does it have pits and downfalls? You bet! Does it create new problems? Sure it does!
So....why trade one set of pits, downfalls and problems we know for another set we not only have no idea in advance how to deal with, but for which to my knowledge there's no current internet model? Just what we need - another system needing guinea pigs.
The only problem, jake, with using your CC to bid is that Ebay (whoops! Almost wrote "Paypal" then becomes the transaction processor, gets invovled with chargebacks....no thanky.
The potential for seller abuse of FVF charges to bidders is way too high. If we've got characters like whatsisname abusing the "relist" feature, you can bet that there's going to be people crawling out of the woodwork recouping their fees by claiming every third person is a deadbeat.
No thanks. I'd rather deal with deadbeats myself - no additional overhead for ebay to justify fee increases, and anyway, I'm more efficient and just with these characters than ebay could ever be
posted on October 20, 2000 02:37:08 PMHCQ: you said, "So....why trade one set of pits, downfalls and problems we know for another set we not only have no idea in advance how to deal with . . ."
Because the only system that you can put in place that will work perfectly 100% of the time without any new problems or flaws can be found in your favorite religion's Holy Book. Every other system creates new problems.
posted on October 20, 2000 02:51:59 PM
Guess I didn't make myself clear.
If you're going to have problems no matter what, why swap one familiar set of problems for another, unfamiliar set?
As far as I can see, all you're suggesting is "different" - not "better". Show me how you'd prevent seller abuse (including a nice extortion game called "leave me a pos FB or I'll make you pay my listing fees" ),how you'd keep this from turning into a game of "seller said/bidder said" with ebay as the arbitrator (!! perish the thought), and how you'd keep ebay from charging us (in the form of higher fees) for this "service" - and then we'll see.
[ edited by HartCottageQuilts on Oct 20, 2000 02:53 PM ]
posted on October 20, 2000 02:54:02 PM
I agree with Borillar though eBay would never implement the policy because it lacks "warm fuzzies" for bidders. Each week the number of deadbeats increases. This week I think I've got more deadbeats than paying bidders. That's right, half the bidders deadbeated. I'm going to have to rethink my selling policies and start looking into other sites. I'm wasting my time chasing after $10 and $20 payments.
posted on October 20, 2000 03:05:48 PM
HCQ, I don't see any difference except that payment would be automatic. That would insure that bids really are binding. How would it create any more room for seller fraud than the system that's in place now? The only thing different would be automatic payments. In other words, don't bid if you [general you] don't want to pay.
posted on October 20, 2000 04:31:54 PM
OK, here's how it could work:
The service, let's call it GuaranteePay is a third party service very similar to PayPal.
For this service to make sense, sellers who want to offer it would have to offer it as their only accpeted form of payment.
The auction text would state something like: "We only accept payment through GuaranteePay. To bid, you must click on the GuaranteePay "Bid" button below. Any bids not submitted through GuaranteePay will be canceled."
Then, when someone clicks on the GuaranteePay "Bid" button, a window pops up for them to enter their account login and password, and their bid. This bid is then submitted to both eBay and to GuaranteePay, who notifies you that you have received a bid and that bid is guaranteed.
By placing a bid through GuaranteePay, the buyer has committed to paying.
The GuaranteePay system could even be set up to scan your auctions each hour or so and let you know if non-guaranteed bids have been placed. Heck, it could even be set up to automatically cancel non-guaranteed bids and send an email to the bidder inviting them to bid through GuaranteePay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All rights reserved. All wrongs reversed.
posted on October 20, 2000 05:17:53 PM
Well, it sounds nice, but the real solution is for eBay to enforce rules that work. A non-payer should automatically receive a 30-day suspension for non-payment, 60-days for violation number two and a permanent NARU boot for number three. This gives deadbeats no place to hide--they could get NARU'd on one non-payment binge. Multiple IDs for the same bidder also get the same if this is true.
This means that they can't go on deadbeat cruise control which is the flaw in eBay's current system. A lot of deadbeat behavior is because eBay has wimpy consequences which reinforces cavalier disregard of payment.
posted on October 20, 2000 05:18:08 PM
If Ebay asked everyone for a CC when they signed up it & held the card # liable for the bids then it would work fine guys.
Seller posts auction & pays fee
Seller posts NPBA on high bidder
Seller asks for refund of the close fee & Ebay informs the bidder that it will be charged to the CC they used when they joined.
Another thing would be to give the buyer a chance... You get 1 NPBA & then you have to use a CC to bid again... Any probs with another NPBA & "YOU" pay the fee from that CC!
posted on October 20, 2000 05:46:11 PM
I think mballai's solution is definately the most realistic. It wouldn't cost eBay anything to implement it. Except the fees that they get when someone deadbeat's on an auction. And those fees are really the heart of the matter, aren't they?
If eBay weren't making money due to deadbeats, this problem would have been solved long ago.
[ edited by amalgamated2000 on Oct 20, 2000 05:49 PM ]
posted on October 20, 2000 06:07:21 PMWedgewood said " In fact, if I could find an auction site that implemented this
procedure I would move there in an instant."
But would the buyers?
The idea sounds silly to me..unworkable, and likely to drive bidders out the door real fast.
But I do think this idea would do a politician proud! Sounds much like some of the ideas our representatives in Washington propose.
posted on October 20, 2000 06:10:17 PM
I agree with the previous responses.
1/ Valid credit card on record.
2/ Deadbeats 1st get warning, then 30 days, then 60 days, then permanent suspension on all accounts associated with that credit card.
3/ Any listing, final value, and featured fees fees on uncompleted sales get charged by eBay back to deadbeat's credit card.
I agree with previous poster that bidding binges create lots of hassles foreveryone but the DB.
At present DB's cause eBay losses in final value fee credits and also the cost to administer these credit requests. So you'd think they would want to contain the problem.
posted on October 20, 2000 06:26:17 PMmballai: As a buyer, if eBay implements this policy then I am out of here. Your idea has no recourse for the buyer when the seller makes a false claim.
Also, what about NARUing sellers when a buyer complains when the item is not as described, has excessive shipping, bad packing, dirty, or any number of other things?
posted on October 20, 2000 06:34:59 PM
Uh-OH reddeer and I agree again...
I know that scheme or any scheme like it would get me off online auctions in a fast hurry.
Sounds like some sellers need to look at a new line of work. Something maybe like "Hi,Welcome to Walmart" That seems pretty safe and secure.
posted on October 20, 2000 06:53:07 PM
Can you imagine the administrative nightmare..and expense..of trying to charge "deadbeat buyers" for fees? I'm willing to bet a whole bunch of them would dispute the fee, requiring ebay to hire people to work with the credit card companies to prove their case. Then the buyer says "but I never made that bid, must have been a hacker, ebay mistake, etc". Forget it, it would cost ebay (and hence the sellers) much more than they would ever recover from buyers.
Not to mention the fact that requiring a credit card to bid would drive away people in droves. Another loss for ebay and sellers.
At the risk of being flamed, let me suggest that the "deadbeat problem" is a minor problem in the grand scheme of things. Yes, its annoying, but "deadbeat sellers", poor descriptions, unreliable ebay system, and about 100 other things are far more important to solve than "deadbeat buyers", since, after all, you still have the item, you just have to list it again.
Nonpaying customers are a fact of life for every business. Just be glad that you still have the merchandise in this case. Pity the real-world sellers who have to deal with shoplifters, counterfeiters, bad check writers, chargebacks, and all sorts of "deadbeat buyers" who leave them holding the bag...
posted on October 20, 2000 06:54:13 PM
jamesoblivion: You really think you can shop online with a check? How many of the top shopping sites take checks?
maddienicks: Paying interest on a credit card? Not if you pay your balance in full each month.
mrpotatoheadd: It's getting to be 10% or more for me.
posted on October 20, 2000 07:06:49 PM
They're always going to be deadbeats as life isn't perfect. However it would be nice if you knew they'd be accountable.
Deadbeats % wise are a fairly small problem, depending upon category. They're maybe 5% of customers or less but unfortunately seem to take up 25% of time and cause 50% of frustration.
If you're not a deadbeat then why worry if eBay enforces strict guidelines. There should always be an appeal process. However if several sellers all have a problem then obviously there is a problem.
As far as sellers I've experienced all of the above problems and wished there was a stronger method than feedback. Although bad feedback hurts a seller much more than a buyer. Maybe buyers should be able to issue demerits. Sellers would be subject to being NARU'd if they get 10.
[ edited by surrrfurtom on Oct 20, 2000 07:22 PM ]
posted on October 20, 2000 07:32:25 PM
maddienicks said:
"Why would I want to charge a five dollar purchase to my credit card and pay interest on it?"
If you pay your balance each month you won't be charged any interest. I've used a credit card for 13 years now and I've never paid a penny of interest. Did you know that Discover pays its customers to use their card? It's a nice easy way to make some extra cash.
posted on October 20, 2000 08:04:05 PM
Puurrrfect World suggestion
On the seller relisting--- seller puts: this item was previously sold to NAME OF BIDDER, but transaction was unpaid, cancelled, or any variety of reasons. The seller checks the apropriate one - and until item is sold, the Non Paying Bidder name stays on the listing!
After all, you are going to publicly neg the bidder anyway, right?? What's the diff if it sits right on the auction with appropriate explanation as to why this item is back on the rack again- huh??
Something tells me, if I was gonna deadbeat someone, and I knew my bidding name was going to stay on the listing.........doubt I would like it or chance it....
posted on October 20, 2000 08:11:49 PM
OK-- here is how it would read>>>>
BIDS MUST BE HONORED - BID PAYMENTS WHICH ARE NOT RECEIVED IN REQUESTED TIME FRAME OR NO PAYMENT AT ALL WILL RESULT IN NEGATIVE FEEDBACK ON BIDDERS RATING.
ALSO, SHOULD SELLER RELIST THE UNPAID AUCTION, THE FOLLOWING REASONS WILL BE STATED ON RELISTIN AS TO WHY THIS ITEM IS AVAILABLE AGAIN.
1- BIDDER DEFAULTED 2- MISUNDERSTANDING IN SELLER DESCRIPTION 3- BIDDER EMAIL RETURNED
then becomes the transaction processor, gets invovled with chargebacks....no thanky.
