posted on October 26, 2000 04:07:35 PM
Damon can we get a solid answer from Pay Pal/X Com? Tax time is coming and I want to write off those fees from Pay Pal.
I have seen the eBay staff post (on their discussion boards) that passing along fees related to a payment service as being against their rules. I don't have the link to give you at this time, but you may want to contact eBay directly.
For the printout/record of fees...I will be passing along the request. The business accounts do have downloadable logs that might help this.
posted on October 26, 2000 06:02:27 PM
Hello Damon,
Perhaps my question was not clear.
I'm not interested in eBay's rule on this. I already KNOW eBay's rule.
My question again:
What is PAYPAL'S rule on passing along fees to customers?
I want to know in regard to transactions that do NOT involve eBay.
posted on October 26, 2000 08:41:07 PM
Hi abingdoncomputers
I have a feeling we'll both be waiting a long time for answers. This is another area where PayPal doesn't have a policy. That's pretty clear from the fact that Damon didn't answer my question. He simply diverted -- and made it look like I didn't read his previous post well enough to understand it.
posted on October 27, 2000 03:16:09 AM
they wanna pick and choose the questions they answer.
and if you pressure for an answer, all you get is Doubletalk
posted on October 27, 2000 10:22:50 AM
I think it's pretty cheesy when a representative of a company ( let's call it "P" ) makes a statement about a policy of another company ( let's call it "e" ) saying:
From information viewed on e, passing along P fees is not allowed.
and, when questioned regarding the actual location of this policy on e's site, has nothing more concrete to offer than:
I have seen the e staff post (on their discussion boards) that passing along fees related to P's service as being against their rules. I don't have the link to give you at this time, but you may want to contact e directly.
People claim to have seen flying saucers, too, but saying it doesn't necessarily make it so. I would think that if the rep for company P couldn't provide solid evidence regarding the policy of company e, it might be best not to make declarative statements regarding that policy.
But that's just me...
edited to remove unwanted smileys...
[ edited by mrpotatoheadd on Oct 27, 2000 10:23 AM ]
posted on October 27, 2000 12:09:28 PM
HI mrpotatohead,
Passing along fees, based on comments made on their discussion boards, is not acceptable according to the representative posting it. This is a fact and not an interpretation of what was stated.
However, to be sure, I invited users to contact eBay directly regarding their policy on the issue.
Passing along credit card processing fees is illegal in many states.
posted on October 27, 2000 12:30:09 PM
Damon, Can you tell us that Pay Pal is going to take a stand and comment on the matter? That's what we all want to know. Is it legal or within the Pay Pal guidelines to pass along the charges when accepting payment through Pay Pal? We all agree to some degree that it may be frowned upon by ebay.
posted on October 27, 2000 12:31:23 PM
paypaldamon-
Passing along fees, based on comments made on their discussion boards, is not acceptable according to the representative posting it. This is a fact and not an interpretation of what was stated.
It may be a fact that it was stated, but that hardly makes it a fact with regards to eBay's posted TOS, unless, I suppose, that particular representative was the individual in charge of making and enforcing policy at eBay. I could round up several comments you have made regarding PayPal's policies on the boards here on AW- would you be willing to agree that every one of them is, in fact, a true and accurate representation of PayPal's TOS?
However, to be sure, I invited users to contact eBay directly regarding their policy on the issue.
I would think if you were not sure about eBay's policies, it would be best not to be posting PayPal's opinions regarding them (you are speaking for PayPal here, are you not?), especially when the time might be better spent addressing the questions many of your customers have regarding the policies of your company.
posted on October 27, 2000 06:05:57 PM
Uh Damon?
No one was asking you what Ebay said. Several were asking what PayPal's policy is. Repeatedly. With circles and arrows on the back - demonstrating that they didn't want you to tell them what Ebay said, but wanted to know what the company you are representing's policy is.
Now that doesn't seem like a irresponsible question for a customer to ask - at this point you are coming across as very rude.
posted on October 27, 2000 08:12:34 PM
Well, since it's very late on Friday evening, I guess we can forget about getting an answer from Damon on this one. But there is always Monday...
posted on October 27, 2000 08:42:19 PM
Hi mrpotatohead,
I did address the concerns of our users through that means. I directed them to where they need to go and that is the main issue as it relates to charging fees on eBay. The official word would come from them.
As far as we are concerned, there is no policy on passing along fees, but it may be against the rules of the web site(s) you are using for payment services. This, however, is subject to change.
I see that you are indeed here on the boards tonight. You still haven't answered my question. Is it number 1 or number 2? The answer that you provide makes a lot of difference...
I find it interesting that you have responded to the two posts I made on this page, which were basically statements by me offering my thoughts about how PayPal was choosing to answer customer questions, while posts which actually ask those questions remain unanswered (at least, those asking the questions seem to think so).
I'm not sure what that means, but there you have it.
posted on October 28, 2000 08:20:12 AM
LOL Empires! I think you've got it nailed.
"As far as we are concerned, there is no policy on passing along fees, but it may be against the rules of the web site(s) you are using for payment services. This, however, is subject to change."
Damon, that sentence FINALLY answers MY question. But it does raise another:
Is PayPal going to let us KNOW when that stance changes?
PayPal will never be broadly successful until it thinks outside the auction industry.
I know I'm not hanging my fortunes solely on ebay, yahoo, amazon or any other auction site.
So you see, continually trying to send me back to eBay for an answer does me no good. I no longer list PayPal as a payment option at eBay or any other web site not owned by ME. I am the master of my own domain(s).
I needed PayPal's ruling.
posted on October 28, 2000 08:35:33 AMvargas My only concern is with Banking industry regulation flags that this problem may post with it's users and the damn IRS. That's why all these cute little online payment companies need to get their stuff out in the open and not let us users do the work for them while they rake in the milions. Cripes almighty, what are they paying the monkess in the circus for anyways if not to do their jobs....?
posted on October 28, 2000 04:33:45 PM
Why isn't Damon's answer clear? It's clear to me. PP has no policy on charging fees but ebay and others might, so make sure you don't violate their policies.
As for PP, they will wait until lots of sellers are passing on the fees. Then they will announce that it is now against their policy and immediately freeze all the accounts of sellers doing this. They will hold the funds for 30 days while allowing payments to continue coming in. By the time they release the accounts, hundreds of sellers will have joined the hundreds of others who have left PP.
I think PP has more users than they can handle and decided that they have to drive a number of them away.
With a TOS that changes daily and changes made retroactive, who cares what PP's position is at any given time? Tomorrow it will say something else and Damon will be here explaining that it was "always" that way. (We have already seen their definition of "always." http://www.ygoodman.com [email protected]
posted on October 28, 2000 08:10:10 PM
Maybe the best way to get an answer on this is to take it up with the California Attorney General's office. California is the state most often cited as having a law against credit card surcharges.
I really don't see how cc surcharge laws can apply to payment services such as PayPal, now that accounts can be funded via checking accounts.
The idea behind the cc surcharge laws is to keep businesses from penalizing credit card users.
Since PayPal accounts can be funded via credit card, checking accounts funds or "cash" from other PayPal transactions, there is no penalty for cc use, as long as you charge a fee for any kind of PayPal transaction.
The playing field is level.
I'm calling the AG's office on Monday to get them to look into it and perhaps rule. I'm also calling a contact at the FTC.
posted on October 28, 2000 09:59:11 PM
I just want to reiterate what others have stated. Plain and simple: Incorporate these costs into your opening bid! This is so VERY easy and there is none of this fussing about TOS or illegalities! </p>DUH! Come on, people! My local stores do not charge me extra to take my payment by credit card, wrap my fragile item in paper or give me a nice bag or two to take it home in! Even the cost of the background music and person ringing up/wrapping my item is ... are you listening? ... ALREADY INCORPORATED INTO THE PRICE OF THE ITEM!</p> I am a relatively small seller, but even I know the basic fundamentals of retail sales! I should ... I have been a consumer for many years! Everyone know there would be no fussing and mussing if you simplified!
posted on October 28, 2000 10:24:22 PMIncorporate these costs into your opening bid! ... Even the cost of the background music and person ringing up/wrapping my item is ... are you listening? ... ALREADY INCORPORATED INTO THE PRICE OF THE ITEM
Oh, I see- eBay should be just like... a store!
For some strange reason I had the idea that sellers (some, anyway) on eBay were running auctions (you know, where you start the price off low, and buyers increasingly offer higher amounts for an item). It's not easy to incorporate costs into a $1 opening bid auction on an item worth $20- raising the opening to $2 would be kind of pointless.
I am a relatively small seller, but even I know the basic fundamentals of retail sales!
I am a relatively small seller too, and I know the basic fundamentals of an auction- some people like to (as you said- DUH!) bid!
posted on October 28, 2000 10:28:22 PM
How silly - the only thing that tends to make me more money when I adjust the opening bid, is to make is lower, not higher.
These are auctions - not outright sales. Or didn't you notice? That means the bidder determines the final price.
Raising the opening bid has never done anything but cost me.
posted on October 28, 2000 11:01:26 PM
No one said eBay had to be like a store... but I know that if I start my auction at $1.00, there is no telling where the item will go price-wise. So that is MY choice to start at $1.00 and HOPE it goes higher. MANY MANY auctions start out at $5.00, or whatever. My response is to those idgits who are all hung up on the costs of the different fees; those who feel it's cutting into their profit. If its cutting into your profit, then you ARE thinking like a retailer, so start your bid higher like a retailer or quit yer whining! I have been selling since January, not a terribly long time. But raising my opening bid by .25 (or more if I feel it is warrented) has never cost me anything! I get just as many hits and bids as before, if not more. I used to start my Estee golden compacts at $1.00, and they never went as high as I'd like. I started them at $10.00 a few weeks ago and the latest one (exactly the same)went $3.00 over what I was just HOPING for! So starting bid seems to have nothing to do with it! We all want to make money at this; its not just for fun. But the choice is OURS to take when we list at $1.00! My $19.00 starts get the same bids as my $1.00 starts, roughly. So, thats just an easy excuse for not simplifying!
posted on October 28, 2000 11:12:59 PMSo starting bid seems to have nothing to do with it! ... My $19.00 starts get the same bids as my $1.00 starts, roughly. So, thats just an easy excuse for not simplifying!
I see- I should change my method of determining an opening bid because your auction results indicate that starting with a higher opening bid works for you. Of course, the fact that I sell completely different items than you doesn't make any difference, I'm sure. Makes sense to me.
posted on October 29, 2000 01:08:33 AM
Oh, I most certainly DO follow my own advice! If I am not so very worried about what I actually end up with as a final bid, (some items I just wish to be rid of as they are taking up space, etc) I start it at $1.00. BECAUSE I SIMPLY DO NOT CARE. If I am concerned about fees cutting into my profit, I most certainly DO start my auction higher! Starting an auction at $1.00 is a choice I make for ME and a choice all sellers make for THEMSELVES. Ever been to a REAL auction house? They do not start the bidding at $1.00 except on the most pitiful, unattractive and "most likely not to sell" items....those items people want gone from their house at all costs. Having been to offline auctions as both a seller and a bidder, I can tell you that you are asked to put down "What do you wish us to start the bidding at?" for each item. Here is where you have to, as a seller, take into consideration the costs YOU have put out (travel to and from far off auction sites, what item is worth, what percentage the auction house charges you to have the auctioneer do the work for you, etc) in order to auction your item! Same goes with online auctions. If you don't like the retail analogy from earlier, I just gave you a real auction analogy. How you start your bidding is YOUR CHOICE, and it does not make your item sell better...it just makes it sell. What makes an item sell better is: having an item that is currently in high demand, is good quality, has a seller with plentiful positive feedback, an enticing picture and creative, friendly or well-spoken ad. IMHO, which comes from my OWN experience and does not mean to speak for others, an extremely low start is perfect for getting rid of unwanted stock (which I do all the time) or attracting newbies to bid. When I first started selling, I thought for sure I had to start at $1.00! I just knew that was the only way to attract bids. But since then I have learned and grown in my confidence, having spent a LOT of time just WATCHING various auctions for all types of items. I've spent as much time bidding as selling, too, and I see the pattern over and over again. This reply, by the way, is addressed to a particular subject, not a particular person. Some of us would do well to learn that this is advice on how to quit the bickering and crying over fees that will simply never go away. Quit complaining, be sensible, and do something about it instead of throwing up stumbling blocks when someone offers a smart alternative. Complaining does no one any good. Debating what's legal and illegal, making snide remarks, taking advice personally and generally whining is a waste of time and energy. Finding a SOLUTION is what's important here. If you have another solution or helpful idea...post it, share it with us. If not, grow up and wake up... this isn't about YOU, it's about all of US in this community!
The (my) official response seems to be:
The unofficial response is:
