posted on December 22, 2000 02:29:49 AMJada: "Lisa says there will be more restriction on Ebay giving out email addresses. Glenda doesn't think this will happen."
I said that eBay will always have to allow people to contact sellers during an open auction. And I've said that I've seen no indication that they are going to change the website link policy. Neither of which is saying that I don't think there will be further changes to email addresses down the road. In fact, though perhaps not in this thread, I've said in the past that I think eBay will eventually come up with methods in alignment with their policies.
"Also, Glenda are you now a representative of Ebay, free to explain policy and answer questions on their behalf? Do you know for a fact that every answer you give is the exact interpretation as Ebay's powers-that-be."
No, I'm not a representative of eBay, and I'm giving my interpretation of the policies as they are written and as I understand them. Which is, of course, the same as I always have done.
Amy: I can only tell you that I have exchanged emails with a couple of sellers who have specifically said that they don't like receiving "will you sell me" emails, and I do think they will use this policy clarification/revision/whatever as an "out". I don't disagree that the policy is silly, as I said.
There were indeed parts of the policy changes that I personally railed against - and lost out on.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:30:30 AM
Jada, if you had read Glenda's comments, you would see that she plainly stated she disagreed with eBay's policy. Hard to confuse her with an eBay rep. That in no way prevents her from analyzing eBay's policy. Why turn this into a personal issue?
You speak your mind, like I do. And like me, you probably find your foot in your mouth occasionally. You warned me about assuming your motives, but you are doing exactly that by calling Glenda an "avid eBay supporter." She is not. She is an intelligent poster with some insight.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:36:07 AMgranee: "wait til eBay closes an auction because the seller links to a website that is SELLING something .... After all, linking to a site with anything other than "additional information to help you sell that item" is AGAINST THE RULES (and has been for a long time---they just never ENFORCED it before.)"
Actually, eBay has shut down auctions for inappropriate links - usually because they're linking to another auction site, but occasionally for the way they've phrased a link to their own website. There have been a few messages about that here on AW in the past.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:38:25 AM
Glenda..i'm sorry if I wasn't clear (kind of normal for me, isn't it!).
I know you weren't supporting this part of the new rules...I just got the impression that you had gotten the impression that ebay had instituted the "bidderes can't email" rule in part so the sellers who didn't like being emailed would have something to hang their no on.
I see now that all you were saying is that some will like this rule because it gives them an out. Sorry I misinterpeted what you said.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:52:46 AM
Jada, I never posted on the Q&A Board, though I did frequent the Support Board late nights ("Late Night With Bridget" ). I don't want the last word. I just want to be sure no one else has it.
Actually, I spent all day yesterday railing on another AW user and I didn't really feel like another cannibal-fest. Sorry.
Okay, so on-topic. I hate to bring this up, since we're all scrupulously honest and follow eBay's every rule and whim without question, but seriously, how can eBay make this stick?
Let's say eBay hides all emails, prohibits email links and website links within ads, prevents email addys for user IDs, etc. What about those big retail companies eBay is trying to court? Will they have a different set of rules, or will eBay prohibit them from sending spam too? I mean, it's hard to believe a retailer that sells thousands of items a day can resist the temptation to either spam us or sell our names to spammers.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:55:33 AMAmy: "I see now that all you were saying is that some will like this rule because it gives them an out."
Right-o I'm reasonably sure eBay implemented the "don't ask" policy revision in tandem with their "don't offer" policy revision, for the primary reason of financial benefit to eBay.
posted on December 22, 2000 02:59:46 AM
I think most voices members have (at one time or another) admitted that there are sometimes "things on the back burners" that we are not at liberty to discuss.
I know that I have stated many times that I will not discuss things that are not ALREADY being discussed or that are not already PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.
This makes it difficult sometimes to be completely truthful without "letting the cat out of the bag" when some topics come up. Carefully worded posts or NO COMMENT AT ALL seem to be the only choices as an eBay voices volunteer participating (independently) in public posting forums.
Glenda is ACCURATE (far more often than she is not) a large percent of the time. In her defense regarding posts about some of the upcoming changes that may be considered as part of eBays ongoing attempts to safeguard their members from SPAM and OFF SITE trades... perhaps the desire to post carefully worded responses that are TRUTHFUL without directly mentioning some aspects of the changes that are still "on the back burner" has lead to the percieved discrepancies in varous posts by Voices members from different volunteer groups.
Perhaps some of us are more comfortable than others to talk about this particular issue or are more ready to recognize that it's already being discussed openly and therefore, public knowledge. Clarification on eBays intentions is the only thing missing at this point.
ALSO.... my voices group may have been presented with different (or more?) information surrounding eBays ongoing plans for terminating SPAM and OFF SITE sales. Sometimes I wonder if Voices 1 reacts vehemently enough that the PTB at eBay have learned to better "poise" their presentation to subsequent volunteer groups in a way that is less aggressive so as not to "scare anybody off"... But since the voices groups are conveniently kept separate 99.9999% of the time - it's impossible for me to say for sure that eBay would manipulate their community source in this manner. *sigh*
Regardless...
We are only volunteers, TRYING to help our fellow traders.
posted on December 22, 2000 03:09:12 AMtwinsoft: Speaking of spam lists, I don't quite fathom how eBay says it's okay to email another sellers' bidders and ask them if they want to receive a link to the emailer's auction. (reference the thread Is this spam? Ebay says no)
I'm not going to be happy if I start getting those apparently "approved" emails from eBay sellers, and certainly not if these banner-ad people start sending out 'is it okay if we spam you' emails.
(On that note, I'm going to bed now, I have to go to work in 3 hours.)
edited for errant smiley
[ edited by Glenda on Dec 22, 2000 03:12 AM ]
posted on December 22, 2000 03:35:04 AM
Glenda, regarding the question of "is this spam?" I participated in a thread a while back where we emailed this same question three times to SafeHarbor and got back three different answers. The most liberal interpretation was similar to the one in the other thread. Email anyone you want, just don't include prices or item descriptions. The strictest interpretation was that the only time a seller may offer their mailing list is at the time they are in contact with the auction winner. In other words, a seller may not send email to (1) random users, (2) bidders in another seller's auctions, (3) underbidders in their own auctions, or (4) past winners.
It's frustrating that every CSR gives a different answer. You can get suspended by eBay for following a support rep's advice. But only the suspending rep can reinstate you. Serious flaw, in my opinion.
Since we're pointing at threads, did you see my thread yesterday entitled "Let's Complete This Deal ... OFF EBAY!" I was complaining that my reserve auction got few bids, but I got many emails once the auction closed.
posted on December 22, 2000 03:37:31 AM
I think eBay's "new" and "old" rules regarding non eBay sales that are not actual fee avoidance schemes smack of Restraint of Interstate Trade.
I also think that contacting persons that have bid on your auctions or buyers that contact sellers for non-eBay sales would not fall under Federal anti-spam laws, as there is a nexis for lawful communucation.
posted on December 22, 2000 03:50:21 AM
I did a search for a book that I wanted. I found several copies listed but way above what price I wanted to bid on it. Did a completed search and seen one had ended with an opening bid of $4.99 and no bids. I e-mailed the seller and asked if they were going to re-list the item. Since it had ended in late November, the seller said to e-mail back tomorrow and they would let me know if they still had it. So I wrote the next day and asked if they did, if they were going to re-list and if not, if they would be interested in selling it to me for their opening bid, plus postage and that I would pay immediately with Paypal. I never did hear back from the seller so assumed they were not interested in selling or re-listing (which would have been fine as I would have bid on it). Could they have turned me in for asking them to sell it to me off eBay? And if it comes to that, what does it mean to buyers who do ask sellers those type of questions?
posted on December 22, 2000 04:10:13 AM
Kiki, that's right. And you'd better believe this new policy will create a whole new pastime involving sting operations and competitors. How many emails like this one will SafeHarbor receive (from a seller's competitor)?
"I emailed the seller to ask if he had more, and he offered to sell it to me! (Headers below.)"
Great way to eliminate the competiton. eBay will have their hands full.
Okay, here's another thing. Two rules are pretty much hard and fast at eBay:
1) Links to web sites are permitted.
2) That web site may offer the same item for sale, though only at a higher price (than the opening bid).
At this point, if eBay intends to restrict sales from web sites, they'll need to do some serious revisions to their existing policy. Not just clarification, but actually reverse their policy in this area. Then eBay would have some 'splainin' to do about why they allow targeted banner advertising.
posted on December 22, 2000 05:39:29 AM
An interesting change showed up in closed auctions just as this policy went into effect.
Previously, when you signed in on Ebay and viewed closed auctions, the seller's email address showed next to their username. Now it does not.
Even more interesting, when you click on the name to request the email address, the url includes the item number and seller id. And of course once you enter your info, they have a complete record of the seller, item number, and person requesting it should they decide to investigate.
posted on December 22, 2000 05:43:27 AM
TWINSOFT:
""I emailed the seller to ask if he had more, and he offered to sell it to me! (Headers below.)" Great way to eliminate the competiton. eBay will have their hands full."
Well, emailing a SELLER asking if they will sell to you off eBay is also illegal ... so you merely coyly reply with "What did you have in mind, big fellah?"
(much like the interchanges between whores and undercover cops, where neither is willing to state a price because the cop is trying to avoid "entrapment" and the whore doens't want to state her prices and services because he/she's afraid the would-be customer is a cop.)
GLENDA -
"I think the engineering aspect is that they couldn't automate it - they'd have to process each billing manually. That's why people can't add listing options to an item after it's already started - like adding a second category, bolding, etc. - because eBay has already done the billing for that auction, they'd have to manually compute the changes and rebill."
Balderdash! With enough transactions and $$$ at stake, they could set up a couple of pages where the customer and seller could sign in and state their intent with regards to the closed auction. And then attach the FVF fees to the seller's billing as a separate transaction in their database (PSF = Post-Listing Sale Fee).
It would only have to afect the billing database, not the one the items are kept in.
posted on December 22, 2000 05:59:36 AM
isworeiwouldneverdothis
Actually, publishing these “new” RULES will cost eBay money!
1. I am sure there are a few out there who hadn't thought of some of these ideas, which eBay has just informed them of.
2. There is no way to enforce these silly rules so they bring no cash into eBay.
3. Since, if eBay catches someone breaking their rules all they can do is suspend them, actually that costs eBay, as they are eliminating either a seller or a buyer at this point which lowers their overall income.
4. The way eBay states rules is so open ended that none would hold up in court anyway.
SO, the bottom line is, no one is going to turn themselves, or probably anyone else in. Only the timid and newbies might be frightened by this stuff - so it was a waste to time to post such by eBay, and more so since all they did is give more people, more ideas of how to avoid their ridiculously high fees.
posted on December 22, 2000 06:28:27 AM
I must be really bad. I have contacted sellers about unsold, closed auctions and have subsequently purchased the item. I have also bid on dutch auction items and then asked to purchase a larger quantity when I realized I needed more and they HAD more available.None of the sellers in these cases were at all hesitant to sell to me. Neither am I when a winning bidder asks me if I have more of an item, or something related.
These policies appear to me to be desperate attempts to control sellers and try to squeeze every last penny out of them, not attempts to seriously address spam or unwanted e-mail.
For example, I felt that the e-mail asking if you wanted to be notified of a seller's auctions was clearly SPAM and the fact that E-Bay seemed to indicate that it wasn't is disturbing. What else could you call it? The sender got your e-mail off of E-Bay and contacted you to sell you something without you ever having any previous dealing with them.
This "only a venue" claim, that E-Bay cites at convenient times. implies to me E-Bay ONLY has jurisdiction over you and your "sale" if you pay to list that item on E-Bay and end up with a closed tranasction and winning bidder. Beyond that, I don't honestly see how they can control what happens. They again would have to rely on the users of the site "reporting" errant users. Great. Another opportunity for vigilantism.
Meanwhile, you can receive threatening e-mail from a fellow E-Bay user and you are told that they have no control over private e-mail between users. I had a guy see one of my auctions and send me bizarre, scary e-mails. He used an e-mail address that was registered on E-Bay. When I forwarded the e-mail with my concerns to Safe Harbor, I was told there was nothing they could do about PRIVATE e-mails between users! Now, how do you reconcile that view with the view that my e-mails to a seller asking if they had more of an item that I ALREADY WON IN A CLOSED AUCTION is within their "jurisdiction?" I don't get it.
posted on December 22, 2000 06:58:38 AM
Hello RedDeer,
I've only read the opening post in this thread but I don't see much need to read beyond that.
It is obvious that eBay has finally decided that it cannot act as an advertising vehicle on the basis of the insertion fees only.
These new restrictions are meant to put the fear of eBay suspension into sellers and buyers alike who see an eBay auction as a means to establish contact and conclude a deal privately without eBay getting its commission.
And what services does eBay provide for that commission? The ability to leave feedback? Insurance?
Imagine the local newspaper selling classified ads with this same set of strictures!
Next, I imagine that eBay will start clamping down on linking to one's own website where the seller advertises other items than the ones they are listing on eBay.
And then after that, eBay will demand that one not refer (in any emails) a buyer to one's own website for other items that might interest them.
eBay has completely overstepped itself by trying to extend its control over what are essentially private aspects of the online auction business.
posted on December 22, 2000 06:59:49 AM
to bad they can't enforce the bidder must pay for all auctions won policy. Seems ebay only wants to enforce the rules that put money in their pockets.
Take a look at 2ebay.com. The site that ebay wants to kill
ebay made an announcement with the usual murkiness. We are looking at the 'worst case scenario', but so are they. The wording allows them a 'fallback' position on this, so let's see how far back that is...
Bottom line, that's what ebay cares about. This will be harmful to us, but it will also be harmful to them. We need to let them know that...
posted on December 22, 2000 07:38:55 AMIMLDS2: does this help, re: fees?
"3.1 Non-Registered Users. Non-Registered users can use mybiz services for free, which entitles them to ask customer service questions through our inquiry system and to view relevant seller FAQ pages.
3.2 Registered Individual Users. Registered individual users can use mybiz services for free, which entitles them to ask customer services questions through the our inquiry system, to view relevant seller FAQ pages, and to make use of additional features available upon registration."
posted on December 22, 2000 08:33:36 AM
It seems that I'm a little slow at some things. Let me get this right... If I have 2 of the same item and only list 1 on eBay. Two people bid and of course one wins by say 50 cents, I can't offer the other to the next person down?
Ebay is still getting the fee from listing and the commission from selling the item. Once that is done, they should have no say so in any other transactions.
posted on December 22, 2000 08:38:44 AM
I thought the "only a dollar" reserve auction penalty fee was supposed to compensate eBay for their "losses" to outside the auction sales. Shouldn't eBay now, do away with that fee? Now that ALL outside the auction sales are against eBay policy, where does that extra "only a dollar" fee go?
The bottom line is this, if we don't turn each other in, eBay can't enforce the policy. I know I certainly won't turn in anyone who contacts me about buying something of MINE. This is business, MY business not some closed community where selling stuff to each other becomes some kind of ridiculous "crime" to be punished. If eBay starts suspending people and putting them out of business simply for trying to sell their own merchandise anyway they see fit, I hope it backfires bigtime and ends up being ruled as a restraint of free trade. At the very least, maybe another site will show up as real competition, finally. There were other alternatives to these steps but eBay chose to excersize it's power and control as the only real game in town, rather that work with us as the community members to whom they pay such sweet lip service.
This is only the beginning. Get ready for more changes, and they won't be good.
Don't blame the voices 1 group for this one. They all fought HARD against this, to no avail.
posted on December 22, 2000 08:54:50 AM
To look at another side of this issue...
Assumming that ebay intends to institute changes that will further restrict our ability to get anothers email addresses..ie, contact seller THROUGH ebay only, emails not available for bidders and seller on a closed auction, etc....and it becomes very difficult to independantly contact another user. and assuming most users are honest and law abiding and will abide by these rules, then..
It is possible it could help increase the number of bids we recieve.
Think about it...a lot of buyers do not bid on auctions, waiting for it to end with no bids or reserve not met, and then emailing the seller and attempt to negotiate a sale. If it becomes difficult to make these contacts, then the bidders may stop trying to work off ebay and will bid instead...and even last minute bids are better than no bids on an item.
This helps both ebay's bottom line and ours.
So...there MAY be a silver lining to this rather dark cloud.
posted on December 22, 2000 09:04:53 AMCDs2Go: "If I have 2 of the same item and only list 1 on eBay. Two people bid and of course one wins by say 50 cents, I can't offer the other to the next person down?"
posted on December 22, 2000 09:20:33 AM
Thanks for the info reddeer.
Of course this new policy has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with spam. It is simply eBay trying to capture more dollars.
IHMO, they are getting very close to the line that they are trying to walk. The line between capturing lots of bucks and not being such a PITA that sellers and bidders go elsewhere.
posted on December 22, 2000 10:12:27 AM
"The building of a New Iron Curtain..."...
Vive La "Dictatorship"...Vive La Monopoly"...
Next step then, will be to make "Saving" an Ebay EOA impossible..because of course, it contains both Seller and Buyer's Email addy...heaven forbids!!!!
This is de-humanizing this business: Many users, sellers/buyers, have become good friends, have established a great rapport. Are we soon to be restricted on WHAT can be said in our own EOA????
"Thanks, send moola"...
Then, POOOF! addy will self-distruct?
This is really becoming totally absurd...
An auction parlor I use to filter some old inventory TELLS ME when they know of a potential buyer, if what I put up did not sell....
And here, we have super-Paranoia on E-bAy'S part, because they might miss out on fees? What's next: AUTOMATIC RELIST, with no CHOICE on SELLER'S PART?????
Forgive my French, but man! am I p----d off!!
********************
