posted on April 3, 2001 07:34:57 PMThoughts I've had many new "0" feedback bidders lately on BIN auctions with no trouble.
***Buy It Now Buyer Requirements***
Dear eBay Community,
Two weeks ago, we introduced new buyer requirements for purchasing
items using the Buy It Now feature. Based on your feedback, we are now
introducing an alternative to placing a credit card on file with eBay.
Starting this week, buyers who are interested in purchasing items with
the Buy It Now feature must meet one of the following requirements:
*Have a credit card on file OR
*Verify their identity OR
*Have a minimum feedback of ten (10).
Please note that these Buy It Now changes will not be completely
functional until we have fully released the changes, which may take
several days.
We hope you continue to enjoy success with the Buy It Now feature.
Please continue to share your feedback with us so that we can continue
to improve the feature for both buyers and sellers.
posted on April 3, 2001 07:45:38 PM
I just had a BIN auction where a buyer wanted to use BIN but could not because she did not have, and did not want, a credit card on file w/eBay. She asked me to close auction and she would send me payment via paypal. I told her I could not (fee avoidance and all). I felt pretty bad, we had exchanged a few emails, and she seemed like a nice person.
Within hours another buyer used the BIN and won it.
posted on April 3, 2001 09:18:32 PM
Maybe this is a first step by eBay to try and stop some of the deadbeats. I'm not sure this will help, but something has to be done.
I think many (most) will register a credit card to be able to use the BIN feature. The few that resist will be few and far between.
posted on April 3, 2001 09:39:20 PM
It's about time they added the OR that includes 10 feedback was added.
I complained to eBay when they changed BIN a couple of weeks ago and I could no longer use it. (I refuse to trust ebay with my credit card, and I won't pay $5.00 to have the privilage of bidding on an auction). The eBay drone didn't even adress my concerns. The drone gave the standard pap about eBay working to protect both buyers and sellers. ?!?!?!?. The drone even said they checked and I had already done the $5.00 registration. WRONG!!.
rampaged don't count on most (or even many) people registering with a credit card. The day eBay forces me to give a credit card, is the day I stop buying on eBay.
Like I am really going to give my credit card number to the company who just changed their Terms of Service to allow them to sell my personal information. NOT
posted on April 3, 2001 10:08:44 PMgjsi I understand your feelings on this matter quiet well, but as stated I feel that most will register their credit card information.
Like I am really going to give my credit card number to the company who just changed their Terms of Service to allow them to sell my personal information. NOT
My question to the above statement is how would this harm you or anyone else? Sure it would cause you to be solicited and get more spam mail but what other harm could it cause. I know it's an invasion of privacy once this happens, but there is no way to really stop it if you use a credit card at all.
H*** my privacy is invaded so much now I take it with a grain of salt. Once you use a credit card anywhere to electronically transfer funds, to pay for gasoline at the pumps or to buy a tape at Wall Mart you have given away enough information to make life miserable.
If i'm missing something i'm unaware of please enlighten me. Personally I just don't see it as a big deal.
posted on April 4, 2001 02:36:14 AMmaybe this will stop some of the deadbeat bidders
I may be slow but I don't see how this would cut down on deadbeats. I have my CC registered with ebay but I never use it for BIN. It tells me my credit card has not been charged, but it lets me continue with the purchase.
posted on April 4, 2001 06:59:23 AM
I'm very glad to hear of the BIN change - I've had a few potential buyers want to use BIN that couldn't because of the CC or $5 rules - and the item has got me less $ because the bidding didn't take it up to the BIN price I would have gotten...
posted on April 4, 2001 07:10:07 AMI may be slow but I don't see how this would cut down on deadbeats. I have my CC registered with ebay but I never use it for BIN. It tells me my credit card has not been charged, but it lets me continue with the purchase.
1) Have a credit card on file OR
2) Verify their identity OR
3) Have a minimum feedback of ten (10)
I don't see where 1 & 2 will be of much help but 3 should as new people become more experienced about the usage of eBay.
As we all know learning how eBay works is no easy task. I've been at it for almost three years and still learn daily, especially when eBay is always changing the playing rules.
At any rate maybe it's a first step. The deadbeat problem will never be fully contained.
posted on April 4, 2001 07:24:58 AM
"She asked me to close auction and she would send me payment via paypal. I told her I could not (fee avoidance and all). "
I would not let ebay tell me who I can do business with. I would have stopped the auction.
posted on April 4, 2001 09:28:40 AM
The saddest thing of all is that in the few times I have used BIN, it was newbies who did it. A 0 feedback rating does not mean deadbeat. It means new to eBay. Oh, well.
posted on April 4, 2001 09:59:22 AM
Although I mostly sell on ebay and rarely buy anything, I am 100% in GJSI's corner. It is about time some people said no to some of these privacy invaders. I stopped using AW because of the same thing.
posted on April 4, 2001 07:19:34 PMrampaged, it is the fact that eBay changed their privacy policy, with out asking users who had already provided information, so they could make a buck selling the information.
When I gave my personal information to eBay, their policy said they would not give or sell the information. They changed the policy after they got my information. What is to keep them from changing their TOS to allow them to start charging my credit card a monthy fee, or setup auctions to automaticlly bill my credit card if I win.
IMHO, this is the old slippery slope, give eBay and inch and they will take a mile. (or two, or ten or . . . )
posted on April 4, 2001 07:59:30 PM
The notification I got from Ebay indicated that they were changing the privacy policy simply in order to be able to transfer our info to a buyer or new owner of the business (or a piece of the business). IMHO, that's just a reasonable position for any business to take, given that our info is a valuable corporate asset. As an Ebay shareholder, I'd be worried if they didn't take that position.
posted on April 4, 2001 08:06:51 PMdickw unless the company they transfer the information to keeps the same privacy policy that I originally agreed to when I singed up, then there is a problem.
What's to keep ebay from setting up a subsidiary that is responsible for user's information and then selling that piece of the company to make some money? Maybe the highest bidder will be one of the major spammers. How many valid email addresses would they get from eBay?
Once again, I think it is totally unethical for eBay to change thier privacy policy after collecting personal information from users, without getting permission from those users.
Greg
Edited to add: By the way I don't think eBay should consider our personal information as a Corp. Asset. This is our information and since eBay claims it is only a venue, how can they claim our information is their asset.
posted on April 4, 2001 10:09:47 PM"... my privacy is invaded so much now I take it with a grain of salt. Once you use a credit card anywhere to electronically transfer funds, to pay for gasoline at the pumps or to buy a tape at Wall Mart you have given away enough information to make life miserable.
"If i'm missing something i'm unaware of please enlighten me. Personally I just don't see it as a big deal."
The following are my feelings, and I don't know if they'll include anything missing....
I used to ignore junk mail, and tolerated telemarketing, but when spam started arriving, it was the last straw. I figure that a few minutes every day sorting out junk, shredding CC offers, answering telemarketer calls, dealing with spam, etc., would cost someone the equivalent of several months of work days over an average adult lifetime. People complain about having too much to do; while the above are small on any one day, it still adds up to perhaps the most needless waste of time.
Add in even conservative estimates of extra infrastructure cost to handle extra volume of mostly unwanted marketing, plus if one gets CallerID and/or filtering software (I know the last two are optional), and that could be a few hundred to a few thousand dollars over a lifetime. Advertising should not spend your money or time for you, but should only cost the recipient when they actually choose to buy an advertised product.
So I lost tolerance for direct marketing, and while finding ways of reducing it, was further annoyed to find out that many banks, credit bureaus, colleges, pharmacies (!), grocery stores, other chain stores, online retailers, ISPs, cable companies, and until recently, state DMVs, are willing to quietly sell the information they've amassed.
Besides buying itself, there are rebates, contests, "registration," etc. Many of these are designed for direct marketing purposes. If these uses had to be clearly stated, up front (most online privacy policies, while a step in the right direct, are not clear, up front, or reliable, IMO), or that permission had to be secured before DM purposes, yet a customer decides to opt in, then that's fine. That's how it should be: the customer being able to make an informed choice on whether they think the additional "exciting" offers are worth their time and money.
Once I figured out the "ins," many "outs" became clear, and I've gotten most of the time back (which I now choose to inform others about direct marketing). Furthermore, using "no nonsense" methods of shopping can actually save even more time (e.g. the less cards you use, the less time spent dealing with multiple bills, and possibly less money in maybe not getting drawn into debt).
I just want to buy something and be done. This is supposed to be the Information Age. I hear and see plenty of non-direct ads on TV and radio, and can seek out plenty of info online. Why do I need someone shoving ads directly down my throat? I don't.
Something interesting has happened offline. I sometimes ask a store if paying with credit card or check would cause my info to be sold to other companies. Two or three years ago, almost all clerks would go (effectively) "huh?" to this question. Now around half react with things like, "oh, no, we don't do that," some even volunteering words on their own personal distaste of telemarketing or even some of the underlying methods. I don't know if they'd all actually know what happens outside their view, but the point is that the awareness level of such issues seems to be higher, at least from my limited range.
Anyway, with eBay, I am happy to see them almost ready to open a 10+ FB option for BIN. I agree with others who don't want to give CC information to eBay. Security still is not the greatest, and eBay is inviting too many direct marketers for my taste (two separate issues). Or pay $5 for the "privilege" of giving up more personal information when I can simply keep bidding and comfortably living with sometimes being outbid? No thanks. I'll take the 10+ option or no BIN.
eBay's customer list would make a prime target for purchase. 20 million (isn't that the current number? ) people known to have been willing to buy online at least once, with records of how many purchases (FB at the very least), over what range of time -- and who knows how much more information stored somewhere at eBay. Most of the people that I know have computers are also registered on eBay, and a fairly large fraction are at least occasional sellers. All of this is a gold mine with few equals (Amazon maybe). A few direct marketers might target with care, but most wouldn't be too picky, but spam as many as they can. Maximizing number of recipients appears to the mode of operation of most direct marketers.
If the customer lists were sold as part of the rest of the business, to a company that has equal or better privacy, or would keep that unit under a separate privacy policy, that's fine. What ultimately happened to the Toysmart list was the most honorable thing. Another way of being honorable while avoiding outright destroying a customer list would be re-confirmations: a company with lesser privacy policies would have to clearly state (no legalese) what further intentions they have with customer information, and ask whether the customer wants to continue under the new company or terminate the account, and only if confirmation of continuance occurs would the customer be considered fair game. Don't just tell people after the fact and make them opt-out, put it up front as an opt-in. Chances are, a lot of the customers would accept this, and the company may find it easier to deal without bad press.
There are ways of doing direct marketing that are both opt-in yet still quite meaningful, and aside from just eBay, I'd think direct marketing to a vastly smaller number of people who will be say 20% responsive seems more cost effective than direct marketing to large numbers with an average of less than 0.5% effectiveness. Snail mail a million fliers and get only 5000 responses, or snail mail 25,000 fliers to get the same 5000 responses? Even if that 20% would really only be 5%, that would still be one tenth the cost of printing and mailing compared to trying to get the same number of responses from a 0.5% response rate.
OTOH, maybe I'm the one who's still missing something.
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
[ Extensively edited to be a little more concise. ]
[ edited by dc9a320 on Apr 4, 2001 10:28 PM ]
[ Edited again to correct my error: Toysmart, not eToys]
[ edited by dc9a320 on Apr 5, 2001 11:08 AM ]
posted on April 4, 2001 10:38:01 PM
dc9, with every passing line of your post your paranoia becomes more and more apparant. But it's more than that. There's a certain arrogance in believing that the business world is really that concerned with your personal info. Collectively, I grant you that, but frankly whether you are or aren't part of this gigantic database adds or subtracts close to nothing. Look, I've owned a mailorder video company for 9 yrs. now. One day when I'm ready to move on and sell my business, don't you think I'll sell my mailing list to whoever I can?? Hell, I'll sell it to anyone and everyone and then again to the new owners as part of the business. That's the way it is for any small business all the way up to big companies like ebay. That's reality! If you feel offended by this intrusion then never buy anything over the mail or internet and use only cash to buy everything else. Or you can just move to Montana and live next to were the Unabomber used to live. Oh and by the way, anybody that really believes ebay has 22 million users..... has got some real issues themselves.
posted on April 5, 2001 10:44:04 AM
Nah, I have no interest in moving to the wilderness. I'm a plenty active consumer who enjoys modern life and technology but who just happens to really hate the modern trend of ever-increasing volumes of direct marketing, and what's done in its name. I don't think there is any silly X-files-style conspiracy here (and don't even care much for that TV show, BTW, if that means anything ), I just don't like how much one has to learn about direct marketing just to get companies like telemarketers to stop wasting my time or money over something I don't want. It's my biggest pet peeve about the consumer world, and I am sorry if I come off so strong over it, maybe I have to watch my tone or length more.
There's more important problems in life, for sure, but in consumer life, I've avoided being ripped off, learned what amount of effort to take researching a product quickly or just buying it, but found learning how to get rid of needless junk a more complicated matter, including having to recognize the sources. I choose to look into all of it when the "last straw" came (the start of spam), and am finally reaping the benefits of knowing how to shut off most of the junk from their ultimate sources. The fact that I choose to share what I learned has perhaps gotten overenthusiastic in certain written fora, admittedly, which I see I'll have to mitigate.
Direct marketing by small businesses tends to be minimal, and on its own, represents only a fraction of the volume. On its own, this is of minor concern at absolute most. The issues of a large company selling their lists contrary to what many people believed that company's privacy statement had written in it, is another issue, however. The complaint most people had over Toysmart was selling the list was apparently contrary to their privacy policy. I think that is why eBay is clarifying theirs: they recognized nothing explicit had been said on the issue, and wanted to avoid the problem Toysmart had, even if it suffers some degree of publicity over it now.
Frankly, at the moment, I have no real urge to deregister over this one issue. I'm not happy with a lot of eBay's trends of late, but this one thing of several, and they've at least made some improvements in other areas, such as accessibility of addresses (though even I feel they should have given sellers the choice on whether their own email addresses remain as accessible as in the past or to route buyers through the new form).
I have issues over not knowing how many people are registered on eBay? Sorry, I don't understand this. I even indicated my ignorance of both the claimed and actual values by inserting a parenthetical question after mentioning it. I wouldn't have minded a correction. I also know that however many eBay claims, a large fraction are probably essentially inactive, but that only partially lowers the value of the list. Gosh, and here I shortened mentioning the number because I didn't want to go into all sorts of qualifications like the above. Silly me.
But seriously, I still think my point about eBay's lists, however large it actually is, being one of the most valuable online customer lists around, is still valid. eBay is one of the largest online consumer-oriented companies, and like I said, I think just about everyone I know who has a computer (and Net connection) is signed up on eBay. Whether the list getting sold or not, and to whom, is another question, and is a matter of opinion, which I won't go back into.
These are my opinions. I don't like direct marketing of any sort anymore (I wouldn't have minded if there had been less volume, and no telemarketing, but both are growing). Almost everyone I know dislikes telemarketing. Most computer users I know either dislike spam or are resigned to it. Junk mail is minor by comparison, but I'm happy to be getting less of it now too. I'm just not resigned to getting this stuff any more.
I am sorry for mixing so many things together in one post (and this one too); I'll be clearer next time. I actually see lots of greys in this territory, but gray areas are harder to discuss without going to even greater length than what I've done in this thread. Maybe I'll seem arrogant to say it this way, but a discussion of the gray areas is too much for any one thread. I've ended up discussing lots of individual grey areas over other threads over the course of many months.
The only "true" black and white that I feel in this area is that companies should have to ask their customer before direct marketing. Realistic or not, that has gotten to be my strongest feeling. Most of the rest are shades of black and white.
Well, I think I'll stop writing right here.
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
[Edited to correct my error: Toysmart, not eToys]
[ edited by dc9a320 on Apr 5, 2001 11:07 AM ]
