posted on May 9, 2001 08:15:19 AM new
eBay has always permitted sellers to email registered users and tell them that their bid is not welcome. Provided a copy of the email is filed with SafeHarbor then seller can than report any bids made by the user to ebay and the user will be disciplined.
Last year eBay added a bidder authorization feature. You could start an auction and indicate that only pre-authorized users could place bids. Interested users would have to contact you and you would then authorize them (or not as the case might be) to bid by placing their userid on the authorized bid list for the auction.
Much more recently, eBay has added a feature whereby you could place a userid on a list of ids that you did not want bidding on any of your auctions.
All three of these features are re-active in nature and design. The seller tpyically must react to a situation in order to prevent its recurrence in the future. Perhaps a bidder stiffs you and you file a deadbeat warning. The deadbeat retaliates by bidding maliciously on a slew of your auctions. Because you didn't think to block the bidder or to forbid them bidding again you now must go and cancel all of their bids or risk further interference.
I suggest that a pro-active approach to bid blocking is in order. eBay should give sellers the means to set criteria for automatically blocking bids.
What kind of criteria? That would be up to the individual seller but there are many criteria that sellers might find useful to control bidders that they feel will make their auctions problematic.
Here are some possible criteria:
Length of time as an eBayer.
Overall feedback rating.
Total of non positive feedback within set time frames.
Unappealled NPB warnings within set time frames.
Number of bid retractions within set time frames.
Country of registration.
ISP.
I personally do not believe that the first two suggestions are very useful. Length of time on eBay and overall rating are rather poor indicators, in my opinion, of a bidder's earnestness and integrity.
But the other criteria, in my opinion, could be extremely useful (especially the non positive feedback and the bid retraction criteria).
As a seller, I would like to be able to enforce a cooling off period for a bidder who has perhaps gotten in a bit too deep.
I could do this by establishing criteria of say, no bids accepted from users who have more than 1 retraction in the past 7 days, more than 3 in the past month, more than 5 in the past 6 months.
The same type of scenario for non positive feedback.
Note that this does not arbitrarily exclude folks from bidding on my auctions for all time. They can bid just as soon as they have put their past behind them.
This type of arrangement would take some of the burden off eBay support. As it stands, retraction and feedback abuse must be dealt with by email and manually. In addition, such criteria could be a powerful motivator for bidders to keep their noses clean.
So, what do you think? Good, bad or indifferent? Other criteria?
posted on May 9, 2001 09:17:24 AM new
Any seller who wants to cut his nose off to spite his face can already stop a bidder from bidding who falls within the criteria on your list. I does require the seller to monitor his bidders and cancel any bid from a bidder who falls within the criteria he objects to.
If a seller wants to limit himself to certain groups of bidders then maybe he should have to work at it...might make him think long and hard before he p**ses off a bidder.
But I guess I can understand why one would want ebay to do it instead...that way the seller never has to face the customer to tell him "I don't want YOUR business, your not good enough for me". Its easier if the seller never knows the id of the bidder who has been "cut".
Presently there are probably only a few sellers who actively cancel bids from newbies, international bidders, certain ISPs (AOL?)...but let ebay do it and it becomes way to easy to insult certain classes of bidders.
New sellers will come to boards like this and be influenced by irrational sellers who rant about how AOL bidders are to be avoided (for example). They will block those bidders before they have had a chance to see that the rant about AOL bidders was blown way out of proportion.
Doing what you suggest would really hurt the reputation of ebay...making it seem very inhospitable to bidders.
posted on May 9, 2001 09:46:09 AM new
Nice post cod ...
I especially like the idea of "As a seller, I would like to be able to enforce a cooling off period for a bidder who has perhaps gotten in a bit too deep." As a matter of fact, I would like to see this become mandatory for ALL eBay sales. I don't how it would work for an auction site where the last bid wins, but eBay has built in so many safeguards for sellers, I think something is needed for the overzealous bidders.
Your first 2 ideas could be considered discrimimatory - why would any seller even consider blacklisting someone when they know nothing at all about that person? It's bad enough that there are still sellers out there who won't ship outside the USA
If eBay could introduce and manage these filters (they are struggling to stay active with the junk features they already have in place!), it should still and always be an individual seller's choice.
I suggest, though, that if a seller picks too many of these, or makes it too complicated for a buyer, their sales will drop substantially. I know when I peruse the listings (I am a buyer only), if there are all kinds of "if, ands, or buts", I just pass right on by ...
posted on May 9, 2001 09:59:46 AM new
What is often overlooked is that while the BUYER is at a disadvantage when sending money and hoping for item delievery, it is the SELLER who is at a distinct advantage by having to do business with WHOMEVER happens upon their auction--regardless of that buyers Ebay record. Buyers can pick and choose who THEY want to do business with--they can mull over the sellers feedback record and so on, while the seller is a sitting duck.
3 CHEERS for cod's filter idea. Nothing wrong with allowing a seller to control who bids on their auctions. And if other sellers say "great, more bidders just for me", I say "great, YOU can have the ones I cast off!". Sure you'll get more bids, but you'll also get more bad apples to go with them. Happy headaches!
posted on May 9, 2001 10:00:38 AM new
The only bidders I block are the one who've deadbeated on me already. I did it just today.
I never look at my bidders feedback til they stiff me.
I've never looked at retractions.
I don't have problems with free ISPs or AOL in any way that makes them special.
I ship outside the US.
I get lots of newbies (less than 10 feedbacks), they don't play games with me any more or less than any other "group".
My TOS says that I hold checks if you have 2 recent buyer related negative feedbacks. In fact, I never look. Only 2 bounced checks in a year, both made good. I don't really ever hold checks.
Who has time for all this research on bidders? I'll deal with the problem children one at a time, as they make themselves known.
posted on May 9, 2001 10:26:03 AM new
"SELLER who is at a distinct advantage by having to do business with WHOMEVER happens upon their auction"
I can just see it...wallmart decides they don't want to do business with "WHOMEVER happens to walk through the door".
So...they decide that since one day they had a buyer who screamed profanities at a clerk and that buyer drove a red Toyota, they will ban customers who drive red Toyotas. To enforce this they have guards at the entrances to turn away red Toyotas.
And then another time they had someone put something on layaway and the customer kept giving excuses why they hadn't paid yet. The customer nerver paid. That customer lived on Main St so now all customers who live on Main St are refused entry into the store.
And one day there was a customer who wore glasses. Well, she knocked over a large display and broke hundreds of dollars worth of merchandise. Now customers who wear glasses are also refused entry at the door.
And then there was the new customer who, on his first purchase from the store accused the clerk of not giving him enough change..said she was in cahoots with Wallmart to steal from the customers. Walmart now will only sell to people who have already been customers...no newbie customers will be served.
Several other retailers in the area told the Walmart manager that what he was doing was VERY bad for business...but the manager just said ""great, YOU can have the ones I cast off!"
The other retailer just shook his head and said..."just give them directions to my store, I have had no problems with customers who drive red Toyotas, live on Main St, wear glasses or are newbies. I will happily call your castoffs "customers of mine"
The other retailer prospered selling to Walmart's castoff buyers. And Walmart?...well, they might never recover from the hole they shot in their foot!
[ edited by amy on May 9, 2001 10:27 AM ]
But it is all right for WalMart to run your credit card to ensure you haven't exceeded your credit line? And refuse your business if you have?
Or to check your check account number against a list of deadbeat accounts? And to refuse your check if you are a deadbeat?
To refuse to do business with someone based on some totally superficial and unrelated resemblance (drive red Toyotas, live on Main St, wear glasses or are newbies) to a prior problem buyer is ludicrous.
To utilize a person's relevant prior history when doing business is good sense.
What you are failing to recognize is that I am not a multi-billion dollar company that can withstand the setbacks or expenses that result from the occurences you outlined above.
If accepting bids from someone with tons of negatives and bid retractions doesn't cioncern you, then by all means have a great time! But it would be nice if sellers who don't want to play Russian roulette could have the option of using some filters.
posted on May 9, 2001 12:47:23 PM new
Block by ISP??? Yikes, like maybe AOL? I use AOL as my ISP, and if anyone blocked my bid because if it, I'd be ticked.
I do, however, like the idea of blocking by critera such as overall negative feedback rating (-3, etc.), recent NPB, or more than 3 negs in the past 7 days.
With a little work, your idea might have merit. Why not let eBay know about it?
posted on May 9, 2001 12:49:10 PM new
Code...when I accept credit card payments through billpoint or paypal the credit card is run through the system and if they are over their credit limit the card will be refuseed. BUT, I'm not refusing to sell to people who have credit cards just because they have a credit card.
You say "To refuse to do business with someone based on some totally superficial and unrelated resemblance (drive red Toyotas, live on Main St, wear glasses or are newbies) to a prior problem buyer is ludicrous."
BUT...blocking a bidder because of his ISP (one of the criteria on your list) is no different than blocking someone because they live on Main St. The seller is discriminating against a class of bidders based on that same totally superficial and unrelated resemblance to a problem buyer that you just said was ludicrous.
There can be so many reasons why someone has a specific number of bid retractions or non-appealed NPBs and some of those reasons can be such that the customer is not going to be a problem. Why should every bidder who falls within the "criteria" be stopped from bidding? Shouldn't it be on a case by case basis?
There are risks in operating a business...both in real life and on the net. There is no GOOD way to reduce the risks to zero. But there are lots of ways to shoot yourself in the foot when you TRY to reduce the risks to zero.
Your suggestion, in my opinion, is a method that would guarantee holes in lots of feet.
posted on May 9, 2001 01:06:49 PM new
Ladyfargo...I'm not a multimillion dollar company either. My "story" doesn't depend on the business being a multimillion dollar business...it is relevant no matter what size you are.
Currently, if a user has a -4 rating they are automatically blocked from bidding or listing.
Currently, if there have been 3 unique FVF request filed against a specific bidder they are NARUed for 30 days...at 4 they are permanantly NARUed.
There are many types of sellers utilizing ebay. Some are reasonable but some aren't. Some will file a NPB alert 7 days after the auction ends if they haven't recieved payment or the buyer hasn't contacted them. The buyer could have sent the payment but it hasn't gotten there yet but some sellers are so trigger happy and suspicious that they won't believe the buyer. The buyer may have emaileed the seller but his emails, unknown to him, did not go through.
Its bad business to cut out whole groups of people from your bidding pool.
I don't look at my bidders feedback, bid retractions,or ISP. I have never cancelled a bid and have even let a -1 bidder continue on as high bidder (she paid fast). I follow the philosophy of "if you expect problems you will get them...if you expect no problems you will most times not have them"...it works for me. I have very, very, very few problem bidders.
posted on May 9, 2001 02:04:18 PM new
"Why should every bidder who falls within the "criteria" be stopped from bidding? Shouldn't it be on a case by case basis?"
Yes it should be on a case by case basis.
In my case, I have trouble with newly registered AOL IDs with 0 feedback bidding and not sending payment.
I do not have trouble with AOLers who have established feedback.
So I would like the OPTION of blocking AOLers with 0 feedback AND allowing AOLers with feedback.
If you havn't had a problem with bogus AOL IDs ruining your auctions you wouldn't have any need to block them. It would be your OPTION.
posted on May 9, 2001 02:22:05 PM new
Oh well, if your way of doing business is to stop all people in a group because you have had problems with some then more power to you.
I wonder how fair you would think it was if you happened to be a member of that broad group.
posted on May 9, 2001 03:42:07 PM new
ladyfargo ... "If accepting bids from someone with tons of negatives and bid retractions doesn't cioncern you, then by all means have a great time!"
I don't think anyone would argue that. But, if you refuse to accept bids from someone with a zero feedback or someone who just joined eBay last week (as "someone" suggested in another thread), you're not going to be in business very long ...
posted on May 9, 2001 03:48:27 PM new
If you have bogus AOL IDs bidding on your auctions to prevent legitimate buyers from bidding you won't be in business very long either.
posted on May 9, 2001 08:29:00 PM new
How do you know they're "bogus" if you have never done business with them? Talk about tarring the whole group ...
posted on May 9, 2001 09:18:17 PM new
RB: I've described in detail the problems I've had with competitors using bogus AOL IDs to ruin my listings. If you want to act like you're completely clueless, be my guest.
posted on May 10, 2001 06:05:26 AM new
sasoony ... "I've described in detail the problems I've had with competitors using bogus AOL IDs to ruin my listings. If you want to act like you're completely clueless, be my guest."
Getting a little touchy eh?
As far as I can tell from your "description in detail", you have a hangup about ANYONE who uses an AOL address simply because you have had some problems with a FEW of them.
posted on May 10, 2001 06:19:13 AM new
If you think about it, automatic bid blocking isn't an inherently bad idea. There are those sellers out there who can decide that they only want to sell to people with certain levels of feednack, or with a minimum number of bid retractions, etc. There are others out there who will take the risk and sell to anyone.
For me, it was simple. For the vast majority of items that I sell on ebay I could care less who bids on them and am willing to take the risk with a newbie or someone with a few negative comments in their file.
However, for the more expensive items that I've unoladed such as a $1000.00 Cannondale bike, a Playstation 2 at the height of that craze, some rare books, etc. I pay VERY careful attention to who is bidding on them. Furthermore, I also state in those auctions that I reserve the right to cancel any bid for any reason. I have that right as an ebay seller anyway, but I also include it in my auction as well for those specific cases.
And I have canceled a slew of bids. The worst was for the Playstation 2 I sold. I included in the sale "bidders must contact me BEFORE bidding if they have a feednack rating of less than 20 or have more than 5 bid retractions". I cancelled 12 different bids on that auction (and sold it to a guy in CA for $602.00 with a "0" rating becuase he contacted me first as stated in my terms).
I would have loved to have had the option to automatically block some of those bids rather than having to check the auction every 8 hours.
The long and short of this? Some people aren't going to like this the filters. But some will, and sellers should have the choice.
posted on May 10, 2001 06:38:34 AM new
I hope ebaY implements this automatic bid blocking mechanism as described above, and the sooner the better. I'll welcome the bidders that you guys block with open arms. Oh, and everyone BE SURE to block newbies first. Since about 90% of my bids come from bidders who haven't earned their first star yet (many of whom are AOLers), I anticipate a HUGE increase in business. More money in the till is ALWAYS a good thing!
[ edited by dubyasdaman on May 10, 2001 06:41 AM ]
posted on May 10, 2001 07:05:58 AM new
"The long and short of this? Some people aren't going to like this the filters. But some will, and sellers should have the choice."
Exactly
And, as long as the operation of these filters doesn't cause more eBay outages due to "server problems", I am all for it.
posted on May 10, 2001 08:41:02 AM new
Amy and Victoria:Concerning all of your posts on this thread as of May 9,2001. Nice shooting ladies...tipping black hat back, smiling with admiration! Let some sellers automatically block whole groups of bidders, I could use a few of them on my sales too. I am a full supporter of bid blocking of a known troublemaker on a per case basis only; whether done by the seller or by ebay.
[ edited by PaladinLvs on May 10, 2001 08:45 AM ]
I think blocking by ISP is worth considering. And it is no different from filtering techniques now in place in some products.
Did you know, for example, that the UBB software that is the basis for the AW boards allows the administrators of the board to block registration by domain name?
Why do email products have options to block email emanating from specific ISPs? So that people can abuse it? I think not. More likely so people can filter out known sources of junk email and SPAM.
The judgement of whether an ISP is a source of problem bidders is a seller's alone. The seller makes the decision. That you would argue against the concept on the basis that it is discrimination is specious. There is no law I know of that says a seller must accept any buyer for their item.
That this type of filtering seems unfair or unbusinesslike is another matter entirely. If you have ethical concerns about features such as I have proposed, fine. And if the features should be available, then don't use them (just as you wouldn't use any existing feature that you didn't care for).
Are you afraid to let capitalism work to produce an efficient marketplace?
posted on May 10, 2001 11:06:14 AM new
Code..calling blocking an entire ISP from doing business discriminatory is not saying it is illegal discrimination. Your argument is the one that sounds specious. By your own words to refuse to do business with someone based on "totally superficial and unrelated resemblance to a problem buyer" is ludicrous. Lumping all people who have a specific ISP into a group of "bad bidder to be avoided" is refusing to do business based on a superficial and unrelated resemblance. It is not the ISP that causes some bidder to be "bad"..it is the INDIVIDUAL bidder, not the ISP.
Whether AW can block based on a domain name is immaterial to this discussion...kind of a red herring. Plus, I would bet AW only uses that to block posters to the boards...a free service. Bet they don't do that to the paying customers .
The email blocking has to do with spam and junk mail...again not related to this discussion. I wonder...are there any sellers who think bids are spam or junk mail?
Then you say "Are you afraid to let capitalism work to produce an efficient marketplace? "...forgive me while I let out a big guffaw!
If the seller owned his own place of business, where his decisions could not adversly affect other retailers then you may have an argument. We could use AW as an example of this...if they decide to block a domain it only affects them, no other business is hurt by that decision.
But ebay is like a giant department store with many retailers under the same roof with all of us vying for the same buyer pool. If one seller ticks off a buyer that buyer may not come back and therefore the buying pool is reduced. Let that buyer then tell many of his friends and acquaintances that he was blocked from bidding just because he was new or had AOL as his ISP and future members of the buying pool may decide NOT to even give ebay a try.
The free marketplace is great and I'm all for it...until another seller has the ability to damage my use of that free marketplace.
There are already enough ding-dong sellers out there with abysmal customer service/ selling behaviors...we don't need ebay to give a tool that could allow even more sellers to step over the line into anti-business behavior that can affect the rest of us.
If you don't want to accept a certain ISP then cancel those buyers bids...let them KNOW it is YOUR decision. But ebay doesn't need to participate in such anti-business behavior.
posted on May 10, 2001 12:08:02 PM new
RB writes:
>>"As far as I can tell from your "description in detail", you have a hangup about ANYONE who uses an AOL address simply because you have had some problems with a FEW of them."<<
LOL.....this is the exact quote from my post, "I do not have trouble with AOLers who have established feedback."
posted on May 10, 2001 12:31:05 PM newThere are already enough ding-dong sellers out there with abysmal customer service/ selling behaviors...we don't need ebay to give a tool that could allow even more sellers to step over the line into anti-business behavior that can affect the rest of us.
