posted on May 28, 2001 10:23:51 AM
Due to the high number of non-paying bidders/winners on Ebay, I believe there should be an automatic suspension of any bidder that does not pay sellers for items they won. I check the feedback rating on bidders during the auction and cancel bids on those who have negs in their history. When the auction closes and then there are 3 negative feedbacks (from myself and other sellers) that have recently happened after the auction closes, I report them to Ebay and they (usually within a day or so) get kicked off/suspended from Ebay. All sellers should notify Ebay of bidders with 3 negative feedback ratings or more to help eliminate the deadbeat bidders...like a neighborhood watch program.
[ edited by lingeriebyjenal on May 28, 2001 10:25 AM ]
posted on May 28, 2001 10:32:31 AMI check the feedback rating on bidders during the auction and cancel bids on those who have negs in their history
How lovely you have the time to check on all your auctions but there are many who have a LOT of auctions running & don't have time to monitor each & every auction.
You cancel the bid of anyone who has a neg in their history? Well, you've just canceled out the bids of most of us sellers on AW who have the occasional neg for having given one.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:35:15 AM
It never ceases to amaze me that sellers actually WANT to get non-paying bidders kicked off of ebaY. This make absolutely no sense.
ebaY NARUs bidder A for excessive negs. NARU'd Bidder A chuckles and signs up as bidder B under a new ebaY ID, with a fresh new negless account.
Now when bidder B bids on an item and the seller checks the feedback, all he sees is a brand-spanking new bidder with a spotless (new) feedback profile.
Getting bidder A NARU'd actually did him a favor. Now there are no negs on his record to warn ANYONE. He can bid and fail to pay at his leisure until he racks up a few more negs and ebaY does him yet another favor by NARUing him and letting him sign up yet again with still another user ID.
Instead of NARUing bidders, ebaY should find a way to FORCE the bidders to do business under their old, neg-laden user IDs. This way the sellers (like the originator of this thread) that check feedback on their bidders might have half a chance of catching the NPB before it happens.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:48:11 AM
Now what would you do if those 3 negs where from bad sellers? There are deadbeat sellers, also some with bad packaging, misrepresented items, etc.
For clarity: Are your previous comments in opposition to NARUing bidders after they reach -3 or in support of it? Your statements could support either opinion depending on how you meant them.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:57:24 AM
RE: "Instead of NARUing bidders, ebaY should find a way to FORCE the bidders to do business under their old, neg-laden user IDs. This way the sellers (like the originator of this thread) that check feedback on their bidders might have half a chance of catching the NPB before it happens."
You're absolutely right. I agree 100% that only 1 user ID should be allowed for BIDDERS and am surprised businesswise that BIDDERS are allowed more than one. Listing fees are not refunded only Final Auction Value fees on items not paid for so it's more money for them.
RE: "How lovely you have the time to check on all your auctions but there are many who have a LOT of auctions running & don't have time to monitor each & every auction."
Have someone help you.
RE: "You cancel the bid of anyone who has a neg in their history? Well, you've just canceled out the bids of most of us sellers on AW who have the occasional neg for having given one."
Let me clarify. I should have worded this differently. Not just anyone. Obviously, if someone has a feedback rating of 100 positives and there aren't any recent negs in a row, what difference does 3 negs make. If the bidder has a low # of feedback ratings and there a few recent negative feedbacks that's the difference and where I cancel the bid. Believe me I know how bidders can be!
[ edited by lingeriebyjenal on May 28, 2001 11:01 AM ]
posted on May 28, 2001 11:11:19 AM
So I have a few hundred auctions going a week, you suggest I get someone to help look up the bidders feedback on these. When do I do that, since it is common knowledge that a good bit of the bidding occurs in the last few minutes of an auction. Day 3, day 5, within the last few hours? If I have 300 auctions a week, and 10% are deadbeat, I am out $9.00 (not including the stuff that can be sold to the 2nd highest bidder). So is it worth my time and effort to spend a couple of hours a week weeding out a few deadbeats to save $9.00. I don't think so. Deadbeats are a problem, but this is not even close to a solution.
I agree completely, but I go even further. I don't think bidders OR SELLERS should be booted off for ANY number of negs. Sellers can re-incarnate themselves as well as bidders, although it's more difficult for sellers due to the credit card requirement. EVERYONE should have to play under the user ID that they sign up with, stains and all.
posted on May 28, 2001 11:20:43 AMSo is it worth my time and effort to spend a couple of hours a week weeding out a few deadbeats to save $9.00. I don't think so. Deadbeats are a problem, but this is not even close to a solution.
Very true. I never even look at my bidder's feedback profiles before the auctions end. The current feedback system is so screwed up anyway that it's pretty much worthless as a reliable guage of a buyer's (or seller's) way of doing business.
What I find ironic is that the sellers who DO check bidders' feedback records are usually the ones that want the bidders NARUd for excessive negs. This is completely detrimental to their efforts in checking the feedback in the first place. Amazing.
posted on May 28, 2001 11:55:31 AM
1) FVF should trigger an automatic adminstrative neg to the bidder, and block either party from leaving further feedback on that transaction. The bidder should then be able to provide proof of payment (copy of canceled check, PayPal receipt, etc.) in which case the neg would be removed.
2) ebaY should limit buyers to 1 buying account, and put safeguards in place to ensure that that account MUST be used for all bidding regardless of feedback on that account.
3) ebaY should limit sellers to one selling account and one buying account with the same restrictions imposed on buyers.
4) ebaY should allow feedback to be changed from negative to positive when the person who left the feedback agrees via notarized letter that the feedback was left in error without having to go through a 3rd party. Positive feedback should not be changed to a negative under any circumstances.
I'm sure there are other, maybe better solutions. I'm also sure that ebaY could come up with fair, positive changes on their own if they would devote half as much time to this issue as they do to scheming to stop revenue leaks.
Would the above suggestions make the feedback system fool-proof? Of course not.
Would they make it more fair and reliable as a guage of buyer and seller business practices? Yes, and by a huge margin, IMO of course.
posted on May 28, 2001 12:12:09 PM
I agree. Since everything is automated the FVF refund should automatically trigger a negative feedback rating. Are listing fees for NPB/FVF items refunded? I was told and read somewhere they were but have not been able to find it again. It appears that your non-paid for, previously won item is treated as a new item when you relist it. This is not fair.
[ edited by lingeriebyjenal on May 28, 2001 12:13 PM ]
