posted on June 23, 2002 10:26:02 AM new
This has been a major issue on AW. I would like to know what everyone thinks on this issue, to find out who the majority is:
When does the transaction end - when the bidder has paid, or when the bidder receives the item and is happy?
posted on June 23, 2002 11:00:22 AM new
It ends whenever the seller feels it ends. If he leaves feedback at payment fine if he leaves feedback upon reciept of confirmation fine. No one is wrong and no one is right. Personally I leave it when I get paid because it fits MY system best I have 8954 Pos 12 Nuet and 9 negs so it seems to work fine for me. If it doesn't fit someone elses system to do it that way and they prefer to wait until the seller gets the items or use an automated feedback return system Fine, that fits THEIR system best. What gets me is the people that think theirs and only their system is the way things should be done and everyone else is wrong no questions ask. those are the type that are usually good to avoid doing any kind of bussiness with. lots of luck on this one rew
posted on June 23, 2002 11:18:04 AM new
It will never be settled.
Ebay states:
[b]After completing any transactions on eBay. Your honest feedback shapes the eBay community and specifically impacts the success and behavior of other eBay members. Make your voice heard!
We strongly encourage you to always leave comments about a specific buy or sell transaction within 90 days after the end of the auction. eBay guarantees that all items will be available on our system for at least that period. After 90 days, you can still try to send in feedback, but items may be removed from our database without prior notice. If that happens, you will not be able to leave feedback. [/b]
Based on this statement, I leave feedback after the buyer has received his item and I hear back from him/her. If I don't, I leave feedback 10 days after delivery confirmation advises buyer has received the item. I also believe that leaving it "after" the buyer receives the item meets one of the qualifications of a legal business contract (when both parties are mutually satisfied).
I don't understand the policy (nor care to) that the seller must leave feedback when payment has been received because the "buyer has met his obligation". There's more to the buyer's obligation than just timely payment. Does the auction really end with timely payment? The successful delivery of the product? The acceptance by the buyer?
I also don't agree with the words "feedback extortion". Since it doesn't meet the legal definition of extoration.
EXTORTION - The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. USC 18
posted on June 23, 2002 11:55:02 AM new
I leave it when the buyer receives their item.
My Note: The only real reason it bugs me if someone doesn't leave feedback for me is this: 3 months from now they might get mad over a bad transaction with someone else and go on a revenge neg fb spree. I've seen fb's that said, "sorry, I'm giving everyone negs today." I checked into their history and see that they really did just go down the list and neg everyone they could.
Are they witholding FB to threaten me with it 1-2-3 months later? I feel that leaving the FB officially closes the file for both of us.
posted on June 23, 2002 12:21:22 PM new
If eBay states that then they are liars!
I just posted a new thread about a situation
that is becoming all too common; bidders
unregistering so they won't receive deserved
Negative feedback. It had happened to me
twice recently, and then today it happened
on 3 of the 4 I went to leave! That is 5
total within about 4-5 weeks. I am beyond
mad. What can we do? Who can we contact
at eBay who will listen and (maybe) care?
This system stinks and the auctions are NOT
available for 90 days. I KNOW!
Z
ADDED:
I should add that I expressed this opinion
in other threads, but for me I leave feedback
for EVERY bidder (provided eBay lets me),
but I prefer it to be left when the bidder
receives the item and leaves it for me. But,
again, I leave it for everyone anyway.
{just to stay on topic}
---
"Cannot say. Saying, I would know. Do not
know, so cannot say". -- Zathras (Babylon 5)
[ edited by zathras11 on Jun 23, 2002 12:23 PM ]
posted on June 23, 2002 01:27:41 PM new
zathras11:
I'm not sure what you mean by unregistering so they don't get a negative.
If I leave a negative for a Non-Paying Bidder (NPB); I'll leave the negative minutes before I file the last step for my final value fee credit. If you file the last step and are the 3rd strike on that buyer's account; they will be NARU'd before you can leave the negative. I'm not sure what type of items that you sell to find that many NARU'd buyers within that short amount of time.
You also have to remember, eBay's website is a private site. They can do whatever they want. Choose your battles; this is one you'll never win.
posted on June 23, 2002 01:28:55 PM new
A transaction can't end when the bidder has paid because the transaction involves the buyer receiving their package. So why is there an issue? Buyer receives item- end of transaction.
The issue you really are bringing up is, is the buyer's obligation over when seller receives payment. Yes, they fulfilled their obligation.
The confusion over when to leave the buyer feedback arises because once the buyer fulfills their obligation they should receive feedback, right? Wrong! What if the buyer refuses the package? What if the buyer receives the item but lies and says they didn't? What if the buyer opens the package and accidently cuts the item, then blames the seller? What if the buyer makes threats because the item was not what they expected? Aren't these issues the seller may want to bring up in feedback?
Both buyer and seller should leave feedback when the transaction, not when their obligations, end.
posted on June 23, 2002 03:38:31 PM new"bidders unregistering so they won't receive deserved Negative feedback"
It might be better if "unregistering" was suspended until 90 days past the end of their last transaction to allow "return" feedback (a fair playing field). In other words, they could request to be unregistered, but it would not go through until 90 days past their last purchase/sale.
posted on June 23, 2002 03:53:18 PM new
To me, timely payment is important but not the most important part of the trasaction.
The manner in which you communicate with the buyer/seller is the most important to me. Everyone should be able to pay promptly or ship the product as described in a resonable amount of time. For the transaction to be POSITIVE both parties must communicate in a positive manner from beginning to end.
posted on June 23, 2002 04:39:27 PM new
On the extortion question someone posted this definition:
EXTORTION - The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person,
reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. USC 18
Reading that I'm convinced the feedback extortion is legal extortion. If a buyer demands a lower price or he will levase bad FB I think this qualifies as legal extortion. Bad feedback harms my reputation.
posted on June 23, 2002 04:43:02 PM new
Most people who are primarily sellers seem to think that feedback should not be posted until the buyer receives and is happy with the purchase. Most who are primarily buyers, like myself, think that they should get positive feedback the moment the seller receives their prompt payment. I always leave positive feedback immediately if the item is exactly as promised and shipped within a reasonable time. My question is why, after I have paid every seller within days, have I only received feedback on 2/3 of my purchases? And why, on the few occasions I have left 100% deserved negative or neutral feedback, do sellers feel they have to leave revenge feedback even if 100% undeserved?
posted on June 23, 2002 04:43:34 PM new
I never leave bad FB for simple non-payment. There are WAY to many total crackpots out there who deserve it much more than someone who simply doesn't pay.
I get buyers who are angry when the get the item because they don't read the discription or live in some fantsy land.
Also I have lot's who think that ebay guarantees them the lowest price on everything. If the get it from me, then find it for cheaper elsewhere it's my fault for ripping them off.
posted on June 23, 2002 05:31:37 PM new
It's Not Revenge Feedback,it is feedback based on the Whole Transaction,If the buyers attitude is F the seller I'm not going to contact,I'm not going to work It out,I'm just going to leave a Neg....Well then what we have here is a well rounded Bad Experience,And I am going to give what I feel is also less then good feedback in return.
posted on June 23, 2002 06:09:13 PM new
This will never be settled until eBay takes away the feedback........
I leave feedback when I get my buyers prompt payment. If everything is right with your auction, i.e. pictures good, description is correct and I mean with every good and bad in it, then what is the problem. Oh and BTW I have had only 3 NPB
Now I believe this discussion is getting out of hand. Leave the feedback when you want and I will leave it when I want. I have had 499 positives with 455 unique ones, 1 neutral because that is the way eBay did it back then and 0 negative. I must be doing something right....
posted on June 23, 2002 06:37:18 PM new
ijusthaveit- I wasn't talking about that kind of transaction. I was talking about when the seller has obviously and intentionally screwed the buyer. There is nothing to talk about particularly when the cost of returning the item is almost as much or more than the item itself. For example-I bought a jacket and the seller conveniently forgot to say that a snap was missing. I bought a frame and the seller forgot to say it had a big scratch. In both cases the sellers said they didn't notice the damage. I NEG'd them and they NEG'd me. Why? BTW- I have never encountered a seller who agreed to pay return postage even after acknowledging damage.
posted on June 23, 2002 07:18:51 PM new
I usually avoid the the feedback discussions, but stusi brings up an interesting point.
IMHO, it seems that many sellers on this board believe that not only should feedback be left after the buyer has received the item (I've got no problem with that), but that they must also be happy with the transaction. It's as if there's a Divine Right of Sellers to always be permitted the opportunity to "make it right" if the buyer isn't happy in order to avoid a bad feeback.
Personally, I think that if a buyer isn't happy with the purchase, he or she is not obligated to give the seller a chance to "make it right." If the buyer feels that he or she has been deceived, or even if the seller simply missed a flaw, then the buyer should have the right to warn other bidders that the seller's auction descriptions may be sloppy at best or deceptive at worst. As stusi pointed out, some transactions simply aren't worth the trouble of returning the item. Or as in the case of a thread regarding an ashtray a few months ago (if I dare even mention that thread), if there appears to be intentional deceit, then other potential buyers should be warned.
My own feedback policy is the same as Libra63's - I leave it when I ship the item. In over 1000 transactions, I haven't had a single neg (retaliatory or otherwise), and only two neutrals - one deserved and one from the pre-transaction days. When (not if) I receive what I consider to be my first undeserved neg, I'll reply to it and get on with life. I also agree with Libra that the issue will never be resolved 'til ebay either does away with the feedback system or at least completely revamps it.
In those cases did you contact the seller and try to work things out or did you just leave a neg? If you attempted to work things out and your attempt failed. I don't blame you. On the other hand....
posted on June 23, 2002 07:28:32 PM new
As far as a missed flaw goes. It happens to everyone eventually. No one is perfect.
if there appears to be intentional deceit, then other potential buyers should be warned.
I agree with that.
There is a lot to consider. Did the buyer read the entire description? We've had several people email that the item does not fit. We provide sufficient information for you to make that determination for your self. This is just one example of stuff that can and does go wrong with some auctions.
posted on June 23, 2002 08:27:20 PM new
My sad story happened today. I have 1139 feedback - 1 neg and 1 neutral. Sent a plate to newbie (5 positive). It broke. She e-mailed me and I very quickly e-mailed back that I had a duplicate and would send it immediately. She mailed back OK and thanks!... and NEGGED me today. I mailed the second plate yesterday. NOW, since feedback is "transaction" related and not payment related - and since feedback is really meant to protect others -- Just as she should have
negged me to warn others,if I had not acted responsibly and fairly, -- then should I neg her to warn others that she is absolutely unreasonable -- and possibly just mean! Actually, I think she is an uninformed newbie, so I e-mailed her about acceptable e-bay behavior. Should I do more? or swallow hard and forget it?
posted on June 24, 2002 02:00:51 AM new
feistyone- As one of the top buyers(Power Buyer?) on Ebay, I am always careful to read descriptions. There are times when the "missed flaw" is so blatant that it is obvious the seller was trying to get over on the buyer. Unless the item is expensive I would not even bother contacting the seller to "make it right" as shipping becomes an issue. I will give them an immediate, deserved NEG. I guess my earlier question was rhetorical as anyone with so little class to do this would also leave a revenge NEG.
posted on June 24, 2002 06:45:41 AM new
Libra63- you are one of the very few.
tomwiii- You sound like one of those arrogant sellers. If you were a buyer you would not be so quick with the PITA accusations. There have been many times I have contacted a seller on minor issues to "work things out" and most have been reasonable. But I know when someone tries to rip me off and they get NO respect.
posted on June 24, 2002 09:09:04 AM new
"Personally, I think that if a buyer isn't happy with the purchase, he or she is not obligated to give the seller a chance to "make it right." If the buyer feels that he or she has been deceived, or even if the seller simply missed a flaw, then the buyer should have the right to warn other bidders that the seller's auction descriptions may be sloppy at best or deceptive at worst."
You're right, a buyer can choose to live a miserable life as a victim and act as though everyone is out to get them, and give a seller a negative. That's why sellers "retaliate" and give the buyer a negative, so others can avoid this problem buyer.
By the way, I've never seen any company in the world with perfect products all the time, or perfect service. Humans make mistakes, it's part of life. It doesn't even mean they are "sloppy" just because one mistake is made. "Sloppy" indicates the seller is making many mistakes (higher percentage). Even 1% error rate is considered good by many companies.
posted on June 24, 2002 09:29:31 AM newThere have been many times I have contacted a seller on minor issues to "work things out" and most have been reasonable.
Same here. Even when the add stated "all sales final", most sellers were very friendly and reasonable. Since negs are difficult to remove, I don't want to jump the gun and damage their FB.
lurking is not an option
posted on June 24, 2002 10:13:04 AM newYou're right, a buyer can choose to live a miserable life as a victim and act as though everyone is out to get them, and give a seller a negative. That's why sellers "retaliate" and give the buyer a negative, so others can avoid this problem buyer.
Sounds like you're describing a passive aggressive type. That type of person is more likely to not contact the seller nor leave a negative feedback out of fear of retaliation. At least an unsatisfied buyer who leaves a neg has the backbone to state their opinion, especially if they know the seller is likely to smack them with a retaliatory feedback.
By the way, I've never seen any company in the world with perfect products all the time, or perfect service. Humans make mistakes, it's part of life. It doesn't even mean they are "sloppy" just because one mistake is made. "Sloppy" indicates the seller is making many mistakes.
It's the aggregate of individual opinions that develop a business's reputation. If being "sloppy" is the aggregate of the mistakes made by a seller, then we'll never know how "sloppy" a seller is unless the buyers are free to leave feedback indicating their dissatisfaction with each individual transaction.
Feedback is supposed to be a person's reputation, but we know it's a sham due to threats of retaliation on both sides. At least in real life, consumers can give their genuine opinion of a business without fear that the business will brand them as a troublesome customer.
