posted on December 3, 2000 04:47:53 PM new
Yahoo will be better when we all pay a fair price for the services we are using. There are way too many sellers here with 100's of spam listings.
Sellers who ship dirty, dusty, uncleaned items.
Sellers who don't grade items carefully.
These aren't frauds- they are carelessness. Sellers get a free ride because they aren't paying for each and every listing. Because they don't pay, too many don't care.
Save us Yahoo! Institute fair fees now.
[ edited by justinias on Dec 3, 2000 04:48 PM ]
posted on December 3, 2000 05:37:55 PM new
What makes you think fees will change anything? Look at feebay, did it improve the bad sellers, because they pay fees? Of course not. You want to pay fees as a remedy, go to feebay and have a ball there. Yahoo! is not hurting for money, period. Giving them more money will not change anything, except their bottom line.
Since they started charging to 'feature' auctions, have you noticed any improvement in their service? No! In fact, with the jumbled listings everyone is getting less sales, not more. I'm sure you can send them checks if you want to, as a donation. Because that is exactly what it would be. Just don't drag us all along with you.
posted on December 3, 2000 05:43:28 PM new
There would be two problems with Yahoo charging. The first problem involves the users. There is an attitude on the net that everything should be free. Lots of folks left Paypal when they started charging, lots of folks joined Exchangepath just because they're free even though they are actually worse than Paypal. Sooner or later, EP will start charging and then there will be another exodus.
The second problem is Yahoo. If you want to charge folks, first you have to show them a service worth paying for. You can't show them a lousy service and say "If you pay us, we'll make it better."
posted on December 3, 2000 05:44:12 PM new
I have been on pay auctions as a buyer and as a seller. Bad sellers are on pay sites too.
I happen to like Yahoo the way it is. I was ripped off repeatedly on the pay site. I have not been ripped off at Yahoo. That does not mean it will never happen, but it has not happened to me at Yahoo. I have received what I have paid for in the condition described. Yahoo is not for everyone. If you prefer the pay sites, buy from them. There are some huge advantages as a buyer at Yahoo that some of us enjoy. We do not want the problems of pay sites. The people at Yahoo are nicer too!!
Have a Happy Holiday!!
posted on December 3, 2000 10:18:15 PM new
Yahoo IS charging, for all practical purposes. Are you a newbie? Went away for the holidays & shut down all your auctions? You're at the bottom of the pile of listings unless you feature. So no, Yahoo isn't charging fees across the board to everyone, but there are lotsa people who are going to have to pay Yahoo if they want to sell anything on the site.
Now are you trying to say that instead of doing it this way Yahoo should change the listing order back to what it was & then charge a modest FVF when items sell? because if THAT's what you're trying to say then I would be inclined to agree with you. But not because I think it would so greatly improve the site- I do happen to agree with CharlieOne when he said "Look at feebay, did it improve the bad sellers, because they pay fees? Of
course not. You want to pay fees as a remedy, go to feebay and have a ball there. "
posted on December 3, 2000 10:20:13 PM new
justinias- I just wanted to add that you probably haven't bought much on Ebay if you think that sellers there don't ship dusty, dirty, misrepresented, full-of-roaches items, because they do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted on December 4, 2000 02:32:21 AM new
justinias,
I would suggest you go to the ebay board here on AW and read a past thread about being ripped off on ebay, in which almost every person posting had horror stories to tell about their ebay purchases---goods that were misrepresented, damaged, stained, and on and on. Not only that, but THOUSANDS of sellers post DOZENS of identical listings on ebay at the same time. The only difference between them and Yahoo spammers is that the ebay sellers PAY LISTING FEES for all those duplicates. Many of Yahoo's spammers pay featuring fees for their listings.
CAgrrl, the problem with Yahoo charging FVFs is that the sellers will want REFUNDS if the buyers deadbeat, and Yahoo doesn't have enough STAFF to handle giving refunds---nor do they want to hire all the personnel that would be necessary to handle refunds. Remember, the 50% refund of featuring fees (if the item sells) is AUTOMATED, or done by computer...therefore not requiring human intervention. Taking FVFs from sellers is another ballgame entirely, and opens a real can of worms for Yahoo. That's why I don't think they'll do it.
At the same time, Yahoo can't charge listing fees for each listing because the LIKELIHOOD of an item selling is too low, and the sellers won't pay to list when they pretty much KNOW they won't sell something. If they were to charge a small listing fee with UNLIMITED FREE RELISTS, they might get away with it---but not a fee for EVERY list including resubmissions. And sellers would never pay listing fees with the listing order jumbled like it is. They would abandon ship.
That's probably why Yahoo offered "featuring" as a paid option, rather than listing fees OR final value fees. It's completely voluntary on the seller's part. And as an incentive to price the merchandise right, the seller gets half the featuring fee back ONLY if the item sells. There's no promise of a refund if the buyer deadbeats, but the fee has already been halfway refunded, appeasing sellers who are stiffed by their buyers. And this all takes place without the involvement of expensive customer service intervention on Yahoo's part.
Where they went wrong was trying to FORCE "featuring" on sellers through the jumble listing order. What's worse---at the same time, they were giving thousands of free "featuring dollars" to an incoming glut of ebay and Amazon sellers, now spending it wildly, clogging the "featured" sections with page after page after page of not-so-special items, defeating the purposing of featuring.
It's sink or swim time and I'm sinking, with only 5 sales this week. I've been meaning to try Bidbay since last summer, but never got around to it. Maybe now is a good time to go check them out (if they're still in business).
posted on December 4, 2000 07:17:19 PM new
I'm noticing in several of areas I sell in the Featured items are showing less. I get the feeling and hope its true that all those people who ran over here to use the free featured dollars, have used them all up and are going back to ePay and paying them for listings...
And I am also hoping that Yahoo is going to see the lite, that jumbled listings is not the answer.
I use featured in each catagory that I sell in maybe 1 or two items, just so people will Notice ME, not so much the item I am selling.
And will look at all my auction items...
Charge us, no way.
Joan
posted on December 4, 2000 08:34:02 PM newWhere they went wrong was trying to FORCE "featuring" on sellers through the jumble listing order. What's worse---at the same time, they were giving thousands of free "featuring dollars" to an incoming glut of ebay and Amazon sellers, now spending it wildly,
I'm a big fan of the feature system, but I gotta agree with this part.
How many sellers feature only to avoid scrambled listings? Not that many, I would imagine.
I think the scrambled lisings might make sense (at least in terms of being an incentive to feature) at some time in the distant future, but right now, it was an incredibly stupid move.
1)Nobody really understood what I said, although someone got close ---
"Now are you trying to say that instead of doing it this way Yahoo should change the listing order back to what it was & then charge a modest FVF when items sell?"
--- This would be a perfect translation, providing there was an anti-spammer provision built into it.
2)Everyone is so hooked on the virtue of "FREE" , that "FREE" is the ultimate good even when "FREE" is providing any reputable seller with loads of competition from fly by nights and spammers.
Now I guess that some/most/all of you simply figure that spammers and the very poor sellers will alway be around, and are resigned to it. Thats too bad. I think most of you probably work hard to do a good job, and don't spam. Why support a system that benefits those people? I don' think the current "featuring" system is better, or fairer. It looks alot like Amazons "placement" system in some regards. Does anyone remember that?
posted on December 5, 2000 12:01:11 AM new
Well, how I personally define "spam" differs a bit from how Yahoo defines "spam". I get tons & tons & TONS of unwanted SPAM email thanks to Ebay's ridiculous way of doing things. Anyone & everyone can, & does, get my email address & sends me SPAM email and I HATE IT!!!!!!! So in that respect I am very content with the way Yahoo does things- the seller has a choice whether or not to put his/her email address into his/her listings, and if (s)he doesn't then no-one who isn't involved in a transaction can get the email address. To me that is fantastic! (even though I do put my email address in my ads, I like it that I can choose not to! )
Are you concerned that people break the "only one item listed once in one category" rule? For the sake of this discussion, how exactly are YOU defining "spam"? just wondering.
posted on December 5, 2000 12:40:28 AM new
Time for all users to smartin up, if indeed you do have smarts or any smarts.
Look very very carefully at all auctions, that is Look and Read all very carefully and 90% of the time you can actually sort out the good from the bad.
If a seller shows scans that are downright awful, then you pick up your fingers and run away, Never ever bid on any auction like that, that is Number 1 lesson to learn.
An uncaring looking seller is not worth anyones time.
Do Not trust feedback.. do not trust feedback, it is the most misguided thing you can look at unfortunately
So where? do you go from here?? use all and any available smarts that you have period.
2000 plus positives feedback mean nothing to me. Some of the worst sellers have huge positive feedback cause winners are scared to leave negative. When the feedback-negative system is researched and corrected diligently by a site, then many more happy winners will there be.
posted on December 5, 2000 05:55:02 AM new
gem10a1
I TOTALLY agree with you about seriously looking at the ad itself. As a buyer look at the quality of the ad, the quality of the pictures, the care that was or wasn't taken in creating the ad, the amount of information contained in the ad.
If a seller doesn't care enough about YOU the buyer, to create an attractive ad, then be careful! IF their picture of an antique chair was taken in their garage in-between tons of trash - RUN - obviously they don't care what you think, they have no respect for the item they are advertising, AND most likely they haven't cared for the item AND won't care how it is packed!
IF a seller's ad looks like the scanned a picture from some catalogue - RUN!
I DISAGREE with not considering feedback - I feel it is important, and not only on Yahoo do my customers have access to see my Yahoo feedback, but I put in a link to my feedback on other auctions -
I ALSO DISAGREE that buyers are afraid to leave negative feedback - I have been on Yahoo almost a year now, and have almost a 500 feedback positive rating with 4 negatives - which I feel is normal - you can't please everyone all the time, and I didn't see that these people leaving negatives were at all afraid to leave them. I normally don't respond to negative feedback, and if I do, I merely state that my record speaks for itself.
When a buyer fails to pay I merely leave a neutral comment that they didn't pay.
But back to the subject - watch the quality of your seller's ad - quality of the pictures, setting of the picture, etc, it will tell you a great deal.
posted on December 5, 2000 12:21:34 PM new
I think you guys do both make excellent points. However, when buying for resale I am willing to gamble on blurry or absent pics, sellers with negative feedback (if I feel the feedback was left by a blithering idiot- I do read & consider the feedback carefully.) A lot of times when you read further into both parties' FB files you will find that the complaint was successfully dealt with and that both parties ended up happy, regardless of negs. You will also find that many sellers simply made one goof. Big deal, one goof out of a few hundred. I've goofed more times than that but have been lucky enough to have understanding buyers each time.
I've found that my success rate with sellers who have blurry or absent photos is higher than you might think. Yes, I have been burned- but in each case it was a gamble I was fully willing to take. Well, except for the roaches. If I had thought about that I wouldn't have bid. YICKK!!!! The roaches did come from a seller who had absolutely NO photos in her auction, just a description. But I bet that even if she'd shown a pic the roaches wouldn't have been visible in it! LOL! And if roaches hadn't arrived in the box I would have been beyond thrilled with the transaction because the item itself was WONDERFUL!!!! Too bad I had to throw it away...
posted on December 5, 2000 12:42:54 PM new
Having been burned a few times by deadbeats, I scrutinize all feedback on bidders very carefully. I don't mail out of the United States, and sometimes you will find comments made about a bidder that tips you off as to where they live. This is when in the 'about me' link it doesn't show a location, (although you can not do that anymore with CC, as it will not let you).
Also, I get an idea of the persons attitude in how they deal with others. Sometimes you will find the very immature bidders this way. Just because they have no negs, does not mean they are easy to deal with. Sometimes you may find several negs that were changed to another rating for some reason. Some are humorous, and others show potential nightmares to deal with.
posted on December 6, 2000 12:15:06 PM new
Unfortunately--- FREE anything drags in the good the bad and the ugly!
Granted that charging fees is NOT a guarantee that the above will not participate. However, one must remember always that auctions are the CyberFleaMarkets of our day!
For years we wandered aimlessly through the flea mkt without guarding our wallets and purses, asking some questions re:purchase, assessing the type of seller -- WE KNEW that we were buying 1) a USED/NEW product, 2) AS IS 3)no guarantees and so on.
I have never heard anyone say -- "what is your return policy, what is your warranty" etc.
My point here is, that the auctions created this monster and FAILED to segregate merchandise in the most important categories.
USED--- NEW --- AS IS---- WARRANTIED
Any merchandising marketeer with half a brain should have realized that this was PARAMOUNT in the architecture of any auction site. The BIDDER has constantly been displayed as the victim of faulty auction purchases but ==== it's TIME that the auction sites provide those low and high risk categories .
SELLER could then be held liable to the type of above category they chose to list..... and BIDDER gets to take SOME liability of purchase.
posted on December 6, 2000 12:25:11 PM new
As for Yahoo needs to CHARGE--
They already ARE!!
Now it's a matter of-- is the charge "for us or agin us"
Methinks it's stooooopidly designed. Why expect us to bid against each other and create a "me first me first" type of mentality that adults should have adopted after puberty??
posted on December 6, 2000 01:10:16 PM new
It's not a "youth" problem, it's advertising. Lots of business pay to be first. I don't have a problem with bidding for featured location.
)
LOL! And if roaches hadn't arrived in the box I would have been beyond thrilled with the transaction because the item itself was WONDERFUL!!!! Too bad I had to throw it away... 
and BIDDER gets to take SOME liability of purchase.
It could happen!!