Ebay have put a limit on what I can list because they are 'premium' brands??

mikeashbee

Have a look at ebid. They allow you to list as much as you want, then, by being careful with your wording. you could list on ebay and direct potential purchasers to youe ebid site

techspec

hermum wrote: »

I thought that it was the item specifics, they brought in a while ago that have to be used.
If I'm looking for a particular make I'd search the description as well as title & specifics.
For anyone who's been restricted it's worth a try rather than charity shopping it all.

You do have to use them - but the Ebay robot that decides if you can list or not simply checks the title for wording and checks it against its database. Missing the brand from the title - but including it in the description does work.

eeeeeee wrote: »

might be easier too mispell the descrption then edit once listed

Doesn't work - the new title is flagged up :-(

mikeashbee wrote: »

Have a look at ebid. They allow you to list as much as you want, then, by being careful with your wording. you could list on ebay and direct potential purchasers to youe ebid site

Links to other sites now banned :-(

an9i77

Problem with missing the brand name off the title though is that you will massively cut your market as a lot of people if not most search by brand. So if you wanna just shift stuff for very little, yes may be worth a punt, but to get the best price I can't see it happening.
Re the is ebay a monopoly argument, whilst it may not technically be a monopoly it certainly does have a stranglehold on the market, as what other auction sites even come close to ebay in terms of numbers of people using. Unfortunately as auction sites need a critical mass of buyers and sellers to work well, ebay has capitalised on this and is now a law unto itself as it knows there is nowhere comparable for folk to go instead (so in my view that makes it a bit of a monopoly). But how to get that critical mass elsewhere? Buyers won't go where there's not a great choice of sellers, and sellers won't sell unless they can get the buyers - that's the rub.

blue_monkey_2

While it is a .co.uk site, have a look at your invoice and it shows you that they are based in Luxemburg. I am not sure that the Government could do anything about it for this reason.

others have tried and failed. I complained once about them only allowing payment by Paypal - cannot remember who it was too, possibly Fait Trading Office, but they said they could not do anything about it.

eBay got greedy and now impose silly rules - such as not negging the buyer which is ridiculous, this week I got my first neg because the buyer reckons something was stained in the wash (and I STILL have absolutely NO idea what that means!!) and she 'did not have time' to return it to me for a refund so preferred to give me a neg - but I'll still use it to clear all the rubbish from the house. There are loads of people that buy and sell and hide additonal income in Paypal and only buy stuff using Paypal so will bid over the odds for something they really want. I no longer run my business on there as prices for selling have risen greatly, but I use it for selling general stuff I no longer want or need.

Just where is this list of Premium brands and is it total of 4 items, or 4 items per brand? I've listed quite a few Boden bits this week and I'd say they are more Premium than M&S! I wonder if it is more companies that have kicked up a fuss about their items being listed and they have imposed this rule to keep them happy?

MyOnlyPost

RFW wrote: »

That's a silly argument, Ebay only has a monopoly over their own domain, there are competitors, and no restrictions on any new ones entering, at every level, as a selling platform and as an auction site there are countless competitors, some with a massive market share. To compare how Ebay operate to banks is not a good comparison, banks have a clearly defined market within which they operate, Ebay does not, it is many things to many people. In recent years they have done their best (whether intentionally or not) to send sellers elsewhere.

I'm not sure where, in this case, their behaviour would benefit a monopolistic attitude, they are restricting their own income, a monopolistic action would be to insist on more listings not less.

For branded items that may not benefit from having the brand name listed, simply don't list the brand name, have the label in the picture if you think it is necessary.

The real thrust of my argument was that the definition of a monopoly is not that it seeks to destroy competition, as the previous poster had suggested. I am not comparing eBay to the banking system. I am using the banking system to highlight that a monopoly does not have to have 100% share of the market in the real world, to highlight the difference between the correct definition and working definition of monopoly.

A monopoly does not have to be by design as you suggest. If 4 companies are in a sector with equal market share and 3 go bust then the fourth becomes a monopoly through no fault of it's own. Restrictions to the market do not have to be legislative for a monopoly to exist. If a rival company simply cannot compete on a financial footing and therefore cannot get a foothold in the market, then a monopoly exists. Microsoft had a worldwide monopoly for probably 10-15 years, even though there was nothing to restrict others entering the market (Except the Trillions of pounds needed to compete). And yes I am aware Microsoft engaged in tactics to deliberately give itself that monopoly.

As for competitors, as a selling platform Amazon, but as an auction site for private sellers to sell their goods within the UK what do you think eBay's market share is? I would bet it's enough of the auction market to be considered a monopoly. And I am in no way saying that this benefits them, or supporting the theory that they do as they please because of it. My post was simply to highlight that someone said eBay had a monopoly and someone else (wrongly in my opinion) shot that notion down.

soolin

I still think you misunderstand what a monopoly is. Yes ebay hold a large percentage of the UK aucition online market- but that doesn't mean they are a monopoly. It just means they are a preferred brand for the majority of users.

lovinituk

Oh dear! The conspiracy theories are rife in this thread! Ebay is not a monopoly - they are just a lot more successful at what they do than anyone else! There were others that could have taken a larger market share early on but they missed their chance and didn't invest as much money as ebay did. More fool them. Why should ebay slow down just because no-one else could be bothered to step up?!

In the words of Jim Royle... "Monopoly?!.....MY A*SE!!!!!"

RFW

MyOnlyPost wrote: »

As for competitors, as a selling platform Amazon, but as an auction site for private sellers to sell their goods within the UK what do you think eBay's market share is? I would bet it's enough of the auction market to be considered a monopoly. And I am in no way saying that this benefits them, or supporting the theory that they do as they please because of it. My post was simply to highlight that someone said eBay had a monopoly and someone else (wrongly in my opinion) shot that notion down.

I'm not sure where your argument is going (apart from round in circles;)). A monopoly controls the largest part of the market and by definition controls what smaller competitors (If there are any) may do and even stop any competitors from entering the market.

The main problem with Ebay and the way people perceive their actions is that sellers consider themselves as consumers when they aren't, yes they pay for a service that Ebay provides, but Ebay protects the end consumer, the buyer, anyone who thinks that is wrong shouldn't be selling on Ebay anyway.

Regarding another point on this thread, there is no need for sellers to leave negative feedback it doesn't do anyone any good.

Back on topic, certain brands don't like having second hand items being resold and whilst they can control what business sellers do it is a little harder to control private sellers, so I'd assume this was the reasoning behind the limit, it does also stop businesses who use private accounts to sell branded items.

Strapped

Hoorah - eBay finally cracking down on "private" sellers listing lots and lots of new branded items. :T Unfortunately, they don't seem to have got the balance quite right and people like the OP are getting caught up as well. I'm not sure what the solution is, other than ring and plead your case, OP.

jasmineswhiskers

I tried re-listing some Boots No7 make-up brushes that didn't sell the free listing time before and got the same message. I haven't sold anything of this brand for about 6 months - maybe only one item allowed per month...