Buyer telling me how much he wants to pay for postage!!

macfly

porto_bello wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the change is simply that the ceiling for compensation for a (free) proof of postage is being reduced from £46 to £20. In other words, whereas before, signed for was required for items of £46+, it will now be required for items of £20+ (unless the seller is willing to run the risk of loss in the postal system).

Adding the cost of 'signed for' to the cost of an item of between £20-£46 is effectively adding an increase of 2%-5% (and that's assuming the existing postage cost is of minimal cost). That's much less than RM annual price rises - hardly 'a huge culture shock'.

Signed for never insured above the normal compensation limits. And all RM price rises prior to this year have been in the 2%-5% bracket, not more.
Your figures are for the total cost. The postage costs for a second class packet will rise by 43%.

RHemmings

soolin wrote: »

You are in effect agreeing with me in that you believe a seller needs to use recorded to protect themselves against scam buyers. Whilst it does not bother you, it bothers a lot of people that sellers think we are scammers who they need protection against.

I only just spotted this one.

It's slightly different. In that while a buyer is protecting themselves against scammers, it doesn't make me feel that the seller is saying that I am the scammer. Or that a majority of buyers are scammers. In the post I was replying to, you said:

A lof of buyers object to recorded as it basically means you are calling them a scammer, however that is something he should have realised before he bid.

I think that recorded being insisted on is an acknowledgement that there are scam buyers out there, but I don't feel that means that the seller is calling me a scammer. There is a difference, and hence I don't think I'm agreeing with you.

Another way of looking at it is to say that insisting on recorded means that the seller doesn't know if I am a scammer or not. Which they don't. Hence I don't object.

superfran_uk

Even if you had charged ten quid for delivery, he accepted it. Surely people look at the whole amount when bidding??? As a buyer, I don't care what is postage and what is item, I just look at the overall price.

Fishingtime

superfran_uk wrote: »

Even if you had charged ten quid for delivery, he accepted it. Surely people look at the whole amount when bidding??? As a buyer, I don't care what is postage and what is item, I just look at the overall price.

I agree with you.
If I am happy with the overall cost then I will buy it,If I think the P&P is too much then I don't bid on the item

superfran_uk

yoxford2008 wrote: »

I agree with you.
If I am happy with the overall cost then I will buy it,If I think the P&P is too much then I don't bid on the item

And with ebay fees what they are, it is no surprise that private sellers of small items want to make a bit back on postage. I know here it is frowned on but if someone bids, that's the price they have said they would pay so as a buyer I don't see the harm in it; I certainly wouldn't mark someone down on postage because they overcharged if I still got a good price overall and I definitely wouldn't message them asking them to knock the price down unless it was absolutely ridiculous and they had clearly made a mistake.

soolin

yoxford2008 wrote: »

I agree with you.
If I am happy with the overall cost then I will buy it,If I think the P&P is too much then I don't bid on the item

Do you still leave 5* for a seller regardless of whether they charged you £2 or £20 to send the same item as that is the issue here.

superfran_uk wrote: »

And with ebay fees what they are, it is no surprise that private sellers of small items want to make a bit back on postage. I know here it is frowned on but if someone bids, that's the price they have said they would pay so as a buyer I don't see the harm in it; I certainly wouldn't mark someone down on postage because they overcharged if I still got a good price overall and I definitely wouldn't message them asking them to knock the price down unless it was absolutely ridiculous and they had clearly made a mistake.

It is 'frowned upon' here as we know it is hard enough anyway to keep an account in excellent standing without a seller making it even harder for themselves by making sure they do something that already irritates many buyers.

Yes save a few pence by loading some of the 'profit' onto the p and p but then lose a lot more money when your account gets restricted and suspended. For a small private seller just a small handful of people leaving a low star would be enough to stop them using a free listing day for instance, so would cost more money in the long run.

However the OP in this instance is a different story, it is not about an over charge it is about buyer requesting an alternative service being used- and I think that is entirely different.

superfran_uk

In my opinion the stars system is just bonkers - another way to penalise the fee-paying sellers. Meanwhile awful buyers can't even get a neg and there is no way to warn other sellers about them except to leave a negative-as-positive and hope it isn't removed.

Although I personally have not sold anything recently to be posted, so it's not something I have come up against, I don't understand ebay's reasoning when it is the sellers who pay the fees, why they want to anger them and make life so difficult??

plumface

macfly wrote: »

Signed for never insured above the normal compensation limits. And all RM price rises prior to this year have been in the 2%-5% bracket, not more.
Your figures are for the total cost. The postage costs for a second class packet will rise by 43%.

I've tried looking for info on this years price hikes and could n't find anything!
Where have you got your info from?

soolin

superfran_uk wrote: »

In my opinion the stars system is just bonkers - another way to penalise the fee-paying sellers. Meanwhile awful buyers can't even get a neg and there is no way to warn other sellers about them except to leave a negative-as-positive and hope it isn't removed.

Although I personally have not sold anything recently to be posted, so it's not something I have come up against, I don't understand ebay's reasoning when it is the sellers who pay the fees, why they want to anger them and make life so difficult??

Any site can get sellers, go and look at ebid. However it is a lot more difficult to get buyers as they need to feel protected.

I personally think that any site that can get me constant buyers that are happy enough to buy my goods has the right idea. If it wasn't for buyers I wouldn't have any fees to pay to ebay