eBay "Buyer Protection Fees" (New charges for buyers from private sellers) - Details just recieved

Spoonie_Turtle

savergrant said:

2dareis2do said:

This is the advert here

https://www.tvadsongs.uk/ebay-uk-advert-see-things-differently/

It does not mention business fees either as far as I can tell.

Looking at the advert they seem to fit the profile of private sellers ebay would want. They are looking to get rid of junk and would be happy to raise some cash.
However if you list an item for auction and someone bids £10 and eBay deducts £1 from the winning bid it is hard to see that it is 'free to sell'. If the buyer was charged a transaction fee on top of their bid it might be more arguable imo.

But if a seller sets it to start at £10, the opening bid will get them £10.  The buyer will have paid a bit more, which eBay take as indicated on the bidding page and checkout, and the seller gets what they listed it for.

It is essentially the same as seller fees but the difference is the seller gets the amount they see, rather than having to mentally deduct a bit from the price they list at.  Conceptually it's the buyer paying it rather than the seller.  (In theory, anyway - sellers choosing to list lower than they would have otherwise is an unintended effect and a choice they're making.)

savergrant

Spoonie_Turtle said:

savergrant said:

2dareis2do said:

This is the advert here

https://www.tvadsongs.uk/ebay-uk-advert-see-things-differently/

It does not mention business fees either as far as I can tell.

Looking at the advert they seem to fit the profile of private sellers ebay would want. They are looking to get rid of junk and would be happy to raise some cash.
However if you list an item for auction and someone bids £10 and eBay deducts £1 from the winning bid it is hard to see that it is 'free to sell'. If the buyer was charged a transaction fee on top of their bid it might be more arguable imo.

But if a seller sets it to start at £10, the opening bid will get them £10.  The buyer will have paid a bit more, which eBay take as indicated on the bidding page and checkout, and the seller gets what they listed it for.

It is essentially the same as seller fees but the difference is the seller gets the amount they see, rather than having to mentally deduct a bit from the price they list at.  Conceptually it's the buyer paying it rather than the seller.  (In theory, anyway - sellers choosing to list lower than they would have otherwise is an unintended effect and a choice they're making.)

Ebay never said it was free to sell while seller fees/final value fees applied, and it would be a pretty clear case of false advertising. And as you said, this is 'essentially the same', ebay is keeping back some of the money the buyer is bidding. The buyer isn't thinking 'this costs x amount and the buyer protection fee is y', they believe they are bidding z for the item.

Spoonie_Turtle

savergrant said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

savergrant said:

2dareis2do said:

This is the advert here

https://www.tvadsongs.uk/ebay-uk-advert-see-things-differently/

It does not mention business fees either as far as I can tell.

Looking at the advert they seem to fit the profile of private sellers ebay would want. They are looking to get rid of junk and would be happy to raise some cash.
However if you list an item for auction and someone bids £10 and eBay deducts £1 from the winning bid it is hard to see that it is 'free to sell'. If the buyer was charged a transaction fee on top of their bid it might be more arguable imo.

But if a seller sets it to start at £10, the opening bid will get them £10.  The buyer will have paid a bit more, which eBay take as indicated on the bidding page and checkout, and the seller gets what they listed it for.

It is essentially the same as seller fees but the difference is the seller gets the amount they see, rather than having to mentally deduct a bit from the price they list at.  Conceptually it's the buyer paying it rather than the seller.  (In theory, anyway - sellers choosing to list lower than they would have otherwise is an unintended effect and a choice they're making.)

Ebay never said it was free to sell while seller fees/final value fees applied, and it would be a pretty clear case of false advertising. And as you said, this is 'essentially the same', ebay is keeping back some of the money the buyer is bidding. The buyer isn't thinking 'this costs x amount and the buyer protection fee is y', they believe they are bidding z for the item.

Yes but a) they are, they still pay the amount they bid, and b) the seller doesn't actually pay anything, which they used to. 

Again, when the seller lists an item with with a set or starting price, that's the amount of money they'll get for it, rather than less or - as in the older old days - getting all the money and then having to pay eBay the fee out of their account as a separate transaction.  

It's a technicality which means that simultaneously not much has changed (so I don't see why so many people were up in arms about it after only a few months of zero fees either side) but also they can truthfully say that the seller doesn't pay anything to sell their item.  It is now like the Vinted model, who've also said all along that it's free to sell on there and I don't recall seeing any outrage about *their* wording.

I do acknowledge it's made life complicated for negotiating offers with buyers, though.  It's bizarre that they've not used the same 'show seller the price they'll get and show the buyer the price with the fee on top' system as they do with listings.

RFW

2dareis2do said:

This is the advert here

https://www.tvadsongs.uk/ebay-uk-advert-see-things-differently/

It does not mention business fees either as far as I can tell.

I don't think they're falling foul of any advertising standards. If someone wants to sell their Kermit the Frog toy for £10 and they list it at £10, they get £10 back. That the buyer may pay £12 (or whatever) isn't relevant to the ad. It's mildly misleading but that's how advertising tends to work.

2dareis2do

It is essentially the same as seller fees but the difference is the seller gets the amount they see, rather than having to mentally deduct a bit from the price they list at.  

There is another difference. The "buyer protection" fee is 75p as opposed to the previous fixed fee of 30 or 35p.

Conceptually it's the buyer paying it rather than the seller.  (In theory, anyway - sellers choosing to list lower than they would have otherwise is an unintended effect and a choice they're making.)

This is not unintended.

2dareis2do

t's mildly misleading but that's how advertising tends to work.

If it's misleading and enough people complain it will be investigated and ebay may be forced to rethink their approach.

2dareis2do

It's a technicality which means that simultaneously not much has changed (so I don't see why so many people were up in arms about it after only a few months of zero fees either side) but also they can truthfully say that the seller doesn't pay anything to sell their item. 

1. There are 2 new fees. The flat buyer protection and the variable rate
2. The new fee is twice as much as the previous one before the window when selling actually was free
3. It's a technicality. If you were to do a study it would likely show that it is the seller that is paying the fee because they will get less on their sale item. This manifests itself in various ways. For example some people have given up simply because it is no longer worth while selling. This is a direct consequence of ebay's "no seller fee" (to private sellers). This is the most misleading bit. This is especially true because there is no mention of the mandatory "buyer Protection fee" in the advert.

2dareis2do

https://www.asa.org.uk/type/broadcast/code_section/03.html

3.2
Advertisements  must not omit material information or information required to be included by law. This includes providing such information in a way that is unclear or untimely, or in a way that the consumer is unlikely to see or hear it. 
Regard will be had to any limitations (e.g. as to time or space) resulting from the means of communication used and steps taken by the marketer to overcome these by providing the information by other means. “Material information” is information that the average consumer needs to take an informed transactional decision (as defined in Appendix 3).
 
3.3
For marketing advertisements that quote prices for advertised products, omitting material information (for the purposes of rule 3.2) includes omitting any of the following information, unless it is already apparent from the context:
3.3.3
the total price of the advertised product, including any fees, taxes, charges or other payments that the consumer will necessarily incur if the consumer purchases the product 
If, owing to the nature of the product, the whole or any part of the total price cannot be calculated in advance, how the price (or that part of it) will be calculated

I would argue that ebay:

1 Do not explain "how the price (or that part of it) will be calculated" - In other words their is no mention of the mandatory buyer protection and how this is broken down in terms of fixed and variable fees.

2. The claim that there is no seller fee for private fees, while technically correct, is in itself misleading (see previous comment)

3. do not clarify in the advert that this model only applies to private sellers, 

In real terms their fixed fees have doubled, after a relatively short window when the there were no seller fees.

The other thing I would add is the buyer protection fees only seems to apply to those shopping on ebay.co.uk which also seem unfair for UK buyers and ultimately sellers. Funny how there is no publicity around this change, Does seem to pay for their TV advertising though. 

prowla

There's been yet another discussion in another group (https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/281038/reported-this-counterfeit-prs-to-ebay-they-say-it-doesn-t-violate-policy-i-have-a-new-business/p1) about eBay being notified of counterfeit goods being listed and responding with

"We looked into your report and didn’t find the listing to be in violation of our policy. This determination was made by a customer service agent."

How can anybody trust eBay's commitment to buyer protection when they just fob people off and make no attempt to deal with counterfeit goods.

rollingmoon

soolin said:

I think the term free to sell is not technically misleading , except for the fact that business sellers do pay. Having  to reduce item price is not a direct cost. Yes it is free for private sellers to sell, but they may need to take a look at their pricing if they want sales , which is something quite different. 

Aren't eBay gouging on the cost of postage now via Simple Delivery? That's a direct cost to the seller surely.