how long before free shipping becomes compulsary?

soolin

I should also add that I have experimented with post and packing charges on my own auctions. Regardless of whether I offer postage at cost (exact cost of stamp) or I add a mark up to cover my packing expenses or even when I tried free postage it made no difference to my stars, I remain firmly at 4.7 for post and packing. The only thing I haven't tried is the excessive p and p charging but it is something I dislike in other sellers.

Interestingly when I was offering free postage on small items I still had people wanting a discount because they bought more than one, the argument being that I had included p and p in the item costs and was therefore making a saving for myself.

BoingBoing_2

I have had exactly the same experience, I've offered free Postage, Postage at cost, and Postage plus 50p to cover cost of packaging and yet I am stuck at 4.7 for P&P charges too. On the free postage items I ensured that the starting price included enough to cover my postage costs and half of the items didn't sell yet all the items that did not offer free postage sold?!?

I hate the DSR scheme tho, as I know that 1 buyer marked me down significantly on everything even tho I dispatched within 2 hours of payment so in effect she got next day delivery) and combined postage on 2 parcels for her! I'm not expecting to recieve perfect scores on everything but I worked out that she must have marked me at 3 stars for everything

Time2Go_25

RFW wrote: »

As has been said elsewhere it isn't a monopoly. No one has to use Ebay as a buyer or seller. They monopolise the online auction market and for sellers the costs can be considered high, they are quite small in comparison to other auction houses. Ebay's charges for buyers (unlike the majority of other auction houses) are nil.

Unlike companies that are considered monopolies (utilities suppliers, airports, etc) anyone can open in opposition to Ebay, it isn't directly Ebay's fault that none of them are successful.

Just because others might be able to enter a marker doesn't stop Ebay from being an effective monopoly. BT was a monopoly even after privitisation because it wouldn't have been economically viable for another company to start laying phone lines, that's why they had to be forced to allow other broadband suppliers access to their exchanges. Microsoft is generally thought of as a monopoly (less so now), there again was nothing to stop other companies from writing their own OS.

Ebay have a sufficiently large market share in the UK to be regarded as a monopoly and while you say you don't have to use them, realistically if you want to sell anything you do.

RFW

pdel61 wrote: »

Ebay have a sufficiently large market share in the UK to be regarded as a monopoly.

Sorry but that isn't the case. For buyers and sellers they are jack of all trades, monopolisers of none. For the sale of books, games, dvds, gadgets, etc, their market share is small. Most sellers in this country don't use Ebay, they have shops, market stalls, use newspaper ads, etc.. Online sales as a whole are only a small fraction of total revenue in this country, so there can't be a monopoly.

The 'market' is the whole poulation, the majority of the population don't use Ebay a large proportion don't know what Ebay is.

meester

Perhaps somebody should suggest to ebay that if shipping is free, you should get an automatic 5* for the shipping cost DSR. Any other score is unreasonable and shows the buyer is either misunderstanding or abusing the scores (perhaps to punish the seller for other activities - I'm sure there are plenty of buyers scoring 1* across the board and leaving positive feedback to avoid alerting the seller).

soolin

I agree with RFW, Amazons market share for media items is huge and there are other sites out there who are competing on a level playing field.

I used the example myself of BT on another thread and the reason they were a monopoly was because originally they were the only company allowed to lay the main cables so all other services ran through them. The right to have cables owned by companies other than BT effectively broke their mononopoly. However the anology would be the same as if ebay owned the internet and made every other company go through them, which is clearly silly. Anyone can enter the market against ebay, just because they don't suceed doesn't mean that ebay have a monopoloy there has to be something unfair about it.

RFW

soolin wrote: »

However the anology would be the same as if ebay owned the internet and made every other company go through them, which is clearly silly. Anyone can enter the market against ebay, just because they don't suceed doesn't mean that ebay have a monopoloy there has to be something unfair about it.

Thank-you. There is a point to be made that those sellers who say they are fed up with the changes and will be going elsewhere prove that there is no monopoly. If there was a monopoly there would be no elsewhere.

Time2Go_25

RFW wrote: »

Thank-you. There is a point to be made that those sellers who say they are fed up with the changes and will be going elsewhere prove that there is no monopoly. If there was a monopoly there would be no elsewhere.

But that argument falls down anyway as "soolin" amongst others has pointed out on many occassions that they have tried various others of the so called alternatives and nothing sells, there is at the moment to competition to Ebay. I will give you that some items do have alternatives, but for a general online aution there is only one company in the running, if you choose to clasify it as a monopoly or not is semantics.

Many people have talked about the hope that someone like google who set-up an auction, I'm sure one of the many reasons that haven't is the huge cost involved in getting any market share.

In so far as at least in one country at the moment Paypal is being forced to be the only payment method, meaning you have to pay Ebay 3 times to sell one item also indicates a monopoly to me.

StaffsSW

meester wrote: »

Perhaps somebody should suggest to ebay that if shipping is free, you should get an automatic 5* for the shipping cost DSR. Any other score is unreasonable and shows the buyer is either misunderstanding or abusing the scores (perhaps to punish the seller for other activities - I'm sure there are plenty of buyers scoring 1* across the board and leaving positive feedback to avoid alerting the seller).

A friend of mine has been offering Free P&P on all of his listings for the last few months, but has just lost out on the powerseller discount as his P&P rating was only 4.5.

He's emailed about a hundred of his previous buyers asking openly and honestly what they have scored him and why, so he can work to improve his service.

Quite a few have responded, but what is worrying is that 3 people have said they marked him as a 3 on P&P - each of them stating a variation of "It was included, so can not be rated". Likewise, a motor trader friend only has 4.3 on his dispatch time, yet every buyer has had to collect the car from him.

The only way to crack the DSR's is through volume selling - get enough good scores, to dilute those left my muppets or out of spite. Yet again, eBay showing the shift of focus towards the business seller...

soolin

pdel61 wrote: »

But that argument falls down anyway as "soolin" amongst others has pointed out on many occassions that they have tried various others of the so called alternatives and nothing sells, there is at the moment to competition to Ebay. I will give you that some items do have alternatives, but for a general online aution there is only one company in the running, if you choose to clasify it as a monopoly or not is semantics.

Many people have talked about the hope that someone like google who set-up an auction, I'm sure one of the many reasons that haven't is the huge cost involved in getting any market share.

In so far as at least in one country at the moment Paypal is being forced to be the only payment method, meaning you have to pay Ebay 3 times to sell one item also indicates a monopoly to me.

Firstly, monopoly has nothing at all to do with charging structure.

As for alternative sites, yes I agree that they have not worked for me but they do exist. I would be a very poor seller if I blamed ebay for me not being able to sell on Tazbar and Ebid, again that is a misunderstanding of what a monopoly is.

Go back to the BT anology, I still use it as for me it gives the best service and my neighbours have had some poor treatment from talk talk, does that mean BT still has a monopoly? I can go elsewhere for my telephone services just as I can opt to use a multitude of ISPs and a selection of online auctions, but that is my choice and I am not forced to do so by any form of cartel or monopoly.

I've got some real issues with ebay at the moment but getting muddled and trying to blame it on some sort of monopoly is just a waste of time.