Poll: giving/receiving feedback on ebay

[LARon]

The recent thread on ebay seller Nitr-o reminded me of one of his practices that I think is bad for ebay, namely, conditioning the giving of positive feedback on him first receiving same. In other words, he, as seller, conditions his review of a buyer's performance upon the buyer being the first to leave (positive) feedback on him. I consider this extortion, for two reasons.

First, I believe that feedback should be left in the order of performance. Since the buyer must pay before receiving the merchandise, his performance should be rated first, not after he has received the merchandise. Second, once having paid, the buyer is at risk: the risk of non-performance or poor product quality from the seller. Why, then, should the buyer -- who has made prompt payment -- have his reputation as a timely payer suspended and conditioned upon the performance of the seller (who could be passing off shoddy merchandise or not delivering on time)?

I note that this Nitr-o fellow cites the number of positive feedbacks he's received. If that record has essentially been "bought" by forcing honest buyers to first leave positive feedback on him, what value does it really have, and how objective is it?

 

[Joffrey]

I just give feedback once I get the notification asking for it in my email.

 

[mattjames]

I agree. Once a buyer has paid, he has upheld his side of the agreement. Some sellers are good and leave feedback first, but most don't. I suppose they don't want to regret leaving positive feedback if the buyer complains about something and promptly leaves negative comments.

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by mattjames

I agree. Once a buyer has paid, he has upheld his side of the agreement. Some sellers are good and leave feedback first, but most don't. I suppose they don't want to regret leaving positive feedback if the buyer complains about something and promptly leaves negative comments.

I don't leave feedback for buyers until they have left it for me. The positive feedback isn't just for paying promptly -- it's for a positive overall transaction. And the transaction isn't complete until I know they've received their item and found it as described.

I can't remember a time when I didn't get paid fairly promptly. The problems I've encountered have nearly always arisen after the item has been shipped.

 

[aybojs]

I have to defend the position of ebay sellers who do that practice, because the "performance" of the buyer in a transaction definitely isn't limited to his paying in a timely fashion. Perhaps if everybody out there were honest and reasonable, this would be the case, but anybody who sells prolifically on eBay will eventually encounter buyers who clearly are not.

Sometimes people will try to take advantage of PayPal's extremely buyer-biased appeal process and fabricate claims of damage or non-shipment to file chargebacks and try to, in effect, get a free item (which is what happened to me, and caused me to stop using PayPal). Other times you get people who, whether they have unrealistic demands, get stricken by a sudden case of buyer's remorse, or fail to read the fine print of the auction, decide they don't want the item or aren't happy with it and want to undo the transaction when the terms of the auction don't allow for it. I'm not saying that any dissatisified buyer is being stupid or dishonest, but, in selling clothes, for example, you're bound to get cases where a buyer ignores the measurements provided and finds out the item doesn't fit or where he is unhappy about not getting a new (with tags) item when the auction clearly states pre-owned and then, in either case, wants to force a return in an auction that clearly states, "no returns unless an obvious error was made by the seller" (the slim profit margin on eBay prevents most bulk sellers from being able to provide the same degree of service and willingness to deal with returns in the way that a department store or site like Yoox/BlueFly can).

Thus, it's unwise for a seller to leave feedback first upon getting payment, because it allows for the possibility of the buyer to behave badly after getting the item without any recourse. And negative feedback isn't just useful from a retaliation perspective, it also helps other users identify potential problem users and avoid getting burned in transactions with them. I remember A Harris' thread about having serious problems with some dishonest/inept buyers from Italy, and I'm glad he was able to leave them negative feedback in order to identify their actions in case I were ever to encounter them in my own auctions.

I think the accepted convention for an eBay user with significant experience on both sides of the coin is for the buyer to leave the first feedback dependant on getting the goods. If the buyer gets the item and it is as described in the auction (note I didn't say if the buyer is happy, sometimes even an item described fairly and honestly will disappoint you when you take risks on an eBay auction), then the buyer should leave positive feedback to confirm that the transaction has been carried out satisfactorily. If unhappy, the buyer and seller should try to resolve the process between themselves, and feedback should just fall based on how that goes. When I'm buying, I have no problem with leaving feedback first after receipt of the product to give indication that I was satisfied with the auction, and when I'm selling, I think it is helpful and considerate for the buyer to give me that first feedback as an indicator that all is well and good and we can move on from that transaction.

 

[EL72]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

I don't leave feedback for buyers until they have left it for me. The positive feedback isn't just for paying promptly -- it's for a positive overall transaction. And the transaction isn't complete until I know they've received their item and found it as described.

I can't remember a time when I didn't get paid fairly promptly. The problems I've encountered have nearly always arisen after the item has been shipped.

+ 1. As a buyer OTOH, I leave feedbck once I receive the goods and am satisfied.

 

[A Harris]

At the completion of the entire transaction is the only sane choice for a seller.

 

[VMan]

As a buyer, I leave it as soon as the goods are received.

As a seller, I used to leave it as soon as payment is received. However, having been burned by a seller who wanted to circumvent my policies by threatening to leave a negative when I did nothing wrong, I always leave feedback right after the buyer does so for me.

I make a note in my end-of-auction email "Please let me know when the item arrives by leaving feedback, and I will do the same for you."

This seems to be common practice for experienced sellers, as with the last 6-7 items I purchased I did not receive feedback until I left feedback for the seller. And in maybe 2 of those, the seller didn't even leave me feedback.

 

[zjpj83]

Originally Posted by A Harris

At the completion of the entire transaction is the only sane choice for a seller.
Why, so that if you send them a piece of crap, they can be scared into not leaving you negative feedback?

I've bought tons of stuff from you and know that you obviously don't fall into this category. But the notion, as DocHolliday suggestion, that a buyer's obligation also include receiving their item and thinking that it is wonderful is insane and false. My obligation as a buyer is to agree that the item is as described? That's about as backward a conception of buyer-seller obligations as I can imagine.

 

[sho'nuff]

Vman that is such a cute picture. did you take that?



(to others: yeah, i said 'cute' ..so what? cmon, whatsup)

 

[Holdfast]

I have only bought on eBay so far. Personally, I don't think buyers should be forced to give out feedback before sellers give you your feedback. I understand on a practical level why sellers do this, but as an honest buyer, it's slightly insulting nonetheless. Because that's what I'm commonly obliged to do, that's what I selected in the poll... but I don't think it's truly fair. Still, that's true for many aspects of living, I guess!

 

[A Harris]

Why, so that if you send them a piece of crap, they can be scared into not leaving you negative feedback?

I've bought tons of stuff from you and know that you obviously don't fall into this category. But the notion, as DocHolliday suggestion, that a buyer's obligation also include receiving their item and thinking that it is wonderful is insane and false. My obligation as a buyer is to agree that the item is as described? That's about as backward a conception of buyer-seller obligations as I can imagine

No, not at all. Take my rating for example. I've got 2454 positives with a rating of 1691 at the moment. Additional positives do little more than stroke my ego. On the other hand, an undeserved negative does hurt business, not to mention the rise in blood pressure and the ruined week. There are indeed completely unreasonable buyers out there who use the threat of a negative to try and extort sellers. They are rare, but inevitably you will run into one or two a year. If a seller leaves positives before the transaction is completed (defined as the buyer having recieved the merchandise) then he is left completely defenseless. It would be nice to be able to see these guys coming, but you never know who they are going to be. So it's pretty simple from a seller's point of view - leave feedback when the transaction is completed, or else recieve at least 1 or 2 undeserved negs a year. Easy choice.

BTW, I do not require buyers to leave a positive in order for them to recieve a positive. I simply wait for a week or so after the item is delivered, if I don't hear anything I assume the buyer was happy and leave the feedback. Sometimes it takes longer because I forget, but the feedback get left eventually whether I recieve one from the buyer or not.

 

[A Harris]

I remember A Harris' thread about having serious problems with some dishonest/inept buyers from Italy, and I'm glad he was able to leave them negative feedback in order to identify their actions in case I were ever to encounter them in my own auctions.

Perfect example. If I had left a positive feedback as soon as that buyer paid (and he wasn't so incredibly inept) it could easily have turned out like this: He would have had $500 worth of shoes for free, and a 2 positive feedback from me. I would have ended up $500 in the hole AND with two undeserved negative comments on my profile!!

To give you an idea of what an unreasonable buyer can be like - this above referenced buyer emails me to the effect that I was going to recieve two negatives if his package did not arrive in 24hrs. This despite the fact that I had shipped the shoes early, before recieving full payment for shipping, had provided him with scans of the shipping documents, as well as a tracking number which showed that the package was tied up in Italian customs! He left the negatives to, just as promised...

 

[aportnoy]

I find that the inclination in these parts is to support the seller's POV no matter what the circumstances, which is not suprising, given that many of our more vocal senior members are indeed sellers.

I find it hard to understand how my responsibility as a buyer extends beyond paying for my auction win in a timely fashion. Once I've done that, I've lived up to my part of the contract and I am entitled to positive feedback. The seller's responsibilty is to provide the promised merchandise in a timely fashion in the condition stated in the listing. If they do that, they are entitiled to positive feedback. It just doesn't seem that complicated.

 

[LARon]

Originally Posted by aportnoy

I find that the inclination in these parts is to support the seller's POV no matter what the circumstances, which is not suprising, given that many of our more vocal senior members are indeed sellers.

I find it hard to understand how my responsibility as a buyer extends beyond paying for my auction win in a timely fashion. Once I've done that, I've lived up to my part of the contract and I am entitled to positive feedback. The seller's responsibilty is to provide the promised merchandise in a timely fashion in the condition stated in the listing. If they do that, they are entitiled to positive feedback. It just doesn't seem that complicated.

My view entirely.