MAD! Who else has this problem selling on ebay

Sometimes I sell a coin or scrap gold or silver on ebay when I think its hot and will bring more money. Usually Im on the money (no pun intended) Lately it seems that there is a ton of new bidders with 0 feedback who win your auctions and don't pay. You used to be able to block new bidders. If you're new, go buy a few trinkets for a few bucks and build up to 10 feedback and then jump in to bigger stuff right?? Now you can't block any one like that.

I believe that these people get new accounts, put in high bids on stuff they like or want, they pay for whatever they get at what they consider a great deal, and flake on the rest. They open a new account and start over again. In the meantime, I have to wait to get my final value fees back, don't get paid, and wind up (can I say no "Edited ~ read rules") in here? It is happening more and more, and usually on metals and coins. I usually keep an eye on my listings and cancel bids from 0 feedback buyers. Most snipe at the end and there is nothing I can do.

Complaining to ebay does nothing. We all know that. I have a love and hate relationship with ebay, and this is one of my hate portions.

Read the rules The Rules

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

One of the best things Ebay could do for sellers is allow them to stipulate the minimum feedback required for bidding.

 

It happens, But I have also had successful transactions with people with zero feedback. I sold a 1400.00 st gaudens to someone with 0 feedback

 

Ive had a few "0" feedbacks pay over the years, but it is definitely less than 5%.

Yes, ebay used to let you stipulate on who could bid. Now if you are a new seller you have to wait 21 days to get paid. If you are a new buyer you should have to wait that long to bid on items over say $50.00 and build up 10 feedback in that timeframe.

 

If everyone such as you were to block bidders with zero feedback then all newly registered users on eBay would never attain the minimum number of feedback comments you require to bid. How much feed back did you have when you initially registered on eBay? That's right, zero. In the fourteen years I was a very active seller on eBay I never had a person with zero feedback fail to pay for the item they were the high bidder for.

 

Gold hasn't been doing so well.

Probably bears who happen to be unethical about bidding.

I've thought that market has been overspeculated for almost a decade.

Silver, maybe not as much but who knows?

 

It has never been possible to block 0 feedback buyers.

Nett negative, yes. Zero FB , no.

 

It seems this just happened to me in the last week but is not a coin its a tablet

 

Well....this one actually paid. Right after I ranted about it. This has only been an issue over the past year. Its gotten bad.

 

Well it still crap what happened to a hand shake and it was done

 

I've had 66 cases this year. Mostly with zero or less than 5.

I just wish I'd get the listing fees back on those sales. In my BIN format it costs me another $.30 to relist it.

So @ 66 cases and me relisting them, extra $19+ in eBay fees....

 

I haven't noticed there being any more or less new bidders lately. And the incidence of non-paying hasn't gone up at all for me.

 

And, now that it's impossible to leave negative feedback for buyers, that function is entirely useless. (Okay, maybe not entirely -- you can block bids from bad sellers who are so inept that they start accumulating negs faster than positives. Gee, that helps.)

 

Jeff,

Agree with you. Sellers should be able to leave negs for buyers. I wonder what the core issue was that eBay made that change.

 

I used to sell on eBay a LOT! Not necessarily coins (although I sold a couple), but mostly clothes, etc. Well after a 1 yearish hiatus I decided to sell some DVDs. Out of 8 DVD sales, only 4 paid. The rest were unique bidders (not all the same bidder) and each had 0-10 feedback (1 had 4 FB, etc). 50% pay rate is unacceptable.

The way I view it, if you bid for an item and that offer is accepted you should be legally liable to pay for that item and it should be enforced. You can return the item later for a refund if returns accepted was in the listing, but you should still have to come up with the money. This means it is a hassle for buyer and seller alike, not just seller. If I make a written offer to buy a car for $10,525.92, I am legally obligated to buy that car @ $10,525.92. eBay has no problem and doesn't bat an eye to withdraw money from seller's bank accounts to refund somebody in a case, why not withdraw money from buyers to hold them accountable for what they are legally obligated to pay for???

 

The problem, they said, was feedback extortion -- sellers refusing to leave feedback for buyers until the buyers left feedback for them, or retaliating for negative feedback by leaving a neg for the buyer. I understand that these were problems, but I'm baffled by the solution eBay chose. Why not penalize sellers who consistently delay leaving buyers feedback, or make the negative-feedback-appeal process more efficient?

Oh, well. They made their choice, and I made mine; I was a second-level Power Seller ten years ago, and in the last five years (since the change) I think I've sold two things.

 

Curiously gold is going down in value, probably to prop up the dollar - and it is being sold to the very countries that are creating mischief in Europe and Asia at the moment with military moves etc.

 

In my experience, way over 50% of 0 feedback buyers have paid for their purchase.

I prefer the current system because I can quickly relist the item and get paid and not have to deal with a certain return and ding on my feedback.

 

Thanks Jeff. I think I remember reading something about this, but wasn't sure whether it was the final straw. The whole feedback extortion game is childish. I like getting feedback from the seller, but it doesn't bother me if they don't. I always leave feedback for the seller, but only after I have the coin/product in-hand.