- This topic has 38 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
This is a must listen for all sellers. Pay close attention to the wording used about returns.
https://www.voicemarketingradio.com/ask-griff-lee-show-504-segment-2/
-
-
It started at minute marker 2:30. Here’s what was said.
–Caller asked if eBay has changed their return policy because Ryanne and I said ebay rep told us they no longer got involved in INAD cases.
–Griff said nothing changed and things worked as always.
–Buyer needs to talk to the buyer about their concern.
–If seller doesn’t resolve the issue, the buyer can escalate the case.
–Seller can call eBay to make a decision about the merits of the return.This has not been the case for us in the last month. eBay told us that we had to refund money no matter what. They no longer got involved in return cases.
Has anyone else called eBay recently to dispute an INAD case? We’re happy to be wrong.
-
(for some reason your posts keep disappearing)
AdventureE wrote:
Jay,
Notice Griff does not address the INAD question directly. He says “I am not quite sure what the context is” when asked the INAD question. He then says “there has been no change to ebay policies regarding buyers opening a case. So the way the process works now, and the way the process will work in the future, and the way it has worked for several years is that if a buyer’s unhappy with an item they can alert the seller, uh, if they go directly to the security cent, uh, the resolution center, and try to open a case, the case will say have you, you know, it will direct them to communicate directly with the seller and the seller can work out with the buyer some solution that is agreeable to both…. If the buyer the seller is not giving the buyer any redress and the case gets escalated to ebay….. He then goes on to state that more often than not ebay will rule in favor of the buyer – In my opinion, this last sentence summarizes how ebay is handling INAD.
As for the INAD situation, he says that he does not understand what they are talking about and he thinks they are taking something out of context.
It is important for sellers to listen to this in its entirety.
-
The caller didn’t give much background info on he issue, so Griff didn’t have much to go on. I’m confused which part you think is so important. Explain in words why you think every seller should listen to this. You’re hinting at some big revelation that I don’t see.
The better thing to do for us is to crowdsource each of our experience. Has anyone else tried to fight an INAD lately?
-
-
-
Jay,
Some things are best left to individual interpretation verse someone else’s.
It is interesting that he never addresses the concept of INAD (in a show that is seller focused) but instead strongly emphasizes the buyer focus of returns and articulates that most likely cases will be found in favor of the buyer. He later goes on to say more about returns even articulating that he thinks there should only be 2 types of returns.
Remember, the hosts and show are part of ebay’s marketing team. Marketing to sellers and buyers is one of ebay’s strengths. It is important to listen to how returns are being marketed to sellers.
-
The part that I think is so important is that (and this isn’t really news to us) eBay wants returns to be an easy process for buyers. He claims that it’s easy on every other platform (assuming Amazon), and their research has proven that buyers are skittish about buying from eBay because sellers make the return process so difficult.
Sounds like eBay wants opened cases to be a last resort, when we can’t work out a return with the buyer. But it sounds like the advice here is to ignore requests for returns, and always make the buyer get eBay involved through a case.
-
If eBay goes to the Amazon model, then buyers return items without discussing with the seller. I can’t remember the last time I spoke to an Amazon seller.
Why is the eBay return process difficult? For instance, we have 30 day returns. You don’t like it? Just return it. That’s eBay’s Hassle Free Returns. Why is there any need for long conversations with a buyer?
The issue we discussed last week is when buyer’s want to return items and want us to pay for all the shipping just because they changed their minds. In the past, eBay would make the buyer pay for the shipping unless the seller has done something wrong.
All we were asking is if this is the new eBay policy? If a buyer says they want to return an item because they changed their mind, do you just say “no problem. Ill cover all shipping”?
-
“Sounds like eBay wants opened cases to be a last resort, when we can’t work out a return with the buyer. But it sounds like the advice here is to ignore requests for returns, and always make the buyer get eBay involved through a case.”
why does ebay have a hassle free returns platform if they want us to work out all returns directly through messages only? i’ve never heard that. sure you can talk to your buyers about returns, but the official process is for them to open a return case to get a label. that’s what HASSLE FREE returns was supposed to be.
in regards to INAD cases through Hassle Free Returns and reps saying they won’t get involved, that has been my experience on my last 2 calls when i asked:
–buyer opens return case, says Item Not Described, but in the notes explains “didn’t want this item”
–ok, buyer’s remorse, but claims INAD, so they are not required to pay return shipping label.
–i call to appeal, CS reps say i have to accept the return because THEY NO LONGER GET INVOLVED WITH INAD CASES.
–so i accept the return, get the item, then call to appeal and hope i get my return shipping refunded.
-
-
Hello,
In response to the requests for someone who has dealt with an INAD recently, I have.
I think as long as the buyer puts INAD in the reason for return, the actual reason they are returning the item doesn’t come into play until you the seller pay for the return shipping and receive the item back. Then as Ryanne says, the seller calls eBay to appeal the reason for the return. It is exactly as Ryanne describes above, except for the last sentence.
After you call to appeal, if eBay agrees with you that it is not a legitimate INAD return, then eBay instructs you to refund the buyer MINUS the amount you paid to have the item shipped back to you. So you don’t just hope that you get your return shipping refunded. You have the customer pay for the return shipping by deducting the return shipping cost from the customer’s refund.
I’m not sure how it would work if the return shipping was more than the item actually cost though. -
-
I’m the caller. I feel that Grif revealed a little more about the real intent of the recent changes when he said: “ebay’s trying to get itself out of the return policy, uh, area where then, you know, a seller says I don’t want to take this back, what do I do? The simplification for returns that was announced a few months ago that starts this month is to make that process as easy for buyers and sellers and nearly every return incidence there’s less reasons for returns that a buyer can select, there’s less options for sellers who set up returns, which is as it should be.” Seems to me that the primary motive is to reduce ebay’s customer support labor cost related to returns.
As for the TV/VCR combo, discussed moments earlier, Grif said he wouldn’t pass judgement based on a buyer’s feedback: “I’m not going to trust feedback in this case because it is one side of the story.” He apparently misunderstood my earlier explanation that the buyer had received well over 50 positive feedback within the past 30 days. Obviously, that is an account being used to purchase/source items for resale or when coupled with the request to make the used item appear as new and omit the invoice, that is an account being used by a drop shipper. He said if the TV/VCR combo was actually shipped and an INAD case resulted because of the used condition of the TV, eBay would side with the seller because the listing said it was in used condition. Sure, but a drop shipper who sources well over 50 items a month on eBay is going to have learned that to prevail, all they need is a better excuse that eBay can’t independently verify such as a bogus claim that the speaker doesn’t work. The seller gets screwed and the ultimate buyer has no idea that the intermediary drop-shipper is lying to the original seller. I know Grif recognizes this and just doesn’t want to publicly admit this reality.
For those who don’t know, there is software that create listings on other marketplaces like Sears.com, Walmart.com, etc for merchandise that seller doesn’t possess. When an order comes in, they get their $3/hour virtual assistant (often based in the Philippines because of their excellent English skills and work ethic) to source that item on eBay with a message to the eBay seller stating it’s a gift and not include an invoice. The person acting as the intermediary pockets the difference in price between what they sold it for and what they paid you. They have ZERO risk because they hold no inventory and if the ultimate customer is unhappy, eBay is going to side with them and force the return and bear the shipping cost both ways. This is a bonanza for drop shippers, especially in light of eBay promotion of free returns. If you want to learn how this shady business is done, YouTube has plenty of people selling courses and software to get this done. Google Paul Lipsky, who reportedly nets $10k – $20k per month doing this using a team of $3/ hour virtual assistants while he works as an attorney at his day job.
I plan on calling in to Ebay Radio every Tuesday and Thursday to get relatively authoritative answers from Grif about anything there is uncertainty about. My list of upcoming questions include 1) Does a seller’s TRS status boost their items in search ranking? (I saw him offhandedly say no, it does not in a live event recorded by Reezy Resales, but I would like to him to say that again for more people to hear) and 2) Will Free returns on a given item cause it to rank higher in search results? and 3) Why are listings created on a mobile device not automatically mad mobile-friendly?
-
-
It was interesting to hear the shocked response from the hosts. (caveat, don’t like that show at all)
They didn’t really respond to your questions and seemed to upset to answer directly. Looking forward to your future interactions.
Heard a CNBC report recently after ebay announced their earnings, one statistic that was mentioned is how high ebay’s margins are compared to Amazon and other retailers, apparently more than double. It’s because they don’t operate warehouses, they just provide a nexus for sellers and buyers.
So, thinking out loud, for the company, a transaction is a transaction. A selling fee is a selling fee. Thus encouraging transactions is the key, whether they are sloppy or not.
Free returns, free shipping, emails saying reduce your price, give it away if you want to sell it, remove realistic feed back for buyers because they can do no wrong…
I still use my late 90s model of ridiculously thorough detailed descriptions, test everything, take too many pictures, discourage returns (NO!) , actual shipping charges only, etc. and have had only a couple of issues a year. (and, yes, EVERY ONE of those has had a bunch of odd emails before the sale – Grif, that’s a 100% statistic!).
I’m small time, still enjoy each sale, love to scvenge – and as long as I ignore the nonsense on ebay radio ( brought to you buy our sponsors who will ship you piles of stuff to sell) or am FORCED to comply with the Free return / Free shipping scheme, I’ll stay that way – and generate transactions for ebay!
-
Buytikiselltiki, even though I know it’s detrimental to my efforts to increase my sales, I too find it hard to skimp on any of the work needed to ensure my items are thoroughly tested, accurately described and competitively priced. The benefit is that I have 100% positive feedback, am TRS and am even somewhat surprised I rarely get returns. On those rare occasions I do, usually nobody is at fault (most recent was an item inside a sealed box had deteriorated due to age).
For the others that seem unjustified, in retrospect, there usually was a “tell” that hinted that they had unreasonable expectations (like the guy who was almost asking a notarized chain of custody and my cost for a $150 cellular hotspot device I was selling that had 4 weeks of service remaining that I had prepaid. It would be worth $30 less after it got returned later, which I avoided by selling it to someone else a few hours later. He bought it before I could reply, block him, and cancel the order. My intuition was right; he next sent me this, which I have ignored (there is nothing he can do other than leave negative feedback, which hasn’t happened): “Contacting you, first, before filing a dispute claim with Ebay’s Resolution Center, if a satisfactory conclusion to this matter is not reached, between us, pertaining to this matter.. Ebay’s Resolution Center will have access to all of the correspondence of messages that have sent and received between us to conclude their decision to who is at fault in this matter.. I did not cancel this order for a refund, as you stated to Ebay, as the reason, you did.. And I got a message from Ebay that substantiates that fact.. I have sent you several other messages prior to this one, also, without receiving your reply, regarding your cancellation of my order, that was already paid for thru Pay Pal, without my consent to do so.”
-
Buytikiselltiki, regarding your thoughts about eBay’s earnings, I think you are absolutely right! It seems that one of their most critical performance measures is Gross Merchandise Volume (GMV), which they are always touting. So if that is a significant driver of the stock price and the execs’ pay, the recent changes may primarily be designed to further increase GMV. I wouldn’t be surprised if GMV excludes returns and besides, eBay isn’t going to bear very much of the loss on return shipping, sellers will and that leads to seller increasing prices to offset postage losses… further increasing GMV and the stock price 😉
https://investors.ebayinc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1044445
Looks like I guessed right. Wikipedia: “GMV or gross merchandise volume for e-commerce retail companies means sale price charged to the customer multiplied by the number of items sold. … It does not tell the net sales or actual amount of audited services as GMV does not include discounts, costs involved and returns of products.”
I am guessing Grif will not take kindly to me sharing this hypothesis with him on eBay Radio =) Based on my last call, he will probably ask if I am a CPA. Actually, yes, I am – ha! 🙂
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
. Reason: added link to press release touting GMV
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
-
-
-
Thanks Ryanne, I was not aware of that subtle distinction. It appears that your understanding may be based on this: “Starting June 1, 2018, when you offer free returns, you’ll have greater control to manage your business, and you can decide to issue partial refunds to buyers. For example, if a buyer uses or damages an item and returns it, you can decide to issue a partial refund and we’ll take it from there.” The key phrase is “when you offer free returns” and what they did not explicitly state is that if you do NOT offer free returns, you will not be allowed to issue a partial refund. I will try to get to Grif to publicly confirm or refute that.
This statement from an eBay exec at a meeting at HQ seems to confirm Ryanne’s understanding: https://youtu.be/Tps1B_plazE?t=1h19m25s What he may have omitted is that you’re SOL if you don’t offer free returns. Elsewhere in that video, Grif explains that if sellers withhold a portion of the refund and the buyer escalates it, the buyer will be made whole by eBay using ebay’s funds and they will be monitoring that for abuse such as sellers repeatedly withholding a portion of refunds and advising buyers to open a case to get the rest of their refund paid by ebay.
-
I listened to the recent ebay webinar on returns (though not the Q&A portion.). The ebay speaker briefly mentioned seller protections, but implied that the subject would be addressed in another webinar after details about seller protection are released in the near future.
Here’s my guess: the next Seller Release (unless they’ve pushed it back) will be issued by the end of this month and it will include more details about the seller protection aspect of the new returns. I think that’s when we’ll get some clearer answers on some of this.
You are correct about seller determined partial refunds for items returned unsealed etc. That is a carrot to offer free returns, and applies ONLY to free returns. ebay will monitor both buyers and sellers for abuse of that. I’m pretty sure any seller who starts refunding only the bare 50% minimum allowed will find his account flagged. basically ebay is saying we will trust you to determine the percentage of the refund, and that you will administer your returns fairly. But in Reagan terms: yes, we will trust, but we will Trust and Verify LOL
IF the buyer is not satisfied with the percentage he gets from the seller, that is then between the buyer and ebay. ebay may or may not provide an additional refund to the buyer. Either way, the seller is not actually involved in any of that.
So, that’s the carrot. The stick seems to be: Item has been unsealed, and you have No free returns? You must issue a full refund and then you can take it up with ebay and hope for the best (and maybe risk a defect if you lose) This is where we need clarity, which hopefully will be coming by the end of the month.
We also need it on this situation: item comes back in a totally worthless condition, no way to salvage it for resale. If you offer free returns, you can issue a 50% refund, but really, it should be zero. I believe what ebay has said is, in that case, you can contact ebay to argue your case. But again, we need details on how this would work, and whether you risk a defect (or whatever they call it these days) if ebay sides with the buyer.
As I’ve often said, I went to free returns a few years ago, so to me, this 50% thing is just a bonus, but for others, it’s designed as an incentive. I saw the handwriting on the wall a few years ago, and figured ebay would eventually provide some incentives to offer free returns. I’d also assume they’ll offer disincentives for non-free returns. ebay isn’t going to REQUIRE sellers to offer free returns, but they are going to try to make it the sensible thing to do through their bananas and sticks.
-
My concern is that we experienced eBay reps telling us they no longer got involved with returns at all.
–We had a buyer say an item was INAD as described because it arrived too late.
–We shipped the same day so it was out of our control.
–eBay rep said we had to eat the total cost of shipping back and forth. Said this was new policy.Do you think eBay has changed their policy and will not get involved in unfair INAD cases? Then it truly becomes like Amazon where sellers need to assume 10%+ shrinkage which is pretty big for small sellers.
-
Jay,
I put this post on another thread, but this may be a better place. I was wondering if you or Ryanne had had the opportunity to call ebay back and address your case as a Guaranteed Delivery case and not an INAD case eventhough the buyer marked it as much. With it being a Guaranteed Delivery case, you and Ryanne should get your money back.
-
-
-
-
Jay, I honestly don’t know. CS reps have been known to be wrong, so it could be a change in policy or a rep who didn’t understand what he’d been told.
I’m hoping that the new Seller Release is this week or next, and I’m hoping they provide some clarity in the new release.And I think it could go either way
-
Jay in answer to your question, that’s how it worked for me at the end of April 2018. I had never dealt with an INAD return before then. But am I reading here that a change was made in May? I feel that my experience was recent (less than a month ago is recent when you’re my age – LOL) but if a change was made in May then my recent experience WOULD be how it used to work, not how it works now…
-
Ditto for me on both these statements below. Either you take the time to list or you take the time to handle returns.
Paul said, “even though I know it’s detrimental to my efforts to increase my sales, I too find it hard to skimp on any of the work needed to ensure my items are thoroughly tested, accurately described and competitively priced.”
Buytikiselltiki said, ‘I still use my late 90s model of ridiculously thorough detailed descriptions, test everything, take too many pictures, discourage returns (NO!) , actual shipping charges only, etc. and have had only a couple of issues a year.”
-
Is this show the official eBay radio program/podcast?
I can’t figure out if the show is an actual PR outlet/marketing piece for ebay official or if it’s the hosts “best guesses” on what the rules are? -
-
It is called ebay radio. The ebay name is trademarked and you will see right at the top of ebay radio website that it says Voice Marketing Inc which most likely means they serve as a marketing rep for ebay. In addition, if you listen to the hosts lingo (which has a very strong positive ebay narrative), it is apparent that they speak as reps of ebay. A marketing firm (or anyone for that matter) is not allowed to use a trademarked name or serve to represent a trademarked company without explicit written permission, so if they were not official marketing reps, I am sure they would have been shut down by now.
-
Yep, eBay Radio is legit, but there are lost of podcasts and blogs out there with “eBay” in the name. For instance: http://www.theebaylifeblog.com/
-
If that is not sanctioned by ebay, it will only be up until they find out and send a legal take down notice.
-
ebaylifeblog folks often get asked to speak at ebay open events, so i’m thinking they won’t ever get the C&D notice that we got years ago.
-
-
-
-
-
Griff is an employee of ebay, probably been there longer than anyone. Griff can be wrong, just like any CS rep can be wrong. I’ve actually corrected him a few times LOL
So, basically you can think of it as an ebay production. The factual information about ebay is usually but not always correct. Griff’s opinions, however, are his own, and he doesn’t always agree with ebay’s approach to everything.
But if you are looking for a totally independent viewpoint, well, no…no more so than you’d find on the ebay for business FB page.
-
-
The podcast description for their show reads ” The official radio voice of Ebay worldwide..” in my podcast app. That being said, if you are The Official Voice, I would *assume* all content shared is accurate/up to date/authoritative in content. So that is good news.
Perhaps I will try tune in again to hear answers to the questions Paul presents.
I would prefer a show transcript, I wonder if I can find one. -
I would not assume that. To the best of his ability, yes. But as I said, he is sometimes wrong. ebay has a gazillion policies, changes happen all the time, etc. I’m sure no one at ebay has all the answers all the time. I guess what I’m really getting at is: if Griff says something, and he’s wrong, it won’t do you any good to try to convince a CS rep that Griff said it on the Official radio show so it must be true. LOL
I don’t think there are transcripts. However, the shows are broadcast live and later archived and divided into segments. If you know which segment contains the discussion you want to hear, you can save a lot of time by listening to only that segment—that’s usually what I do. Also, be aware, the show ahs commercials…I usually download the segment, makes it easier to speed through the ads.
-
-
Well, yeah. But none of that guarantees accuracy. As I said I’ve corrected Griff a few times on policy matters, and I’ve heard others correct him as well. So, ebay radio is a good place to try to get information, and most of the time it is right, but it never hurts to verify if its something really important.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.