Subject:
|
Re: So what would you do?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:30:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
726 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> In lugnet.market.theory, Christopher Lindsey writes:
> > Part of the reason that I was more generous
> > than usual was to protect my feedback rating; the seller was waiting
> > to see what I posted before giving me any feedback.
>
> And that, IMHO, is why eBay feedback has degenerated to be basically
> worthless... You're held hostage to your own good name if you don't post
> something good first. As far as I am concerned the seller should post first
> anyway since the seller's end of the deal (from a feedback perspective) is
> completed once the money was received and the goods sent.
I'm not sure how a better system could be created. What we can work to
do is create a better system within the constraints. I basically always
give positive feedback if I get the goods. I have only ever been stiffed
once, and really have not had any difficulties in actually getting the
goods (the most recent situation turned out to be a Post Office delay,
goods arrived more than two weeks after being mailed, no indications
from the packaging that there was any reason for that). What I do do is
make sure that I highlight above average service. I indicate "quick
shipping" for any seller who gets me the item in less that about 10 days
for within the US (right now I don't particularly account for the
advantage to those sellers who offer PayPal as a payment option, but
then I'm willing to credit those sellers as being "above average"). I've
mentioned "very well packed" when I receive a package from a seller who
does a real good job of packaging. I'm happy to say "one of the best
LEGO sellers" in comments for the sellers I have done repeat buisiness
with, and with whom doing so is a pleasure.
I also set low expectations. I assume that if a set is indicated at all
as not being in factory sealed box (essentially anytime the seller
doesn't make it clear the item IS in a factory sealed box), I assume
that a few pieces will be missing, even if the seller says it's complete
(I'm not sure I've ever had that situation). I certainly wouldn't harp
about the 1x2 brick and plate for a horse, nor the "extra" small parts
which you can almost count on in a new set. I don't think I've ever had
a set be missing a rare part which was indicated as complete. I have
found it pretty easy to tell when a set has a high chance of being
incomplete. The one place where I need to be more carefull, and perhaps
should have dinged a few sellers is when pieces arrive which are
significantly playworn without good indication in the description or
photo.
Essentially, all I treat the feedback system as is an indicator as to
whether I will get my goods. I do read the feedback, and especially read
all the negatives. I have sworn off of several sellers because of the
feedback. One recent one I decided to pass on even though my feeling was
that I would get my goods because the impression I got was that the
seller was a little intolerant of delays in receiving payment, they
passed out negative feedback on people who hadn't managed to get payment
to them within 10 days. I know that as a seller it is frustrating to not
get your money, but there are plenty of reasonable reasons for delay.
While 10 days is certainly time to start pinging your buyer, I don't
think it's reasonable to post negative feedback (heck, should that
seller that I just dealt with get negative feedback just because the
Post Office dropped the package in the "this buyer needs to be taken
down a notch" bin?). Another seller got ignored after reading his
feedback and seeing that it looked like he had a tendency to sell
pirated music (it was amazing the number of feedbacks he had complaining
about it, the complaints were even in the positive feedbacks, not just
the negative and neutrals). It is also usually possible to spot the
negative feedbacks who come from buyers who just don't understand the
system (and a couple have just turned me on to watching the descriptions
more carefully). These often turn into feedback wars (though the last
time I was reading one, I wondered if I really wanted to buy from a
seller who participated in feedback wars, but then, as the recent little
event over in .space shows, its easy for almost anyone to let themselves
get fired up and start throwing punches when the better course would be
to ignore the provocation).
I also have to feel that at least with what we've got for a feedback
system, I can get a better feeling about the seller than when buying
from some company which has a flashy web site.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: So what would you do?
|
| (...) And that, IMHO, is why eBay feedback has degenerated to be basically worthless... You're held hostage to your own good name if you don't post something good first. As far as I am concerned the seller should post first anyway since the seller's (...) (24 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
