1. How accurate was the item description? If the buyer says "Accurate" they leave 4 stars
2. "How satified were you with the seller's communication? If the buyer says "Satisfied" they leave 4 stars.
3. "How quickly did the seller ship the item?" If the buyer says "Quickly" they leave 4 stars.
4. "How reasonable were the shipping and handling charges?" If the buyer says reasonable they leave 4 stars.
The words: "Accurate", "Satisfied", "Quickly" and "Reasonable" are not negative words. These are NOT sentiments of a dissatisfied buyer but expressions from a happy buyer who will most likely be back for more.
By setting the bar at 4.3, well above "accurate, Satisified, quickly, and reasonable" is not ebay setting the bar too high and won't many "good" sellers be suspended?
Quick case in point go to stores do a search for "t-shirt". The largest seller their is top expressions with over 15,962 items in stock. They are running a 4.2 on shipping time. Check out their feedback. Is ebay really going to give them the axe? 3 out of the top 10 largest stores are in danger! Does ebay really want to axe these GREAT stores?
Again, don't misunderstand me. I'm glad ebay wants to police this site and get rid of the scum. I just think that using words like "accurate, Satisfied, quickly, and reasonable" to define scum is a little off base!
IMO ebay either needs to lower that bar a little more or re-word the questions by which that bar is determined.
I would greatly like to here ebay's defense of this.
Why can't eBay just admit that DSRs are not working when, on a 1 to 5 scale, anything below 4.3 is considered so inferior as to warrant termination of selling privileges?
The point is, you don't have to have a point to have a point. Dig?
Disclaimer: The information and advice concerning bidding might not apply in auctions with a r.e.s.e.r.v.e and probably does not apply in d.u.t.c.h auctions unless the context indicates otherwise.
No good seller is in danger of sanction from the seller standard requirement of a 4.3 DSR. Less than 5% of current sellers fall below the bar of 4.3. This bottom 5% are chronic underperformers.
"...Does ebay really want to axe these GREAT stores?'..."
No we don't, but 4.2 does not qualify as "great." Keep in mind that in order to be at 4.2, it takes a lot of 3, 2, and 1 ratings.
You've said before on the radio that you do not think it makes sense to punish sellers who are on average rated as "good" - which is it? You can't have it both ways.
"Keep in mind that in order to be at 4.2, it takes a lot of 3, 2, and 1 ratings."
No, it takes nine 4's and one 5 (and that's for 4.1!). I can get a 4.2 without EVER receiving anything below a 4.
P.S. If eBay doesn't want to take that 5% of sellers' money, I'm sure those sellers will be happy to accept the nudge into moving their sales off eBay.
But I'm a little skeptical on how the shareholders will feel about that.
While I support the idea that poor performers need to be weeded out of ebay, I agree with honeville and buyalot that the standard proposed is too strict, especially given the wording currently used on the DSRs. I think the first step should have been anything under a "4.0" rating in any category would be a better level to start. This would eliminate all of the definitely poor performers, and put the marginal ones on notice. I don't think anyone would complain that a "4.0" standard is unfair requirement.
Honeville, Thanks for wording that just perfect. That is exactly what I think. If 4 is satisfied, quickly and reasonable, why would we get rid of sellers that are performing on that level? I think the DSRs would work better if they were reworded.
I am a small seller. If I get two 5's and just one 4, that puts me right at 4.3.
I also don't think sellers are educated about shipping charges & times. I have no control over the post office shipping charges and delivery times. I do all in my power, but can still get rated down, especially for media mail.
I totally agree with Sharon. That was my first thought. Anything between a 4-5 means MOST buyers think you are good or great. It makes no sense to eliminate sellers who rate a 4 or above.
The scale does not seem to be working if your bottom 5-10% isn't in the 1-2 range. IMHO it is time for eBay to take a good hard look at what the numbers mean instead of pushing full-steam ahead and getting rid of sellers who rate as "good".
And when 4.3 sellers get axed and suddenly 5% of the remaining sellers are below 4.4, do they get axed as being the bottom? And then 4.5? And on and on until only large seller don't get knocked out by a couple of "Accurate", "Satisfied", "Quickly" and "Reasonable" ratings who don't know that eBay is lying to them when it says to rate such transactions a "4"?
The point is, you don't have to have a point to have a point. Dig?
Disclaimer: The information and advice concerning bidding might not apply in auctions with a r.e.s.e.r.v.e and probably does not apply in d.u.t.c.h auctions unless the context indicates otherwise.
The problem is when buyers are offered slow services (media/parcel) and faster services (priority, express) and choose the cheap option, and then give low DSR's when the media/parcel option is slow. And a lot of buyers ding shipping cost when the cheap option is slower than they would like and they don't see it as a good value.
You can't win on eBay... so what's keeping us here??
Though a seller has to perform pretty badly to be rated 4.3 or below, it still is ridiculous that ebay defines a 4 star rating as "accurate, "satisfied", "quickly", or "reasonable".
My 30 days DSR's are 15% worthy, but this issue of skewed defintions shown to those leaving feedback still doesn't make sense!
Honeville's logic in post #1 cannot be argued with, period.
Less than 5% of current sellers fall below the bar of 4.3. This bottom 5% are chronic underperformers.
Griff - Has this been looked at by catagory? I suspect that certain kinds of items are much more likely to be bought by people who would tend towards giving "5 stars" than other items.
For example - I suspect "hair bows" would likely get a lot more 5-star ratings than would "lawn mower parts". I am not implying anything derogatory here - its just that "hair bows" are a "feel good" "oh, this is so cute" kind of item, and "lawn mower parts" are - by their nature - ugly, un-exciting, and things a person wishes they did not need.
I also suspect that "hair bows" are much more likly to be bought by people who do a higher amount of ebay buying than are "lawn mower parts".
And, yes, "hair bows" are more likely to be bought by women - and "lawn mower parts" by men. And, Im thinking human nature tells us that a woman buying a luxuary item for her small child would be more likely to give "5-stars" than would a man buying a part for his broken lawnmower.
I put the items in quotes because they are examples.
I do not have access to the data - but I strongly suspect that there should be different "cut-off" points for different catagories - mainly due to human nature. Some items are fun to get in the mail, others are routine, or even "sad" to get in the mail (drat - now I gotta go fix that lawn mower)
Thanks for listening (and, yes, I am a real seller on another account, and have never been below 4.5 for 30 days, as far as I know)
if you are so concerned with "bad" sellers", why is it that sellers with a 96.5% rating are still allowed to be powersellers? I see this all the time. I work so freakin' hard to maintain my 99.7% and to see someone with so much dissatisfation, and to be a HIGHER powerseller than me makes me ill and also confuses me because it COMPLETELY makes eBay look hypocritical.
"...You've said before on the radio that you do not think it makes sense to punish sellers who are on average rated as "good" - which is it? You can't have it both ways...."
A seller who is rated at 4.3 is actually not "good" at least not for that particular DSR. That seller is providing a serious number of less than acceptable experiences for buyers with regards to that particular
"...No, it takes nine 4's and one 5 (and that's for 4.1!). I can get a 4.2 without EVER receiving anything below a 4. ..."
In this instance, you are assuming no previous DSRs to include in the rating so that would only apply to a situation where the member is a new seller or a seller with no previous DSRS. That seller would be impacted. But I want to be clear about this. A seller who is getting 90% 4's is severely underperforming the rest of the seller population.
Griff
sharonk114,
Actually, a 4.0 average for any DSR is far below acceptable. We studied this very closely to make sure we weren't in danger of sanctioning good sellers with this level requirement and we aren't.
I would also urge anyone who is concerned about this announced requirement for all sellers to read the FAQ. There are nuances to the policy that allow any seller affected by the standard requirement to return to selling.
I also need to question the statistical significance of deciding ANYTHING based on a sample of 10.
10 is simply too small a sample size.
And - I would further state that 50 is likely too small a sample size.
For this cut off - perhaps we could say 4.3 is set low enough to account for the sample size being so low. But, a lot of different things are being based on the 30 day DSR.
I would really like to see eBay contract with a statistics proffesor at an accredited university to provide a study on what sample size WOULD BE appropriate. I strongly suspect any statistics proffesor would be appalled to hear a sample size of 10 is being used to make any decisions.
As a manufacturing engineer - if I had test results of 10 items, 9 of them being 4s and 5s, and one being a 1 - I would NOT call that an average of 4.15. I would either discard the "1", or I would look into what happened to cause that "1" - and address the problem that caused that score.
Even in a sample of 50 - with, say, 35 "5s", 14 "4s", and one "1" - I would need to look into what caused the "1" result. If it were not possible to determine what caused the "1", then I would throw it out of the sample - and assume it was an error. It simply would not be correct to state the average as 4.64. YES, its the mathematical average - but its not a MEANINGFUL average. The meaningful average would be 4.71.... with one "outlying data point being discarded"
Again - I suggest eBay contract a simple study by a professional statistician to determine how to use the 30 day DSR data.
just kind of browsing thru sellerdome.com looking for stats and came across the 11th largest seller of ebay. with monthly sales of 555,322 and a DSR in shipping of 4.3. Went to see their items and they're gone.
Items for Sale From: emilyandlily ( 381822) [ Show results from all sellers ]
0 match found [ Save this searchSaved toMy eBay. ] Your search returned 0 items
2,400FB in last 30 days so not sure what to make of them not being here, but really? is this the kind of seller ebay thinks needs to go? Really? Hope so because apparantly they just did.
Actually, a 4.0 average for any DSR is far below acceptable
Which means the system is BROKEN and is NOT an accurate measure of what it is purporting to measure.
It means that too many buyers are leaving 5s for merely adequate or even inadequate performance.
The point is, you don't have to have a point to have a point. Dig?
Disclaimer: The information and advice concerning bidding might not apply in auctions with a r.e.s.e.r.v.e and probably does not apply in d.u.t.c.h auctions unless the context indicates otherwise.
I think it's interesting to see that eBay has finally posted the official data.
SELLERS WITH FREE SHIPPING AVERAGE A 4.8 FOR SHIPPING COST. That means that even with the shipping cost as low as it can possibly go you still are too low for the best discount.
So Griff, this average seller with free shipping is getting a 4.8, he's clearly underperforming. He should make the shipping negative $5 and put the rebate in with the item to boost his DSR.
Actually, a 4.0 average for any DSR is far below acceptable.
Then why are the customers told when they see the stars that 4 is good???? I would consider 'reasonable, quickly and accurately' as good.
Actually, a 4.0 average for any DSR is far below acceptable.
Again, then why don't the DSR's that buyers see reflect that??
**And I am a small seller. If I get two 5's and one 4, I am right at a 4.3. I do have other feedback, but it would probably affect my 30 day ratings greatly.
I am a great seller and can get great DSR's....if the buyer understands them better. I just recently got rated down for shipping time/delivery. My items went media mail. I only charged exact shipping(printed it on the label) and shipped within 24 hours. How can I improve on that. I even put in my listing how long media mail takes. Still got rated down. Until the customers are educated on the DSRs or the wording is changed, all sellers are in danger of going below 4.3.
I thought at Ebay Live it was mentioned by Ebay they were going to look at and change the wording.....that they admitted it needed work. Am I wrong on hearing this at Live?
Adding a feature that ensures that FREE shipping will result in an automatic "5" rating on Shipping Cost would go a long way towards encouraging sellers to implement it.
You've got to use a bit more carrot, & take away the stick on this one to be seen as on the side of your sellers.
We're working hard to adapt, & if you met us halfway with a policy that would give us the chance to do well with the lowest rated star that we all struggle with in return for offering FREE SHIPPING (which costs us, no matter what), you'd get much better results.
I have heard people are giving 3's for free shipping. They didn't pay for shipping, so it wasn't 'reasonable or unreasonable'. When people offer free shipping, ratings go down. When they charge, ratings go up.
What does that say?? Buyers are not educated on what those DSR ratings really mean. And our fate is in their hands. That's a really scary thing.
A seller who is rated at 4.3 is actually not "good" at least not for that particular DSR. That seller is providing a serious number of less than acceptable experiences for buyers with regards to that particular
I totally understand that we are using a "curve" to determine that below 4.3 is the bottom of the pack.
My concern is - are we sure that a seller who - right this minute - has an average of 4.3 - is CONSISTENTLY providing "a serious number of less than acceptable experiences"? I feel there is more to it than a straight mathematical average, when the sample size is so low.
Perhaps you are thinking only of large volume sellers. You are also assuming the 4.3 is coming from a lot of 5s, plus "a serious number of " 1s, 2s, and 3s. If that really were the case - fine - Im with you.
But - unless there is more to the calculation than we have ever been told - the 4.3 can just as easily be coming from three 5's and seven 4's.
Or - even more troubling - it may be coming from six 5's and three 4's, and one 1. That one 1-star rating MAY BE important - but it also may easily be a buyer not understanding, or making a mistake, etc.
If MORE data were used, or if the 'outlying data point" were discarded, then one score would not have that kind of impact - there would have to be - as you said - "a serious number of less than acceptable experiences"
"...No, it takes nine 4's and one 5 (and that's for 4.1!). I can get a 4.2 without EVER receiving anything below a 4. ..." In this instance, you are assuming no previous DSRs to include in the rating so that would only apply to a situation where the member is a new seller or a seller with no previous DSRS.
The info in the link you give clearly states "at least 10 ratings" - and that its using 30 days. One does not have to be new to only have 10 or 20 DSRs left within 30 days. According to the info in the link - 12 month data is only used if there are less than 10 ratings for the previous 30 days.
Even mid-volume sellers may well have only 30 DSRs left in 30 days. I sell multiple items per transaction - so only one rating counts, not all leave feedback, not all leave a dsr, etc. Its very possible to be a consistent, profitable seller, and still have less than 30 ratings in 30 days.
=====Again - this isn't just about this 4.3 cut-off - its about the Discounts, and the search advantaging. The 30 day number is just too volatile for small/mid sized sellers to be used to make any kinds of decisions.
That is correct. The feedback and DSR features are under what is the same regular review that all features recieve every year or so. The process is exacting and takes time (and involves some serious user studies and surveys which are happening as we speak).
All aspects of the features are included in the review and study, including the text used for defining each point of the DSR scale (as well as each DSR and how it is scored).
Any resulting changes from the review would not be implemented until next year at the earliest.
Griff just cannot BS his way out of this one! LOL.
"...No, it takes nine 4's and one 5 (and that's for 4.1!). I can get a 4.2 without EVER receiving anything below a 4. ..."
"In this instance, you are assuming no previous DSRs to include in the rating so that would only apply to a situation where the member is a new seller or a seller with no previous DSRS. That seller would be impacted. But I want to be clear about this. A seller who is getting 90% 4's is severely underperforming the rest of the seller population."
How about 900 - 4s & 100 - 5s....that is still 4.1 or does someone not understand 8th grade math?
If a 4 is under performing why is it considered "Accurate", "Satisfied", "Quickly" and "Reasonable"?
Someone bring griff a bottle of Tylenol, he will need it today!
Adding a feature that ensures that FREE shipping will result in an automatic "5" rating on Shipping Cost would go a long way towards encouraging sellers to implement it.
You've got to use a bit more carrot, & take away the stick on this one to be seen as on the side of your sellers.
We're working hard to adapt, & if you met us halfway with a policy that would give us the chance to do well with the lowest rated star that we all struggle with in return for offering FREE SHIPPING (which costs us, no matter what), you'd get much better results.
Actually I believe the Shipping & Handling Cost DSR should go away as soon as specified shipping is required. There won't be any way for sellers to "surprise" buyers with high S&H costs so it makes absolutely no sense to rate sellers on them.
If Free Shipping is going to be required, or at least encouraged and supposedly rewarded BECAUSE eBay thinks that buyers prefer it, then the buyers should NOT be able to rate that aspect of the transaction. It should be an automatic 5. I tried free shipping and my DSRs went down! They are higher than ever and I charge exact shipping. So I will be punished for doing what eBay wants to me do, and for doing what they don't want me to do, but obviously my customers prefer. Please explain the logic behind this.
I think the OP makes a very good point, a person relying on the information provided to them at the time they are leaving DSRs for a seller might think they are showing total satisfaction by leaving all 4s.
The reality however is it is having a devastating effect on smaller volume sellers.
All 4s on a consistent basis, even though by eBay's provided definitions of Accurate, Satisfied, Quickly and Reasonable, will disqualify the seller from any discount programs and could prevent them from selling period.
I agree with eBay needing to get rid of the sellers creating unfavorable experiences, however I think the use of a subjective DSR rating should not be the tool used to extract them from the community.
What about those buyers who don't take the time to provide a DSR rating? Last i checked they are not required? So have i misunderstood something here or are they going to make it mandatory that the buyer takes the time to do so...and how are they gonna enforce that?
What is up with Ebay...i stop selling for awhile here and there because i get fed up and every time i come back they are not fixing what doesn't work and screwing up what does...just like the neutral feedback effecting positive feedback scores????....like why not fix the negative feedback received by a buyer who had to be reported for an unpaid item!!! yet where is the protection for the seller and their feed back...because ebay has gotta know the buyer once forced to pay will get revenge!! if they have to be reported to collect they shouldn't have a say on feedback for that item!! and now buyers know they can be simply in a bad mood on any given day and leave negative feedback knowing the seller can't leave negative feedback in return????
Gee i had to laugh when feebay announced they were cutting back on listing fees...wow feebay really out did themselves on that one!!! the small pennies will really add up and save me money as you now try to tell us what we will be able to charge for shipping and what type a payments we will be forced to accept
Thanks feebay as you always have us sellers covered..you know the ones who make feebay what it is and keep your feebay revenue turning.......
I agree that a 4.0 is a sub-par score. The problem is not the grade score. The problem is eBay's verbiage associated with the score. Supposedly, the Global Feedback Policy people have heard this comment, and will be addressing it.
Most buyers seem to understand the 5 point scoring system. eBay just needs to change the language to more accurately reflect the meaning of each score.
If a 4 is under performing why is it considered "Accurate", "Satisfied", "Quickly" and "Reasonable"?
We don't mind being judged by our buyers. Yes and Amen! Let it be so. But having words like "accurate, Satisfied, Quickly and Reasonable" used against us is wrong.
So for ebay to say that those whose ratings are well above THOSE standards (accurate, satisfied, quickly and reasonable) are NOT good sellers is just hard for us to see.
"...How about 900 - 4s & 100 - 5s....that is still 4.1 or does someone not understand 8th grade math?..."
I got straight A's in math. The above is correct. And the hypothetical seller above would be in the very bottom 2% of sellers on eBay based on performance and their level of service would be unacceptable for eBay. The reality is that the lion's share of sellers on eBay do not receive anywhere near the above number of 4's to 5's and that nearly every seller with a 4.1 has received a fair share of 3's and lower (in the next revision of Seller Dashboard, sellers will be able to view the volume of 1's and 2's that they have received)
I appreciate (and fully would expect) that sellers with superb DSR ratings (like those of the posters in this thread) would be concerned about their fellow sellers selling status but the truth is that any seller with a DSR lower than 4.3 needs to re-adjust immediatley their business practices and we will give them the chance to do so but a chronic 4.3 or lower indicates a seller that does not meet the standard for conducting business on eBay.
If a hundred buyers are satisfied with a new seller and give him all 4s, the poor guy will be kicked off eBay, Griff, and you know it. But I love you anyway.
Welcome to the 8/20 Announcements Discussion Forum
Learn more about RSS
Must use Buy It Now and PayPal.
)
Previous
)
)
)
)
)
)
What's New
