eBay Paranoia or Legit Concern?

[Bosco685]

My concern would be a low feedback buyer, with a similar name, could be viewed as a shill.

 

Poor shill if he picks a similar name. You think even the stupidest shills would try and disguise their identity.

 

Not so much the shill being stupid, but, people looking at the auction being stupid.

 

Especially later on when feedback is left, and usernames are exposed. If someone going by the username "Wall-Crawler 101" leaves feedback for someone going by "Wall-Crawler 100", alarm bells will go off this is a shill account trying to rack up feedback to look legitimate over time.

[ARWilson-migration]

My concern would be a low feedback buyer, with a similar name, could be viewed as a shill.

 

Poor shill if he picks a similar name. You think even the stupidest shills would try and disguise their identity.

 

Not so much the shill being stupid, but, people looking at the auction being stupid.

 

But you wouldn't know the shill's name was similar to the seller's name until the shill left feedback, right? During the auction you'd be able to see that a Zero fb bidder is bidding, but you wouldn't be able to tell what the name is.

[zuulioso]

I'd block any buyer with no feedback.

 

+1

 

I know it doesn't seem fair but nearly every single <10 feedback bidder I have ever let through ends up not paying. For me, what may have only been a few coincidental bad luck experiences made it enough to block across the board.

[Number 6]

I'm conflicted on the zero-feedback bidder issue.

 

I believe that everybody has to start somewhere so up until recently I've allowed anyone with zero feedback and up to bid.

 

But my last two auctions:

 

Had a zero-bidder bid up one of my books and then not pay. Frustrating thing was that if he hadn't meddled I would have been happy with the price the 2nd highest bidder was willing to pay. But after the time spent fooling around with the NPB process, the 2nd and 3rd highest bidder were no longer interested. Probably thought the zero-feedback bidder was a shill for me.

 

Then I had a low-feedback bidder (under 20 I think) win an item. They were really needy but I worked with them. Then they left a really lame positive feedback.

 

So now I'm starting to think I should block bidders with feedback under a certain amount.

[Doohickamabob]

Then I had a low-feedback bidder (under 20 I think) win an item. They were really needy but I worked with them. Then they left a really lame positive feedback.

At least it was positive...

[Number 6]

Then I had a low-feedback bidder (under 20 I think) win an item. They were really needy but I worked with them. Then they left a really lame positive feedback.

At least it was positive...

 

Yeah, that's true.

 

It's just a little irritating when I was willing to business with him, when a lot of other people wouldn't because he had low feedback (he was actually under 10 at the time)

 

He had all these special little conditions and needed constant e-mail updates which I gladly did. Then he leaves a positive feedback simply saying "fast shipping" - kinda implying everything about the transaction stunk but hey, USPS did a great job.

 

Actually, as I read this, it does sound pretty whiny on my part.

[Hado]

[Doohickamabob]

It's just a little irritating when I was willing to business with him, when a lot of other people wouldn't because he had low feedback (he was actually under 10 at the time). He had all these special little conditions and needed constant e-mail updates which I gladly did. Then he leaves a positive feedback simply saying "fast shipping" - kinda implying everything about the transaction stunk but hey, USPS did a great job. Actually, as I read this, it does sound pretty whiny on my part.

Ha ha, okay well what good are the CGC boards if you can't whine a little? Ultimately though, you walked away with a weird experience, a positive feedback, and no money lost, which sounds like a "win" to me. There's definitely more headaches to be had with lower-feedback users.

[Wall-Crawler]

My concern would be a low feedback buyer, with a similar name, could be viewed as a shill.

 

Poor shill if he picks a similar name. You think even the stupidest shills would try and disguise their identity.

 

Not so much the shill being stupid, but, people looking at the auction being stupid.

 

Especially later on when feedback is left, and usernames are exposed. If someone going by the username "Wall-Crawler 101" leaves feedback for someone going by "Wall-Crawler 100", alarm bells will go off this is a shill account trying to rack up feedback to look legitimate over time.

 

This was one of the things I was concerned with, with all the shilling going on.

 

I decided to let the bids stand. I recently sold an ASM CGC 9.2 to a guy with 1 feedback and the buyer was great, was getting back into the hobby after years away. I don't want to 'punish' anyone for not having any feedback. I mean, we all start somewhere. So, what the heck, I'll give this guy a chance too.

 

The guy won a few items.Also, all the items were low dollar items, so I don't know what he would have to gain, other than being a jerk by playing games. Invoice sent today. No payment yet. Items will require confirmation of delivery though.

 

I have put in place some of the safeguards others have suggested but I thought I would give this newbie the benefit of the doubt...

 

Will update as this develops...Thanks again!

 

 

[Hado]

Good luck

[Wall-Crawler]

UPDATE

 

Ok, all is well.

 

The bidder who created a userneame EXTREMELY similar to my username did not respond to any messages so as soon as I could, I filed an Unpaid Item Case.

 

4 Days elapsed this morning so I closed the case and received final value credit fee's.

 

I also blocked the user.

 

I don't know what was up with this last round but I had this and a couple of other annoying things go on with my last auction...I hope this is not a sign of things to come as some of the other stories I have heard are far more cringe-worthy...

 

 

[Doohickamabob]

Bizarre.