Thread About Fee-Free Payments Vs. Payments With Fees 1 1

[Math Teacher]

I could swear that I read in a thread somewhere that there is an acceptable way to charge for a payment that includes fees compared to a payment that is fee-free. Of course, I could just be having a "senior moment."

If anyone remembers this thread, could you please send me a link? If I am wrong in my assumption, I would appreciate it if you would point that out to me too. I have already been informed about Rule #10.

[comicdonna]

If you are talking about paypal, there are two ways to pay.  Goods and services and friends and family.  Only the former is allowed on the boards.  

[Math Teacher]

No, no, no. Charging extra for PayPal has already been brought to my attention and has been fixed.

I'm looking for the thread where all this was discussed. Like I said, maybe I'm just imagining this thread.

[KCOComics]

58 minutes ago, Math Teacher said:

No, no, no. Charging extra for PayPal has already been brought to my attention and has been fixed.

I'm looking for the thread where all this was discussed. Like I said, maybe I'm just imagining this thread.

In the GA area,  there was a post about sales slowing down on the boards that diverged into that discussion. 

I think the topic has been touched on in a few other places as well.  

[shadroch]

I recently tried to pay a boardie for a book and since it wasn't much tried to go the friends and family route, only to discover the person was barred from gtting such payments. I guess someone was a naughty boy and played fast and loose with it.

[Buzzetta]

When it comes to discounts, surcharges, and friends and family...   

I will just repost what I posted in the other thread so we don't take away from the sales thread.  When I was tagged in it I did not realize that we were having that conversation in your sales thread. 

 

Badger had stated that there is a difference between a surcharge and a discount and that it was a matter of semantics.

My response: 

I would not take your advice not because of any argument with you or because you are necessarily wrong.  I would not take your advice because PayPal doesn't seem to care about semantics.  It does not matter what you, or I, view as a discount or a surcharge.  That can be argued while the account is tied up and they conduct an investigation.  

Rob Ross of the Facebook Group, GI Joe Trader PX runs a tight ship.  On March 8th, look at what he called for members of the group to do.   People are in fact screen capping and reporting.  If anyone wants to argue with PayPal over discount v surcharge they can be my guest.   I do know from the group that there have been plenty of people that had their account tied up pending investigations as PayPal sort through transactions to see what is owed. In some cases, some lost their selling privileges entirely.

Price the item accordingly with the fees built in or realize it is the cost of doing business. 

To me, it is not worth the risk to argue semantics. 

PS: For example, I sold two GI Joe figures for $180 + shipping yesterday in his group.  I had it listed at $190.  Buyer offered $150 and asked me to meet him in the middle at $170.  I said $180 + shipping and best I would do.  He asked for $180 shipped.  I knew what I wanted to take home on these figures after fees and the only way to do that was by $180+shipping.

Buyer paid... they go out today.  The math is not that hard. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Buzzetta

[Buzzetta]

Just now, Bag of Snacks said:

Exactly. The discount is supposed to work like this:

"Item is $1,030. There's a 3% discount if you pay by check or M.O."

No.  Because if we do that, all I have to do is say,  and when you give me your email address, I screen cap what you just wrote in the thread of offering a discount if you pay using a check or money order.  Then I provide your email and the screen cap to PayPal and they are tying your account up.  It is against PP TOS for anyone to offer a discount to use something other than PayPal when you are including PayPal as a method of payment. 

[Buzzetta]

3 minutes ago, Bag of Snacks said:

Ok, I see what you're saying, but in my example I never mentioned Paypal. That doesn't make a difference?  Is that just semantics?

Funny because this is what the credit card companies suggest retailers should do.

PayPal has their TOS... Visa has theirs.  Judging by the evidence I am seeing of people having their funds frozen, PayPal would not be on the side of arguing semantics.  Again, I don't want to come across as argumentative here.  It's what it is.  And make no mistake about it, as Shadroch stated, they are restricting PayPal sellers abilities to collect funds based upon possible indiscretions of activity. 

[Math Teacher]

2 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

I will just repost what I posted in the other thread so we don't take away from the sales thread.  When I was tagged in it I did not realize that we were having that conversation in your sales thread.

It's no problem. It's not like this sales thread is going anywhere.