Why Sellers Should Consider "0 Feedback" Bidding Policies

[joe_collector]

Are you suggesting that newbies not be allowed to bid on eBay transactions? I'm inclined to go with Pete on this, because as a seller I've had positive transactions with zero feedback bidders.

 

Why are you totally ignoring the fact that this goose-egg bid higher than Bruce, immediately RETRACTED the bid, then bid a second time, DIRECTLY BELOW what he KNEW to be Bruce's maximum?

 

This is NOT about newbie bidders, as you seem to be be trying to make it, but unethical bidding and bid retraction/resubmission tactics. And Paradise approving of this scam, as long as it makes them money.

[joe_collector]

The most helpful I think is requiring bidders to have paypal accounts, which doesn't necessarily mean they have to use paypal, but should weed out a large portion of the riff raff.

 

I actually love this idea. To be honest, I'd like to deal exclusively through Paypal in all my Ebay dealings.

 

This is a super idea, especially since you can also set any payments to hold if the buyer is not confirmed. This should clear up a ton of problems, especially as I only take Paypal anyway.

[worldsbestcomics]

Are you suggesting that newbies not be allowed to bid on eBay transactions? I'm inclined to go with Pete on this, because as a seller I've had positive transactions with zero feedback bidders.

 

Why are you totally ignoring the fact that this goose-egg bid higher than Bruce, immediately RETRACTED the bid, then bid a second time, DIRECTLY BELOW what he KNEW to be Bruce's maximum?

 

This is NOT about newbie bidders, as you seem to be be trying to make it, but unethical bidding and bid retraction/resubmission tactics. And Paradise approving of this scam, as long as it makes then money.

 

JC, you nailed this issue in two sentences. The bidder's practices were CLEARLY unethical. And Paradise deciding to profit from it, at the expense of Bruce off all people who has done so much for this hobby that has benefited all of us - including Paradise - is cheesy at the very least.

[toro]

There is a matter of good business policy. There is the old saying the customer is always right. In this case the customer is DEFINITLY right.

 

I know after reading this I would have trouble ever bidding or doing business with Paradise Comics. I've never said that about any comic company before, even Mile High! I agree with Bruce that he wasn't shilling his own auction, but seriously just look at those bids and tell me that this was someone who really wanted that book.

[toro]

Gee look who bid this one up too!

 

[BronzeBruce13]

I always like to clarify that while Peter and I are friends and partners in the convention business, I am not a partner in his brick and mortar store (just a customer there). Certainly we talk about things like this that come up.

 

Kev, I was unaware that you were NOT part of Paradise beyond the convention end of it. I was under the impression you were an employee of Pete's… his right hand man basically. It makes sense though, otherwise your working for both CGC and a comic dealer would be a conflict.

 

I don't answer for Peter, he's got to do that for himself.

With the above in mind, obviously I thought you were. BTW… you do a damn good job of not answering for him Pete's fortunate to have a good friend like yourself ready to back him up, I respect that.

 

I understand you didn't like Peter's e-mail responses re: his position on the matter, and as I understand it you relayed that in your communication with him. I appreciate that you would like a zero feedback policy adopted, and Peter to do things the way you prefer, but that's up to the seller to decide.

 

I think both of you are missing the point to some extent… and characterizing me as demanding policy change is not accurate. That was a suggestion ("should consider") and I pointed out how it could have helped prevent this type of behavior… and protect a legit customer.

 

To be clear: What disturbed me the most was Pete's immediate acceptance of the underbidder's bids and his preference to give him the "benefit of the doubt"… which was all to his financial advantage. In this particualr case, (because the underbidders actions were sooo obviously wrong) I had to conclude that Pete's motivations were to secure as much money for himself as possible, not look at the situation objectively and take appropriate action.

 

I get the feeling that I'm now entering into a debate with you, and I think that's a little of what was going on behind the scenes. I don't want to debate you on this, as this isn't my decision or policy, I'm just relaying some of the whys as they were explained to me - and while I can see your point, I also can see Peter's.

 

I appreciate your taking the time to pass along the information you did and your point of view.

 

Paradise being a big operation or not, the transaction, as it was explained to me, was done because you decided not to wait to see what the underbidder had to say, you paid. I think they feel this is over with and they sending the book (or they have already). I don't know how communication ended, you say you had an additional query, maybe they feel it was over and done with or that, with Peter away, that the one store employee who would have been monitoring e-mails over the last few days thought it was something that could wait for Peter's return rather than reply to say "Peter is away and will respond when he returns on Tuesday".

 

Kev, the lack of another response was not something I intended to make a big issue of. I only responded that he "could have communicated with me further had he wanted" because you chose to open your first post with the comment… "Probably because Peter went to Dallas?" quoting my "I did not hear anything back after that". To be fair, I can see how Peter may have concluded the discussion was over since I was not in favor of giving the underbidder the options he wanted to, and I also said I would pay. It was certainly over… if he wanted it to be. One point though… he knew I was unhappy.

 

That you decided to bring the matter up to the court of public opinion here on the boards, because you don't like Peter's position on this matter. Fine... perhaps that will also get Peter to review his policy...

 

Somehow I get the feeling you don't approve. Regardless of what conclusions you or Pete may arrive at regarding my posting this issue on the forum, I can assure you that my primary motivation was to learn more about other's experiences and opinions to help establish if my views and conclusions were shared by the majority or not. When I encounter "puzzling differences" in positions (and my position seems obvious to me) I like to see if my interpretations and actions are fair and reasonable in other's eyes.

 

As I mentioned, I really feel my participation in this thread has been a balanced, fair and a genuine attempt to exchange opinions. I believe its a worthy topic that has led to other side discussions on similar matters I've never heard on the boards before.

[BronzeBruce13]

If only I could be so short and succinct

 

Are you suggesting that newbies not be allowed to bid on eBay transactions? I'm inclined to go with Pete on this, because as a seller I've had positive transactions with zero feedback bidders.

 

Why are you totally ignoring the fact that this goose-egg bid higher than Bruce, immediately RETRACTED the bid, then bid a second time, DIRECTLY BELOW what he KNEW to be Bruce's maximum?

 

This is NOT about newbie bidders, as you seem to be be trying to make it, but unethical bidding and bid retraction/resubmission tactics.And Paradise approving of this scam, as long as it makes them money.

[worldsbestcomics]

There is a matter of good business policy. There is the old saying the customer is always right. In this case the customer is DEFINITLY right.

 

I know after reading this I would have trouble ever bidding or doing business with Paradise Comics. I've never said that about any comic company before, even Mile High! I agree with Bruce that he wasn't shilling his own auction, but seriously just look at those bids and tell me that this was someone who really wanted that book.

 

Toro,

 

You make a good point. Some of these dealers only seem to listen when they think it will cost them money. So, I'm adding Paradise Comics to my blocked bidders list on eBay and I'm not buying from them either. Anybody who'd screw Bruce over for a lousy ten bucks would probably screw me over for ten cents.

 

Maybe if enough of us join in, they'll get the message.

[Anfield Fox]

Your question raises the issue in my mind for different reasons. After being on e-bay for nine years under three usernames (which are used for different purposes, business vs. personal, etc), and attaining in excess of 600 positive feedbacks, I received my first negative comment under my ebay user name EsquireComics. In fact, I received two because the winning bidder won two auctions for JFK assassination books.

 

The winner has 0 feedback. These were small cost items (totalled $75) but the fact that a new user won them immediately had me thinking this was a potential set-up. I sent the buyer an e-mail through ebay immediately after the close of the auction (which was a Wednesday) informing him I was on the West Coast for work and would not be able to ship the books, which were in Maryland, until Monday. I also informed him I would be happy to combine the books into one shipment to save him money and did he have a preferred shipping method.

 

I never received a direct response. Instead I received complaints that he wanted the books sent to him within 48 hours because he had a 10 hour plane ride on Saturday and he wanted to read them. I was criticized as being rude and condescending and he doinked me twice on feedback. Never once have I ever received such complaints. His big complaint appears to be he never received an invoice from me, which was initially correct because I had no idea what shipping would cost by combining the two sets of books. Eventually I sent him invoices with separate shipping costs. Of course, that did nothing and he even continued in his reply feedback to say I never sent him an invoice (which of course ebay records contradicts). In fact, I have still not received payment from him.

 

I have complained to ebay and opened a dispute. Not surprising, he has failed to respond except for the additional negative comment he left me in the feedback section. Eventually I will hopefully have the negatives removed but it brought to light the issue regarding whether I should adopt a policy, as others have, that in order for an individual to bid on my items with less than a certain number of feedback, prior approval must be sought.

 

This can backfire though. I sold a Superman #2 CGC 8.0 for $15,500 on ebay to a buyer with just 2 feedbacks. He was the only bidder. I thought for sure that was a set-up as well, but it turned out to be completely legit.

 

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether I should adopt such a policy? Perhaps establish a policy creating a right of refusal if a bidder with 0 feedback doesn't identify himself first?

 

Anyone have any suggestions as to how to get ebay to remove the negatives?

 

Not that i have used it but there is a loophole to get your neg removed, including the comment if all other avenues fail. You can only use this "get out of jail" card once and eBay frown upon it but im told it works. PM me for more info

[BronzeBruce13]

An Interesting Thread in the Marketplace… More "0 Feedback Bidder BS"

[Paradise_Comics]

Well I guess since I am getting raked over the coals in this forum I have to give some reply. I am truly sorry Bruce that you feel I have screwed you over and not catered to your concerns. You originally sent me an email and I replied. Sorry if I didn't take the time to investigate further but I was getting ready for Dallas last weekend and our show this weekend. You mentioned you were going to look up the rules on ebay and get back to meand I suggested contacting the underbidder to see how serious he was. Contrary to popular belief I have had a number of good transactions with people that had 0 feedback and feel everybody obviously has to start there.

 

You had sent me another email on Wed night that I didn't even read until yesterday since I flew out on Thurs. I would not have even seen this thread for awhile but Kevin pointed it out to me.

 

Skimming through this thread and the other auctions that the CGC police have uncovered yes it is obvious this guy is a thrill bidder. I will refund you your $9.00 and leave positive feedback. You have obviously had an unsatisfactory transaction so feel free to leave negative feedback. Bruce for someone that had mentioned you didn't have the time to search through ebay you sure seem to have plenty of it on this thread to discuss in public how badly you have been wronged by me. I have a good relationship with all of my customers and am confident they are happy with all our transactions. If you are not I would ask you not to bid on my auctions anymore.

 

Sorry everybody had to be dragged into this transaction.

 

Peter Dixon

Paradise Comics

paradisecomics@wiznet.ca

[tth2]

Contrary to popular belief I have had a number of good transactions with people that had 0 feedback and feel everybody obviously has to start there.

I don't think the issue is not permitting 0 feedback bidders to bid, but having controls or policies in place to deal with obvious bogus bidders like the one that ran Bruce up, so that legit bidders like Bruce don't get shafted. If the bidder hadn't been so blatant, then perhaps it would be a judgment call on your part. But I don't think there was an iota of doubt in anyone's mind here. In my opinion, you should have offered to let Bruce out of the deal and given him two options: (i) agree on a fair price for the book or (ii) rescind the auction and re-list the book (this time with proper procedures to deal with bogus bidders).

[BronzeBruce13]

Well I guess since I am getting raked over the coals in this forum I have to give some reply. I am truly sorry Bruce that you feel I have screwed you over and not catered to your concerns.

Pete, you're not being raked over the coals so please don't play the victim. What you are seeing is it's VERY obvious to nearly all who commented (and actually took the time to LOOK at the information) what the underbidder's conduct amounted to.

 

 

You originally sent me an email and I replied. Sorry if I didn't take the time to investigate further but I was getting ready for Dallas last weekend and our show this weekend.

Ater reading this and some of your other comments, I think I realize what happened here and its very unfortunate. You were very busy (understood) and did not take enough time to review what I pointed out to you clearly, and in detail two times. As a result, you were basically "half-assing" your way through our communications. I, not knowing you were "coasting" through the matter, was left with the impression (since you at least looked however briefly, and commented) that your were either too stupid to understand what was going on, or too greedy to care. (both of which are probably not true)

 

I would suggest in the future to avoid similar misunderstandings that you either take the time to handle customer service issues with the attention and focus they deserve… or communicate that you are too busy to address it at the moment but will do so in the near future… problem solved.

 

 

Contrary to popular belief I have had a number of good transactions with people that had 0 feedback and feel everybody obviously has to start there.

The fact that you are still clinging to this point illustrates that you still "don't get it" completely. Please read Tim's post (above this one). I made that point more than several times now in both our direct communications and in this thread you "Skimmed Through" (apparently like you did with the auction bid history and my emails). Maybe, since its not coming from me, you'll actually take the time to read it… and consider it.

 

 

Skimming through this thread and the other auctions that the CGC police have uncovered yes it is obvious this guy is a thrill bidder.

Note to Pete: LESS "Skimming through"… more reading would be helpful during customer service issues. There are no cliff notes versions to solving problems.

 

BTW…Nice to see you acknowledge (finally) what is obvious to almost everyone that took the time to look and consider it. Thanks for that.

 

 

I will refund you your $9.00 and leave positive feedback.

Please just keep it… it was never about the $10 even if you want to make it appear so.

 

 

You have obviously had an unsatisfactory transaction so feel free to leave negative feedback.

Never intended to leave a neg… and won't martyr you so you can paint me as unreasonable. "My hope" was that you would reconsider (or in this case look closely for the first time) at what transpired and consider it constructively.

 

Bruce for someone that had mentioned you didn't have the time to search through ebay you sure seem to have plenty of it on this thread to discuss in public how badly you have been wronged by me.

Pete… you're "Skimming" is showing again. I never said that "didn't have the time to search through ebay"

I said… "I feel I spent enough time already providing you with an accurate overview of the situation. I did so because I just assumed that you did not take the time to look closely(*) at how the auction transpired after my first email pointing out the underbidders "shill-like" behavior. From my perspective, I think its rather obvious what happened, what a fair-minded seller and wise businessman would do… what I would do."

 

(*)boy, was that on the money (both times)

 

Pete, learn to "take the time" and read and process information. It matters sometimes. If you don't have it… communicate that fact.

 

 

I have a good relationship with all of my customers and am confident they are happy with all our transactions. If you are not I would ask you not to bid on my auctions anymore. Sorry everybody had to be dragged into this transaction.

Pete… this is disappointing. Now that its pretty clear what most think of this bidders conduct, you had the opportunity to take responsibility for your abysmal effort at dealing with a customer's problem in this case and try to make amends instead of continuing to play a victim that's never had any other problems with anyone else and asking me not to bid on your auctions again. Well done again.

[BronzeBruce13]

Nice to see some people can read and form a reasonable conclusion.

 

 

Contrary to popular belief I have had a number of good transactions with people that had 0 feedback and feel everybody obviously has to start there.

 

I don't think the issue is not permitting 0 feedback bidders to bid, but having controls or policies in place to deal with obvious bogus bidders like the one that ran Bruce up, so that legit bidders like Bruce don't get shafted. If the bidder hadn't been so blatant, then perhaps it would be a judgment call on your part. But I don't think there was an iota of doubt in anyone's mind here. In my opinion, you should have offered to let Bruce out of the deal and given him two options: (i) agree on a fair price for the book or (ii) rescind the auction and re-list the book (this time with proper procedures to deal with bogus bidders).

 

I totally agree. Had the bidder NOT taken the lead and retracted his bid seconds later after doing so, much would have been a judgement call and not obvious until (if) a pattern developed. In fact, I would not have even contacted Pete… BUT it WAS so obvious.

[cgcmod4]

Everyone has had their say.

 

If Bruce and Peter need to continue to communicate they can do it via PM.