eBay: we're sorry for treating sellers like dirt

Angus Kidman04 July 2008, 8:48 AM

eBay has officially withdrawn plans to force customers to use PayPal, just as the ACCC was expected to announce eBay was breaking the law by doing so.


eBay has officially withdrawn all further plans to make its online payment system PayPal its sole acceptable payment method, but offering PayPal as one of the payment options remains a requirement and there's no sign of the auction giant apologising for suggesting that its opponents were no better than drug addicts.

The war is now officially over. Having been told by both the regulator and its customers that plans to make PayPal compulsory were unacceptable, greedy, anti-competitive, and just plain stupid, eBay has finally thrown in the towel on plans to make PayPal the only way to pay for eBay auctions in Australia.

eBay's statement acknowledging its backdown — something widely anticipated ever since it removed its target date for changing its current approach — contains the closest we'll ever see to an apology for its greedy and rapacious tactics.

"eBay has withdrawn its notification to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) about removing other payment methods," it reads. "Instead eBay will continue to allow all existing payment methods on eBay.com.au. We have decided to withdraw the notification to stop any further confusion and disruption among the eBay Community. eBay regrets any uncertainty that this process has caused among the Community and believe that today's decision will remove further doubt."

While that expression of regret is a welcome change from eBay's arrogant approach to date, it falls somewhat short of a real apology for the insults and abuse which eBay officials have thrown at the community ever since the policy was first announced in May. In the most infamous example, eBay VP Simon Smith compared people who opposed the compulsory PayPal approach to drug addicts. Somehow, it's hard to imagine that the current mea culpa is going to make up for that particular piece of sledging, or for eBay's evident pro-competition hypocrisy earlier this week when protesting a fine for allowing the sale of counterfeit Louis Vuitton goods. And the fact that PayPal must be offered as an option on all listings won't please sellers who have found eBay's own service less reliable than anything else on the market, or users like this writer who have found eBay's security management incompetent and inconsistent.

It's still unclear whether eBay genuinely believed it had a case that would convince the ACCC that the security benefits of its plans would outweigh the massive disruption to competition or whether it hoped that no-one would notice. The ACCC was much firmer on that point, suggesting back in June that the plan was unlikely to fly. A public meeting this week only reinforced the point.

Despite the backdown, the change is likely to take some time in being reflected on the eBay site. Having royally messed up previous attempts to put the correct information on its site, we don't expect eBay will do any better at withdrawing the policy. List with care.

Rivals were, unsurprisingly, quick to kick eBay while it was down. Telstra's Sensis Trading Post site, which launched free auction listings during the period while eBay was promoting greed ahead of its seller's needs, flung out a press release even before the news of eBay's backdown was widely distributed. "It has taken hundreds of angry public submissions plus the threat of action from the ACCC for eBay to withdraw its notification at the 11th-hour," Sensis Classifieds acting general manager Elisabet Wreme said. "Businesses that make a living by selling online must surely be questioning their credibility."

Rival payment service Paymate, which faced an effective eBay ban if the policy went ahead, also leapt on its rival's misfortunes, launching a waiver on buyer fees until July 15 to celebrate being allowed as an auction payment method.

So what happens now? With PayPal now a requirement on all listings, even though other methods are allowed, eBay still stands to make a bucket load more cash. On the other hand, the thrashing it has given its own brand may have scared off so many sellers that even a handsome bonus 2.4% commission on every sale won't quite make up for it.

In recent days, eBay has undertaken a blanket advertising campaign with a bargain hunt theme, perhaps hoping to distract customers from the recent debacle. But one lesson hunters learn early is that elephants never forget. We don't expect sellers will either, and we're about to find out if three months of stupidity can destroy a decade of global success.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Me In Oz (Cornerstone member):

OMG !
I think this is the first time the ACCC has had a result consistent with what it's role as a 'anti-competition watch dog' demands !
Now get to work on the oil industry !!!

04 July 2008, 8:55 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo (User):

The federal government has already fixed this with the fuel-watch scheme. World oil prices are a different issue and there's no reason why something in high demand and limited supply should be cheap.

I don't think a proper apology from eBay would make any difference. The deed is done and their reputation is irreparably damaged. Saying they wouldn't do it again would be a lie.

04 July 2008, 9:53 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting McBanjo:
The federal government has already fixed this with the fuel-watch scheme.

Like they fixed grocery prices with grocery prices? Muhahaha, some people will be suckered into believing anything.

What's next curing lung cancer with cancer watch, online porn with porno-watch, as for prostate cancer watch, well there is no way I'm logging onto that website.

No problem was ever solved by watching it, these watch schemes just demonstrate an inability to solve or even tackle issues and a desire to satiate the masses with feel good pap.




04 July 2008, 10:26 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me In Oz (Cornerstone member):

Quoting Raindog:
No problem was ever solved by watching it, these watch schemes just demonstrate an inability to solve or even tackle issues and a desire to satiate the masses with feel good pap.

+1
There are watchers and there are doers, and I'm afraid the toothless ACCC has always been a watcher !




04 July 2008, 10:37 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo (User):

You obviously don't understand the economics of information. Petrol stations are forced to submit their current and future prices, this is then compared against all of the other nearby petrol stations. This drives up competition enormously since consumers will go for the cheaper prices if it is within their interest.

The fuel-watch scheme will work for those who need it. But if you don't use it because it's too much of a hurdle, then apparently fuel prices are not that much of an obstacle for you, and you're just complaining because the media says you should.

04 July 2008, 10:53 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting McBanjo:
You obviously don't understand the economics of information.

Better than you would imagine.
Quoting McBanjo:
Petrol stations are forced to submit their current and future prices, this is then compared against all of the other nearby petrol stations.

You obviously do not understand industry Cartels.


Quoting McBanjo:
This drives up competition enormously

Oh yeah, can see that happening.


Quoting McBanjo:
since consumers will go for the cheaper prices if it is within their interest.

What? Drive half way across the city to save 2c a litre, that'd be a saving in time, labour, and green house gas emmissions wouldn't it?



Quoting McBanjo:
The fuel-watch scheme will work for those who need it.

politicians without the will or interlect to make changes, yes I can see how they would benefit.


Quoting McBanjo:
But if you don't use it because it's too much of a hurdle, then apparently fuel prices are not that much of an obstacle for you

And if you dont use it because it does not yet exist, or because any savings offered are less than the cost of travel to an alternate location.

Nothing ever changes by being watched, its a concept even the dimmest amongst us should be able to grasp.
In the e-bay experience, they appear more concerned about many deciding to no longer watch them, than concern over any scrutiny.


Removing ebay from Australian lifestyles hardly raises a ripple, escalating fuel prices has a much more obvious and widespread effect, to compare the two makes little sense.

04 July 2008, 12:17 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Me In Oz:
and I'm afraid the toothless ACCC has always been a watcher


In the case of Fuelwatch, ACCC can only be a watcher, it was not their cock-a-mam-ey idea but the genius of others.

04 July 2008, 11:06 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Quoting Me In Oz:
Now get to work on the oil industry !!!


Trouble is the current pricing jumps are being driven buy greed from investors, not the oil/fuel companies. The investors are seeing oil as a good buy, and fighting each other for it. Seriously, it's retarded, and likely to collapse soon anyway.

04 July 2008, 1:54 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ebay divorce (New user):

A win win for ebay way to go ebay.
Lets watch all the selers stay there for another kicking which im sure will come along very soon, when are they going to realise they are this tiny miniscule speck in a ebay and the more they carry on the more they are going to get it from ebay.
The users of ebay are a bit like a abused person who sticks around for more as they are to scared to move on.


04 July 2008, 10:42 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dan Warne (Administrator):

Funny you guys should bring up the oil industry in the context of an eBay article. eBay's slippery Australian spokesman, Daniel Feiler, used to be a PR flack for the oil industry.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=daniel+feiler+caltex

No criticism of him personally, of course -- someone has to do the job of publicising oil, tobacco or Telstra (and at least he has never dipped into the latter two as far as I'm aware), but it's interesting that his career path has landed him in this job, defending eBay's efforts to force people to use PayPal.

04 July 2008, 4:01 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

PfftGreedbay (New user):

Oi there Angus, I love your work, but what about biting Simple Simon Smith's moronic ankles a wee bit on behalf of ebay members.

The ACCC revoked their application and that prat doesn't understand that means revoked STAGES 1 & 2 which is what they applied for in the first place.

HOW DARE THEY PROCEED TO ENFORCE PAYPAL in any shape or form after ACCC's ruling???

It is far from over yet, this travesty must not be allowed to continue and they must be put back in their evil little box with a severe reprimand and a severe paddling of their bare bottoms in the town square.

04 July 2008, 7:53 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Discosis (User):

As a *buyer* I'd rather pay with PayPal. But I also think it shouldn't be the only option.

I'm puzzled as to why they tried to force ONLY PayPal... if they'd just gone down the "compulsory-but-not-exclusive" path I doubt people would be as angry as they are. It would STILL provide that much sought-after security -- for those of us who want it.

05 July 2008, 3:20 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

eBay junkie (New user):

I'm puzzled as to why they tried to force ONLY PayPal... says Discosis. Does Discosis realise that PayPal is wholly OWNED by eBay? ALL PayPal profits are therefore headed for eBay. Fair enough reason eBay think it'd be good to force all payments to go via their subsidiary, wouldn't you think?

07 July 2008, 5:21 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Discosis (User):

Quoting eBay junkie:
Does Discosis realise that PayPal is wholly OWNED by eBay? ALL PayPal profits are therefore headed for eBay.


Yes, Discosis does realise PayPal is owned by Ebay. Discosis is not that simple. Oooh look, donuts...

My bemusement was at the fact that they really thought they'd get away with making it the only payment method - forcing it only to be an available option seems far more reasonable to me, and far less likely to generate the crapstorm that they got.

07 July 2008, 6:45 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

eBay junkie (New user):

sorry - seemed to submit comment twice!

07 July 2008, 5:21 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Secure? Paypal is as secure alright... About as secure as a bank vault with no door, no walls and a giant neon sign saying "Free money!".

Even eBay's own information provided to ACCC said PayPal is more prone to fraud than any other method.

07 July 2008, 6:48 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Quoting Discosis:
It would STILL provide that much sought-after security -- for those of us who want it.

Ha! You think Paypal is secure in any way? You do know they can freeze your account at any time, and their own figures say it's less secure than using a credit card online, right?

Who quotes that it's the most secure? Oh right... The guys that get paid out of people using it.

07 July 2008, 6:59 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Discosis (User):

Quoting Tin:
You think Paypal is secure in any way?

Hmmm. Yes, I can connect to PayPal on port 443 in HTTPS. PayPal IS secure in at least one way. This counts as a negative to "any".

Quoting Tin:
You do know they can freeze your account at any time

Also a good point (and it's happened to me - apparently I requested an investigation into a seller which I never requested). To their credit, it was resolved quickly (even though it was annoying that it happened).

Quoting Tin:
Who quotes that it's the most secure?

Err, "most" secure? I didn't say that.

From an Ebay buyer's perspective, I'd rather use PayPal than a money transfer for buying my Transformers and Wii games, especially if I haven't dealt with the seller before - buyer protection.

PayPal isn't evil... but Ebay might be.

Ebay + PayPal is still better than Ebay + Money Order. Compulsory PayPal will cut down on fraudulent listings (remember all the stories of buying a laptop on Ebay only to get a laptop box with no laptop in it?).

Compulsory PayPal is not exclusive PayPal.




07 July 2008, 9:11 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Mel (New user):

I just had a seller confirming that he received twice the payment for something that I just bid and won. And I am surprised that Pay Pal 'allowed' it. I thought it was 'safe'
Mel.

07 July 2008, 7:51 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags