I'd like to draw everyone's attention to the petition here:
Link to petition on Change.org about Final Value Fees on postage for Australian sellersThis announced change by eBay will hit certain sellers much harder than others. For sellers who sell small-value items that are too large to fit into a "Large Letter", for example, this may make it impossible for them to continue. For sellers whose items include things that are quite heavy, just consider for a moment how impossible the situation will be for them to cope with trying to work out how to survive such a fee when their postage cost could vary from around $8 (local) to over $170 to Zone NT2. (And that's not even as BAD as it could get... The postage price to Zones W3 and W4 are even higher.)
eBay suggests that sellers simply add on the price of postage (plus of course the additional fee charged by eBay) to the price of the item.
In the case of the first sort of seller I've mentioned above, consider their postage cost. For an item whose weight is over 250g but under 500g, which can fit into a Large Letter (and can be sent in this way with adequate and suitable protection), postage cost is $3.50 - $3.40 for those with an Australia post business charge account. Let us proceed with postage cost of $3.40, plus 60 cents to cover such things as bubble wrap, tape, etc. This amount won't cover a seller's time in packaging, so let's assume the seller in our example has minimal need to protect the item. This gives us $4.00 postage cost.
Final value fee of 9.9% on the postage cost of $4.00 is 39.6 cents. So the postage cost then becomes (for practical purposes) $4.40... and on low-priced items that 40 cents may not be able to be absorbed by the seller. The sellers thus needs to increase his postage charge to cover this fee - and every time the postage charge is increased, eBay's percentage becomes higher.
Let x = postage cost excluding eBay's fee; eBay's fee on the postage is represented by x/9.9. Since x -x/9.9 must equal 4, x = 49/9, which is 4.44943 (let's round that up to 4.45)...
... and thus the seller will need to increase his postage charge to $4.45 to cover the 45 cent additional fee.
This extra 45 cents may well represent a postage component that the buyer of a low-price item is not willing to pay. It's particularly something to bear in mind if the seller has previously, for example, kept the price just UNDER $4.00 for postage... at $3.95. There is no doubt at all that $3.95 looks a great deal cheaper than $4.45; it is a well-known marketing fact. The seller will be forced to charge more than the buyer wants to pay.
Or perhaps - instead of putting this additional cost onto the postage price - it should be placed onto the cost of the item itself. You can see how this will immediately cut into the seller's slender margin to an unsustainable amount.
Oh - and of course this means that sellers can no longer give discounts for combined postage; not with FVF being charged on each postage amount and with eBay's attempting to make sellers offer free postage.
In the case of the second sort of seller I've mentioned above, consider a sewing machine which weighs 12kg. It's not a small item in size, either (it would be around 30 x 60 x 40 cm as a conservative guess). Postage from VIC to WA (not the most remote WA, either - just W2) is $99.75 (calculating on today's AP rates). Compare this to the local cost - $9.75.
(This is a MODEST example - by no means the most extreme possibility, and as such they don't represent the worst of the cost issues.)
How can the seller incorporate that into his item price? Should he calculate for the worst case scenario? Should he strike a middle ground and be prepared to subsidise the postage cost heavily if the buyer happens to be in remote WA???
Here are his choices for a sewing machine listed at - let's say - $100. He'd have been paying 9.9% of this price (that is, $9.90) before the FVF included postage. Now, let's say he follows eBay's suggestion to add the postage cost onto the item. Well - what will be item be now? $109.75? $199.75? Or more than that? Or less than that? How can he justify DOUBLING THE PRICE of the sewing machine (with free shipping)? (And will any buyer in the same state, or whose postal zone gives a postage price of, say, $40 or $50, even consider buying from him?)
That is not even taking into account that the fee charged by eBay would double.Can he cater for the wildly different postage prices by leaving postage as a separate charge on his listing, then?
Well, the fee charged on his postage will vary from 97 cents to $10.86.
Let me put that into context. His postage fee could be 97 cents or as much as 11.19 times MORE than that.
That is over 1000 percent difference in FVF for the postage component.
His total FVF would then be anything from $10.87 ... or as much as $20.76.
Is it reasonable for a seller to be put into this ridiculous situation? He would be accused of postage piracy if he slaps on an extra $20 or so to the postage when a local buyer purchases it. He could add the $20 to the starting price of the item, but that is a one-fifth increase in price!
If he does what eBay is trying to "educate" sellers to do, and include free postage on the sewing machine, we can now see he'd have to change the price to $199.75 plus $20.75 just to make sure he's NOT subsidising the buyer's postage costs.
This is clearly, clearly, clearly ridiculous.
Let's not forget, too, that eBay have specifically said they will PENALISE sellers who don't offer free shipping. Hamish Moline (eBay's B2C marketplace senior director) says that
eBay will set its algorithms to demote items that have an additional cost for postage. “You’re at risk of being ranked more lowly,” Mr Moline admitted.
- Source:
The Daily TelegraphThis means that sellers whose business model CANNOT possibly work with the free postage "suggestion" are going to be punished by being so far down the ranks that they might as well be invisible.
They will be PAYING MORE THAN BEFORE for a service that will be SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THEY PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED.
Their fees will increase - in some cases, dramatically (as in, by 100%) - and their listings will be low-ranked (as in, hidden).
As a buyer, I am outraged by this. My favourite sorts of purchases have already been affected during the last few years - with more and more of the sorts of sellers from whom I buy being driven away from eBay due to increased costs and risks.
My apologies: I know this is a ... ahem ... a bit of a scroller. However, it could be worth reading so that you realize to what extent this will affect a significant number of sellers.
I urge you to contact the ACCC and make a complaint NOW. The link is http://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/complaints-problems/write-a-complaint-letter.
For those who need help in drafting a complaint letter in respect of this, feel free to ask me for assistance.
The petition will probably do little good, if any - at least, in respect of getting eBay to change its mind. eBay are a business; they are in the business of making money. One does not blame a business for wishing to make money - but of course eBay is scarcely doing poorly. Even so, they are extremely unlikely to "change their minds" because of very angry eBay members. If you recall, the PayPal-only requirement which eBay attempted to impose was thwarted - not by angry protest, not by petitions, not by letters to eBay, not by upset posts by eBayers - but by the power of the ACCC. (If you recall, the ACCC revoked eBay's immunity in respect of Australian law when eBay lodged a notification in respect of its intent. eBay finally backed down after the final decision by the ACCC was a foregone conclusion: not one moment earlier.) We do not - as individuals, or collectively - have the power to sway eBay. But what we can do - and what we MUST do - is give the ACCC the fuel to proceed with an investigation. The ACCC will act on complaints received - and the more complaints received, the more they will have to power their investigation. Sheer weight of numbers, backed up by evidence and by complaints that illustrate that the proposed change is unfair or wrong in respect of Australian consumer law, will be the iron fist in the iron glove.
That's why I consider the petition almost in the light of a tactical diversion, or a signpost to other angry eBayers who will have received that notification recently to their great dismay. Most Australian eBayers may not be aware that there is anything to do - other than to "suck it up" or walk away in despair. They need to be made aware. The more eBay users there are who will submit a complaint to the ACCC, the higher the chance that something will be done. I would therefore urge people to sign the petition, and to post about the petition on Facebook, Twitter and other social media.
Complaints on eBay's Facebook page, complaints on your Facebook complaints - all well and good. Do that - but do that as a tool of raising awareness of the situation and awareness of what to do in an attempt, at least, to have this stopped (if this is unlawful and can be stopped).
The ACTION needed is a complaint to ACCC. You can also complain to the NSW Department of Fair Trading (since eBay's office is in NSW) and perhaps even your own state's department of Fair Trading or the equivalent.
MOST IMPORTANT: http://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/complaints-problems/write-a-complaint-letterALSO MAY BE IMPORTANT:
In Victoria:
http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/contact-us/make-a-complaintIn NSW:
http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/About_us/Online_services/Lodge_a_complaint.pageIn SA:
http://www.cbs.sa.gov.au/wcm/consumers/consumer-advice/making-a-complaint/lodging-a-complaint/In WA:
http://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumerprotection/Content/Consumers/Complaints/Making_a_complaint.htmlIn NT:
http://www.consumeraffairs.nt.gov.au/ForConsumers/Complaint%20Form/Pages/default.aspxIn QLD:
http://www.fairtrading.qld.gov.au/complaint-general.htmIn ACT: (can't find the actual complaint form, but here's the contact information):
http://www.ors.act.gov.au/page/view/1544/title/contact-usIn TAS:
http://www.consumer.tas.gov.au/html_forms/enquiry_form
