eBay survey sellers on Item Condition attribute
by Chris Dawson
eBay are considering a change to the “item condition” Item Specific that sellers use to describe their items. They say that buyers sometimes misunderstand the condition of an item which leads to disappointment and leaves the seller trying to resolve a problem.
I know where they’re coming from – some of the computer products I sell are “New and boxed” but about 10 years old with any manufacturers warranty they once had expired. I don’t like describing the products as “Used” as they’re not, but calling them “New” might be misleading to a buyer.
They’re asking selected sellers to suggest additional alternative Item Condition values for certain categories as well as showing the most popular terms submitted by other sellers.
If you want to influence the Item Condition values for the categories you trade in and are a in the group of sellers chosen to vote you can log in to the Community Consultation and make your opinions heard.
31 Responses on "eBay survey sellers on Item Condition attribute"
Related Posts:
- Google Base: “condition” now compulsory
- Item Condition goes missing on eBay.com, .de, .co.uk
- eBay.com roll out new Item Condition specifics
- Updated item condition now available on relists
- Mandatory Item Condition Specifics for eBay India and UK
Recent Posts
- Upgrading TameBay for the future
- How to get your business started on Facebook
- .Net: How to improve your eBay store by Mark Buckingham
- 10% Discount vouchers for dormant eBay buyers
- New eBay International Selling Policy
“eBay Community Consultation on Item Condition Values
Thank you for your interest in the discussion for alternative item condition values. At this time, we are only allowing PowerSellers to cast votes for alternate values.”
yeah we got the above too, then while sitting wasting a few minutes at the M40
Cherwell services
we thought we would have another go, and the bugger then wanted us to respond with a pin number
I completed the survey and offered suggestions on the condition of several product lines, because having criticised ebay on numerous previous occasion about not consulting sellers I felt that I should.
Personally I would like to see more consultation albeit a survey of sellers as a regular feature.
I doubt if my few comments will have any impact on the decision making process, but it felt good to be asked for a change instead of being told. If ebay had spent more time speaking to professional sellers before implementing and then changing policies i.e. postage charges they might not be in the mess they are now.
I would urge invited sellers to take advantage of the opportunity to influence decisions. You never know the idea of speaking to the people who are the backbone of ebay might catch on.
we filled the survey in
though cant help feeling we were being led into what to say
and we thought the term as new !was an ebay no no
New/Unopened
New/Unsealed
New/Shelvage
Excellent with Packaging
Excellent without Packaging
Good with Packaging
Good without Packaging
Typical without Packaging
Typical with Packaging
Poor but functional
Non-functional/broken
Is this going to jam up the Google submissions? Google (so far as I can find out) allows:
new
used
refurbished
Not having a condition attribute will result in the item being rejected by Google, not that eBay cares.
I put new (old stock). vintage stock with tags or new (vintage stock) in the description but alas, most eBay buyers don’t read.
Whether by glitch or design, Google has been showing the condition of some new eBay items as “used” for months, so I’m not sure this would make any difference. /cynical
in truth its just another stick to beat you with. dont matter what you say or what term you use,
some buyers just see with their minds eye,
and should stick to the high st ,where they can touch feel and be demonstrated too, and never buy on ebay
knackered,
just a little knackered,
very knackered,
knackered beyond repair
beyond knackered
vintage knackered,
as new knackered
brand new but knackered
Aren’t eBay missing the point entirely anyway? It shouldn’t be about what sellers want at all, it should be about what the buyers want, they’re the one’s who are going to be using it.
And certain sellers will always stretch the reality, game the system, whatever term you like.
Keep the defaults just as simple as possible please.
In fact all aspects of eBay would benefit from a Dr Beeching style rationalisation.
Just because you can process infinite minutiae with computer processing at next to no cost does not mean you have to.
why all the play with words
a simple percentage scale would be easier
If I described an item as 80% or 90% or 95 % etc etc etc along with a few descriptive words, most would get a reasonable picture of condition
“most would get a reasonable picture of condition”
I think it’s the ones who wouldn’t who eBay are trying to sort out – you know, those ones, “it’s last season’s style so how can it be ‘new’”…
I like “new old stock” and “as new” – and if eBay are thinking of dropping their wholesale antipathy towards those phrases, then I’m all in favour.
I don’t think it will make much difference, no matter what words or phrases we/eBay use…There will always be a number of people who will disagree with “our” perception of the product.
I may think “new-unused” is a fair description of something that is 2 years old but never used, someone else may feel that I shouldn’t use the word new…Horses for…
My opinion is New should mean that the item is as you would expect to receive if you bought the item from a shop (not oxfam
) and that this is the first time that the product has been up for retail sale. Some items have tags some don’t. Some items come in boxes some don’t. Some are sealed some aren’t.
Breaking things up into different kinds of “New” doesn’t really seem to fit with eBay 2010.
The problem is that they currently have:
Like New
Excellent
Good
Acceptable
for the categories like video games but the definition of Good means it must include either the manual or box making all loose games regardless of condition “acceptable” — BUT the majority of people do not follow the guidelines of ebay and might list a game cart as “good” despite being loose.
New means in the same condition that you would expect to buy an item if purchased from a shop together with full statutory warranties and rights.
How can it mean anything else?
Private sellers should not be allowed to list new items full stop or be allowed to even use the word “new”!
Only business sellers should be allowed to use the word new and classify an item as being new!
It simply is not possible for a private seller to offer something that is new with all the rights that go with that.
Private sellers should be restricted to the use of the word “used”.
The question is what do you do with sales of unwanted gifts by private sellers?
It is absolute that private sellers are not bound by the same redress that business sellers are subject to. eBay must obligate private sellers to make this clear if an unwanted gift is being sold.
This can be done by automatically flagging this up at the top of any listing by a private seller (and all overseas sellers?) when a “new” classification is applied.
And ebay should limit the number of “New” sales by private sellers to no more than 20 per month or 5 each week.
With this regime in place eBay surely could keep the status quo rather than tampering?
Oh look, another idea copied from Amazon
There are many reasons why private sellers might be selling a new item. Why pick on them for it?
“New old stock” is the perfect way to describe things that are new, yet vintage — such as some of the Converse Chuck Taylors and other vintage sneakers that we sell. They’re completely unworn, sometimes even still in the original box, but they’re 20-30 years old or more, which doesn’t quite gell with the literal meaning of new.
It will be interesting to see what happens with this and if eBay start doing the same thing on ebay.com!
I would guess the outlets are putting pressure on eBay to do something about “new”.
With eBay focusing on the selling of new retail items the outlets must be unhappy about their new products being placed in the same search result as new products that in reality are not new as defined by something that you buy from a shop.
On the definition that new is something that you buy from a shop are you sure that “New old stock” is the answer?
I always use “used” for mint in their original packaging collectables as I believe that collectors only look at used items anyway in those catagories in which I operate. I may be right or wrong but the items for the most part always appear to be found whatever.
There are issues around used items in certain catagories (clothing as an example) so ultimately this is a matter of judgement for the individual. How you define “new” in clothing may be completely different to how you define “new” in a media section.
Am I alone in thinking that “New” means not used by anyone since it was created/manufactured etc.
The obvious exception for me would be antiques. I wouldn’t feel honest describing something as “New” if it was say older than 5 years. Then “Unused-Since new” would be simple enough.
“not used since mf” and “not older than 5 years” are not mutually exclusive. I once had a whole stack of 1960s nylons to sell – still sealed, still in packets, never worn by anyone. New, or not new?
I would say with your nylons you would need to elaborate in the description that they are “dead stock” and “vintage”, which would be an added selling point for the item.
I think that the item specifics are really meant for refining search – would someone searching for new nylons want to be presented with your product (may be a pleasant surprise)?
To sell discontinued lines, cabbage stock, catalogue returns, shop clearance as “New” (without clarification) is ……… a common practice.
Jimbo, seeing as the only options eBay would give me now would be “new” or “used”, I wouldn’t have much option but to pick “new”, would I? They’re certainly not “used”… ! (anyone been reading that thread on Q&A?
)
I’m happy with just New and Used and elaboration in the description.
What I don’t like is “New” or “New with tags” (somthings don’t have tags!).
Item specifics are good for refining search but shouldn’t be seen as a way of replacing the description. especially in such a diverse marketplace as eBay.
Question in this case is would have actually sold for more Sue, if you had put “Worn” rather than “New” ?
Yes, but then I’d’ve had some disappointed customers when they were all new in packets not “cleaned to eBay standards” or whatever the euphemism for “stinking just the way you like them” is
Well I completed the survey and put my tuppence worth in for what it’s worth.
I recall a buyer I had a couple of years back who told me I had “ambushed” her into purchasing some Waterford crystal which was chipped. I had 6 glasses, 4 perfect and 2 with problems to the rim. Put 3 auctions up, the chipped ones over an hour later so that they were away from the others. I put chipped in capitals in the title, in the description and also pictures of the damage. When I queried what the hell she was on about and how did she miss the word chipped, she said “I don’t have time to read the listing you should have listed them somewhere else like Amazon!!!”
Oi stop nicking my customers