Re: [FWDLK] '57 Dodge in Ft. Lauderdale, FL

[William Huff <wbh@xxxxxxxxx>]

Well, I still believe that anything less than 99% is cause for 
worry.  There are numerous sellers on eBay with hundreds or even 
thousands of feedbacks who have a rating approaching 100%.  In my 
opinion 97% or 98% is not in that range, 99% to 100% is what I look 
for.  I agree that everyone doesn't post feedback,however if I am 
interested in buying from a seller with lower feedback, I check out 
the people who have left negative feedback.  If they have poor 
feedback themselves, then I tend ignore their input, but if they have 
very good ratings themselves then, I feel their opinion is important 
with regard to the seller's job performance.

Back to Walmart or Target, go by the return section, there are 
usually folks their returning either items that were defective, or 
that they bought in error or even that they had used and now wish to 
return.  Nonetheless, the store realizes that maintaining a good 
reputation, feedback if you will, is important, thus they try to keep 
the customer satisfied.  And this is for customers who can see, feel, 
touch and generally know the item before they buy.  If they 
maintained those policies and sold on eBay, I would bet that their 
feedback would indeed be very high.

Sellers on eBay are dealing with customers who are solely dependent 
upon them for accurate descriptions, prompt shipping, realistic 
shipping costs as well as for customer service after the sale.  There 
is no word of mouth on eBay except for the feedback rating, to ignore 
it or belittle it is to throw away the only tool we have to make a 
prior judgement regarding a prospective transaction.  Why should we 
accept a lesser standard for an Internet buy/sell than we would for a 
mortar and brick sale?

And you are correct, a private feedback rating is cause for concern 
as well, what is being hidden?  Negative feedbacks that are unfair or 
unwarranted can be removed by eBay after review by an impartial 
panel, I think we must believe that negative feedbacks that are 
allowed to remain have validity.

Everyone must make their own value judgement when dealing on 
eBay.  Rarely is there only a single source for any given item, so 
why take a chance, especially for a big ticket item like a classic 
car?  I have bought 3 cars on eBay, all from trusted eBayers based on 
their feedback, and I was satisfied.  I wouldn't touch this '57 Dodge 
unless I personally inspected it, drove it and had the title 
researched.  That is due to the feedback.  Just my opinion, but that 
is how I do business.

Bill Huff



At 5/7/2006 05:00 PM, Bill K. wrote:
> I think that 99% is unrealistic, especially in high volume sales.
>
> The problem is maybe 50% of good transactions get a positive feedback, but
> every bad one generates a negative, a percentage of which may not even be
> deserved - they're left by disgruntled bidders who didn't read or understand
> what they were getting.
>
> You have to look at it this way - if say K-mart, or Autozone for that
> matter, sold on eBay, what would their profile look like?  I'd be willing to
> bet it wouldn't be 99% positive.  But those places are generally considered
> good, or at least acceptable, businesses.
>
> I've seen a seller getting expensive bids on items with his feedback set
> private and a rating of 16 that is like 78% positive.  Some people don't
> care, or don't look.  I'm doing an NPB on him because he didn't even respond
> to the auction of mine that he won.  You never know what you're going to
> get -
>
>
> Bill K.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William Huff" <wbh@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 4:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [FWDLK] '57 Dodge in Ft. Lauderdale, FL
>
>
> I'm not an expert, but I do enough eBaying to
> cause my wife continually ask "Do we really need that?" :-D
>
> In my experience, someone with feedback in the
> hundreds should have a 99% or more feedback.  If
> you read the comments on most sellers with poor
> feedback, they often seem to involve incorrect
> descriptions or outright fraud.  Also, power
> sellers often do not respond to email complaints,
> they are selling dozens of items a day and just
> seem to not have time or don't care.  A seller
> with only a few feedback can have his rating
> capsized by one or two negative feedbacks, but
> someone with hundreds or feedback and who still
> has a poor rating has torqued off a lot of people.
>
> Do not forget that negative feedback is usually
> not a first sign of displeasure, it is the end
> result of a very frustrating experience wherein
> the seller (or buyer) has not responded to
> attempts to communicate or has not adequately
> addressed the complaint.  If 3 or 4 people out of
> 100 were so teed off at their buying experience
> at Walmart or Target that they took out newspaper
> ads voicing their displeasure, you would have the
> equivalent of a 96% or 97% feedback rating.  I
> suspect the store in question would not consider
> that a successful business plan.  If it were a
> store with big ticket items, such as Furd, then
> the company might even go out of business, oh
> wait, that is what is happening to Furd.
>
> A favorite ploy for unscrupulous eBay sellers is
> to string a dissatisfied customer along until
> after a month has passed after the auction
> ended.  After that the customer doesn't really
> have any recourse with eBay or Paypal, not that
> either of them do much to begin with.  If you
> have a problem, register it with eBay and with
> Paypal if applicable.  You can always withdraw
> the complaint or mark it resolved.  On eBay  it
> is always Caveat Emptor.  OK, end of rant.
>
>
> Bill Huff
>
> At 5/6/2006 02:30 PM, Jan & Roger van Hoy wrote:
> >This is a bit collateral, but what is the
> >consensus about eBay ratings?  Seems to me that
> >in the "real" world a business with a 96%
> >success rate would be doing quite well.  Yet on
> >eBay, any negative feedback is looked at unfavorably.
> >
> >Also, I'm mostly a buyer [buy high, sell low] on
> >eBay, and pay immediately, yet a number of
> >sellers haven't given me any feedback.
> >
> >--Roger van Hoy, Washougal, WA, '55 DeSoto, '58
> >DeSoto, '56 Plymouth, '66 Plymouth, '41 Dodge
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <mailto:wbh@xxxxxxxxx>William Huff
> >To: <mailto:L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 4:25 AM
> >Subject: Re: [FWDLK] '57 Dodge in Ft. Lauderdale, FL
> >Beware, be careful.  This seller has a poor
> >feedback rating, lots of negatives stating
> >misrepresentation. Plus, there are several bad
> >feedbacks that were withdrawn, or feedback
> >rating would be even worse.  Any feedback out of
> >the 99% range is a warning sign in my book.  As
> >it stands, almost 4 out of every 100 sales was unsatisfactory.
> >Bill Huff
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At 5/6/2006 02:44 AM, Jim Hoekendijk wrote:
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>There's a really interesting '57 Dodge in Ft.
> >>Lauderdale, FL and I wonder if someone is in
> >>the vicinity and could go and look at it for me.
> >>It's currently on eBay:
> >><http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4637284346>http://cgi.eba
> y.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4637284346
> >>
> >>eBay item number: 4637284346
> >>
> >>I've been trying to get additional information
> >>off of the seller, but he doesn't want to send
> >>me the additional pictures I've asked for, nor
> >>does he want to tell me about data/trim plate or any identifying part
> numbers.
> >>I recall seeing this car before, but can't really remember.
> >>
> >>It's been listed three consecutive times before:
> >><http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4628347529>http://cgi.eba
> y.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4628347529
> >>
> >>http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4630979938
> >><http://cgi.ebay.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4634551760>http://cgi.eba
> y.com/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4634551760
> >>
> >>Bidders don't come close to his reserve, which
> >>is 60K, which is what seller told me.
> >>I am seriously interested, but only if it is a factory original.
> >>
> >>It's not listed on his homepage
> >><http://www.carsfromyesterday.com/>www.carsfromyesterday.com
> >>
> >>Jim Hoekendijk
> >>Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
> >>'57 Dodge D-500
> >>
> >>*************************************************************
> >>To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
> >><http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1>http://lists.psu
> .edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook
> >>A=1
> >*************************************************************
> >To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
> ><http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1>http://lists.psu.
> edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
> >
>
> *************************************************************
>
> To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
> http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/333 - Release Date: 5/5/2006
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/333 - Release Date: 5/5/2006
>
> *************************************************************
>
> To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
> http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1