Paying for paypal

[beadsandweeds]

Buyers have the choice whether to use paypal (with extra costs) or bank deposit.

This benefits shareholders of ebay Ink (well it might do if it didn't do so much to reduce activity on ebay by driving away sellers or limiting what is viable to sell.)

What creative ways have people found for redressing this and letting the decision-maker pay for the decision? (Other than discounts for bank deposit.) For instance, would I be within my rights to accept paypal for the item but bank deposit only for postage? Or what about regular postage only with bank deposit, signature and insurance required (at buyer's cost) with paypal?

[carly2579]

i prefer paypal over bank deposit anyday

[phorum_junkie*]

I think your problem is that you are living in the past if you expect many sellers to want to join you in ways of wriggling out of using Paypal. There was a lot of hot air around the time ebay wanted to make it compulsory but that was because a lot of people just didn't trust a service that was not well known in Australia. In the US and the UK Paypal had been the preferred payment method of the majority of buyers and sellers for many years.

Now most sellers are more than happy to accept it and many of us prefer it while still offering bank deposit. Not only does it make the post sale process much quicker and easier it increses a buyer's sense of security so they are perhaps prepared to pay more than they would risk with no buyer protection plus you have the buyers who don't have the cash to hand but can use their credit card with Paypal, all well worth the 2.4% small fee we pay.

[*new2vintage]

There is no sensible argument or reason for sellers to encourage buyers to pay via an unsafe method. It can affect their reputation, buyer trust and sales. Although I'm not against paying fees I've always believed that buyers should pay for them. People who are totally against paying fees should attend an ordinary auction house where sellers and buyers are charged fees that are of a higher percentage than ebay and paypal fees. It would be a real eye opener.

I can't give you a rundown of all of the fees but you need to pay 10% for GST for a start.

[springyzone]

I understand your pain, with all the extra fees.

But you need to consider the bottom line-will it help you sell or how will it affect your business?

As a buyer (mainly), paypal costs me nothing and to be frank, if i read an ad asking me to pay via paypal for the item but pay for postage into a bank account, I probably wouldn't bother with the item.

I'm okay with pick up only for bigger items, but I don't want my transaction segmented into 2 parts.

As a seller, I can't imagine that system would make it easier for you either. What if someone paid paypal, didn't pay postage into your bank and then put in some sort of claim against you?

All too messy.

As a buyer, paypal seems to offer some protection. I do know that a couple of times when I paid via the bank instead of paypal, because the sellers where having trouble with their paypal accounts, I never got the goods. So I just would refuse to consider bank payment now.

[beadsandweeds]

Thanks springyzone,

a genuine response to my question at last!

I might have had more success if I hadn't let me self got drawn into discussions about the rights and wrongs of ebay, paypal, bank deposit, etc, which aren't relevant (not criticising you for adding a note on that), and losing my temper a bit as well.

Much of that stuff was even more irrelevant because driven by a business perspective. It's true, as phorum and others have stated, that the climate here has become more tolerant of ebay's monopolistic practices (which they manage to endorse using free-trade arguments!), but the main reason is probably that the businesses who have suffered most damage have indeed left. Despite the we-all-love-paypal arguments, I notice that there are still business people talking about leaving, in threads that phorum and others have followed. 

If I had thought the paypal for purchase, bank deposit for post was a good solution, I would have implemented it rather than posting here. I mentioned it just by way of illustrating that I'm looking for a better solution. All the same, the idea never involved a buyer actually having to split the payment. I would never have refused bank deposit for the item. I merely wondered whether I would be complying with ebay policy if I accepted paypal for the item but required bank deposit for the postage.

In my view as a solution it is too complicated and would confuse and annoy potential buyers and, as you say, risk unexpected outcomes like a buyer only paying for the item.

The initial problem is not that paypal fees are excessive. They're very reasonable, unlike ebay fees. But ebay fees come out of income--the buyer's purchase. When the item as cheap but bulky and/or heavy, postage is expensive and paypal fees add a proportionally massive overhead to a small sale. I thought posting a question here would work because thousands of other people must have faced the same problems, and maybe some have found better solutions than I.

The obvious solution is to sell elsewhere. On the whole, I'm comfortable with that. Still, there's a reason for wanting to persevere with ebay with books despite it not being business-wise a good idea. It would probably be better if I threw them all or gave them to op shops, but I would like them to reach people who value them. Whatever its faults, I'm sure ebay is the best place for that. 

[digital*ghost]

If you want people to use other payment methods, in particular over PayPal, which is obviously the most popular and widely used for many reasons (not just on eBay), then you need to give them more reason to change their habits than PayPal give to maintain them. 

That is no easy task. 

PayPal is fast, convenient and offers protection for the payment, everything you offer to counter that disavails buyers of these advantages and frankly, not many buyers want to be asked to advantage the seller over advantaging themselves. Yes, you can say that registered post must be used if paying via PayPal, but many will interpret that not as a benefit to them if they use bank deposit, but a penalty for using PP. So not only do you need to give them a good reason for using other payment methods, it needs to be done in a way that doesn't leave a buyer questioning why you don't want them to have the benefits PayPal offers. 

The only way that has been done that I know of, is via reverse psychology, and it was a few years ago now - the climate here and use of PayPal has changed so I doubt it would have the same kind of effect. That is, to offer PayPal and bank deposit, then state PayPal Preferred. 

Historically and anecdotally, when people say Bank Deposit Preferred, payments via that method decrease. When people say PayPal preferred, payments via bank deposit increase (if but slightly).