topic Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory in Selling

Best Match is certainly discriminatory

nirv_australia — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:17:09 GMT

I have been having a major problem with Best Match for a while now. Our fixed priced listings, some of which used to rank in the top 10 on page 1, are nowhere to be seen in search results. I have contacted Ebay countless times. On the phone they tell me nothing’s wrong with best match. When I email, they don’t reply.

So, today used one of my old ebay accounts to list a PC. I haven’t used this account in years. Low and behold, this item is ranking high on page 1. I then listed the exact same item under this account I’m using now. That item is nowhere to be seen on the first 20 pages. The two listings are identical in every way. So, according to ebay, out of these two listings, the ‘Best Match’ for a customer looking for a PC is the one from a seller who has sold nothing for years, has a feedback rating of only a hundred or so, is not a Powerseller or a TRS. The other listing is all of these things with a solid and consistent sales record for the past 6 years. How completely insane is that??

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

thecatspjs — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:41:45 GMT

??? Doesn't best match take into account user preferences???

When I search a couple of your items using one of my buying IDs they come up trumps in best match.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

pc-tech-pros — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:45:41 GMT

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

nirv_australia — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:47:18 GMT

I think you will find they are auction listings. I have been forced to list auctions seeing as my fixed price listings aren't ranking at all. The auctions don't sell though.

With PC sales, I believe a lot of people filter out the auction listings and look mostly at fixed price ones.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

thecatspjs — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:51:59 GMT

Using INTEL CORE GAMING DESKTOP SYSTEM COMPUTER PC some auctions and buy-it-nows of yours are page one for me out of 93 results - 7 of your listings are in the top ten.

Are there others search terms you would like me give a go?

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

nirv_australia — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:58:40 GMT

Yes but that search term is very specific to my listings. A buyer would never actually type that in. The would typically type something like:

Core i7

Gaming PC

Gaming Computer

Those types of things.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

annies_fancy_dress — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 07:20:42 GMT

Listing a new item is good way to puff up your existing listings, but I agreee it's insane for the experiment you just did.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

maranock — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 07:46:47 GMT

With the amount of items that would come up for 'Gaming Computer' why do you think that yours should come up in the first pages of best match.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

thecatspjs — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 07:55:05 GMT

Have to say with those very sketchy search terms I can only pass on my best wishes for coming up with an ongoing recipe to appear on page one in any ongoing consistent way.

I think a buyer may start a search with that - but would refine by detail. There are too many variables and too many products that come up.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

nirv_australia — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 23:03:38 GMT

If I use Listing Analytics, using various search terms, I used to have several items in the top 10 results, now I have NONE in the top 1000 results. Nothing has changed on my end. It's Ebay. For example, I just did a search. One of the items close to the top on page 1 is from a seller with a feedback rating of 2. That's right, 2. The item in question has had zero sales. The item description is almost non existent, a few lines of test, no pictures. How on earth could Ebay think this listing is the 'Best Match' for anyone looking to buy a computer. It's so riduculous it's laughable how useless Best Match is.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

davewil1964 — Wed, 18 Sep 2013 06:57:56 GMT

I totally agree.

And experienced buyers seem to agree with you. But if that was the case it wouldn't affect your sales; so I have NFI.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

thecatspjs — Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:45:24 GMT

In best match search "kathmandu" - my GTC new products don't seem to come up within cooee of the first few pages - a whole host of products come up, doesn't faze me, don't care.

I give buyers credit where credit is due, whilst best match might be the default search - I reckon very few buyers actually choose to buy according to best match results for the very exact reasons you are pointing out. I think buyers quickly learn that using too few search terms throws up a very random selection that is at best confused.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

snj_trading — Fri, 04 Oct 2013 05:47:49 GMT

I have seen this exact same problem. My main account is TRS 100% positive feedback, little over 2 weeks ago my listings started coming down in the ranks. Before I would get at least afew in the top 100 and now none of my listings are in the top 1000!!! Are you kidding me? I then listed some same stuff using my casual account, yes, the one I'm not actually paying a subscription for, and let me tell you, the same items are coming up in the top 50. **bleep** is going on?! Thinking about cancelling my subscription if this keeps happening.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

*crikey*mate* — Fri, 04 Oct 2013 06:13:08 GMT

I understand the reasons for doing so in these circumstances, but are we "allowed" to create 2 listings for the exact same product simultaneously?

I m pretty sure that eBay get a bit narky about that, so advertising that you've done it is probably not the wisest thing to do.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

clarry100 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 05:53:49 GMT

Hi We have two stores both selling the same products. One has been operating longer than the other and has a very good history of sales, views, watchers and a much higher overall FB score. However, this store has disappeared off the bottom of the search results whilst the younger store is still holding up reasonably well. Between both stores our sales volume is down about 50% since Sept 17th. The listings between both stores are identical and 100% compliant with the new eBay Premium Service requirements. And every listing is displaying the new logo too. We have contacted ebay and they just give us some "pilarva" that's its our problem and we should improve our listings. Both store listings are identical! We cannot sustain the low sales and are looking elsewhere. Once we establish we will close our two eBay stores we think. We have also noticed a huge flood of Chinese and Hong Kong sellers are now at the top of the rankings. And very few of their listings are compliant. Very few display the new logo. This seems wholly unethical as ALL their profits go offshore. ALL ours stay in Oz. I think the default search filter should be AUSTRALIA ONLY, this would give an advantage to Oz sellers. After all this is eBay Australia. Isn't it???

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

*crikey*mate* — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 06:20:10 GMT

If it's not too personal, could i enquire as to why you have two stores that sell the same thing?

I'm asking as it had been something I thought about from time to time, though not to sell the same thing.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

clarry100 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 10:18:06 GMT

No problems... we use one to sell single qty or small batches. And the other to sell the same items but as bulk qty's or wholesale. Prices per unit qty are obviously cheaper to buy when you take multiple qty.

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

*crikey*mate* — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 10:49:33 GMT

thanks for that - makes sense, but it's not something I do, so I can't add it to my pro/con list - LOL

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

*crikey*mate* — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 10:51:38 GMT

@clarry100 wrote:
No problems... we use one to sell single qty or small batches. And the other to sell the same items but as bulk qty's or wholesale. Prices per unit qty are obviously cheaper to buy when you take multiple qty.

ok, so back to the OP, is it possible that the type of listing is what is getting the higher ranking for you?

i.e. maybe the best match algorithm is showing a preference for bulk quantities vs single items (or vica versa?)

Re: Best Match is certainly discriminatory

clarry100 — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 03:32:52 GMT

It's something that happened on/after/about Sept 17th. That's when things went pear-shaped for us.

Up until that point the older store (the one with the single qty items listed) with good history was far in front of our other younger bulk/wholesale items store.

Since then sales have plummetted on the older store while the younger one did drop off somewhat but seems to be slowly picking up again.

We had been mailing out about 20 packages per day (and it was steadily increasing) between both stores, now we are lucky to mail 10 per day and not getting any better yet.

We normally do test seaches (have been for a while) using the exact same search text each time. This tells us where our items sit in the rankings. After Sept 17th is when they all went way off the bottom somewhere. Nothing at all in the top 1000. Usually we had 5-6 inside the top 100. And pretty much all showed up inside the top 1000 in our category.

We modified ALL our BIN listings to 100% comply with the new eBay Premium Service requirements but that did absolute diddly squat. Except now all our listings have the eBay Premium Service badge against them.

Ebay have been ZERO help, simply telling us to look at the listings of our competitors and improve ours. We have done that and to us it appears that ours are much better.

It's kinda looking like someone has taken a dislike to our store and put some kind of blocker on it.