3BrNBBRz4UYdo+!~~60_7.JPG "chameleon54"){kind=avatar}
You could be describing ebay, Melina! 
@clubesquire wrote:I can’t help but wonder just where the current serious discontent of sellers will end. I have a feeling it’s much more serious than we understand and that is despite E posting massive profits last quarter.
They seem to be so pig-headedly intent on ignoring basic seller needs, indeed ignoring sellers period, in among some monumental platform stuff-ups. The contempt displayed towards sellers is palpable and only contributing to make a serious situation worse. It has been suggested that sellers are moving on in droves. I think this is pretty accurate.
It seems that one fellow is determined to do there what he did here, although there will be differing opinion on that.
Its pretty bad.
Melina.
This is what happens when companies go public and shareholders become the top priority, unfortunately, though some of the deeper problems did exist well before then.
Their problem is how to grow (which to most companies like this, means how to increase profits), when the site is more specialised (meaning product range, while extremely diverse, is still limited to things people made, things 20+ years old, or things people can use to make things). The first thing they did was relax the definition of "handmade" (it was already pretty relaxed - modify any item yourself, in any way, it is handmade. But now you can pull a public domain image from somewhere, send it off to a printing company, get the printing company to send direct to your buyer, and that is also "handmade"). That means they have to make more and more allowances for products they never would have in the beginning, and get sellers to pay extra for things that they should be provided as a normal site function (tools to help them sell, tools to get their items actually seen, etc).
My biggest problem with them is that they are fully aware supplies (which is my primary business) are the top money earner for the site, but we pay the highest percentage of our turnover. Low item value + high turnover items are an absolute boon for them, due to the USD 20c listing fee per item sold. On ebay, if I actually had to pay a listing fee, it'd be $1.50 per month, but I could sell 100 items from that listing and never pay another cent for it. On Etsy, selling 100 items from a listing (or even multiple listings) means USD$20 in listing fees, so even though their FVF is just over half what eBay's is, at 5% of price & postage, it cost me more to sell there than here, particularly as I offer international postage. Last I checked, ebay was costing me about 11% of my much higher revenue (no international options here, but I do pay for a featured store and buy postage labels, which is included in the calculation), and the other site was taking 18% with no additional features or services purchased. Obviously this sort of issue is unique to items like mine - sellers with a lower turnover and / or much higher prices will find them more economical than I do.
I suggested to them years ago that a subsciption type option would be ideal for sellers like myself, and they introduced one finally a few months back - nearly $30 a month for features that should be standard, and you get like 10 free listings and a little credit for promoted listings. 
Their obsession with postage costs is ridiculous - way worse than ebay's ever was, and also worse than the most postage-oriented buyer I've ever experienced or heard about as well.
But, like ebay, they are a means to an end, for the time being.
could someone please msg me as to what site they're talking about, the suspense is killing me i'm guessing its not allowed to mentioned here?
