08-01-2015 05:55 PM - edited 08-01-2015 05:55 PM
Next month we’ll be making some changes that we want to bring to your attention. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | ||||||||||
The changes will automatically take effect on 12 February 2015 and we have updated the Combined Financial Services Guide and Product Disclosure Statement, the User Agreement and the Privacy Policy. |
on 08-01-2015 06:03 PM
I LOVE how this thread, about fees being lowered, posted by a high volume seller, is currently right above a thread, with the identical copy-paste, about how fees are being raised, posted by a low volume seller. All about perspective eh.
on 08-01-2015 06:05 PM
08-01-2015 06:17 PM - edited 08-01-2015 06:18 PM
So Paypal have cut .02% of high $$ sellers and added the same amount onto low $$ sellers? Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
on 08-01-2015 06:38 PM
Robbing Peter to pay Paul ...
.
I would suggest that the total dollar value of small sellers would be higher than the total value of large sellers ...
.
Paypal would not rob Peter or Paul, just you and me ...
.
I think a win win situation for PayPay
.
But having said that, I think that PP's rates are reasonable ...
.
EXCEPT
.
That I believe in User Pays ...
.
It is the buyer who uses the service, so they should be charged the fees !
on 08-01-2015 06:58 PM
@am*3 wrote:Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Hardly - that phrase refers specifically to using money indebted to one party in order to pay a different debt.
Does anyone here know the costs to PayPal of processing a payment?
Does anyone here know if there's a difference in cost between maintaining the (presumed) much higher quantity of small sellers (i.e. more accounts) in order to process the same value of payments as, say for example, Australia Post? (that is, let's say AP are processing $100k a month with their PayPal account, while conversely, the mum & dad eBay sellers are processing $200 worth of payments per account per month, so that's 500 individual accounts processing the same amount of money as one account - so, what is the vs cost?
If no one here can answer these questions, you can't presume these fee differences and increases are unfair (unless you think fairness = whether you like something or not).
on 08-01-2015 09:49 PM
Simplistic at best DG.
A regressive user pays model has many pros and cons to the entity introducing it, and more importantly to the end users.
on 08-01-2015 10:22 PM
@thecatspjs wrote:Simplistic at best DG.
To suggest that nobody here knows what PayPal's costs are, and if/how they differ between types of sellers, and therefore have no real basis to judge these fee decisions except by how much they like them?
Simplistic it may be, but nobody has said anything yet to sway me from that position.
on 08-01-2015 10:36 PM
Having a position is one thing.
But you posted If no one here can answer these questions, you can't presume these fee differences and increases are unfair (unless you think fairness = whether you like something or not).
Posters can presume what they like including that the fee differences and increases are unfair.
Fairness does not automatically equal whether you like something or not. There are multiple definitions and measures.
08-01-2015 10:42 PM - edited 08-01-2015 10:45 PM
Some might think that is unfair that they have used paypal for years and years overtime and never had a dispute or claim from a buyer, whilst other johnny-come-latelys that list a few high-priced items that result in claims for each one - get lower fees.
Lol - which transaction costs paypal more ???
The automated electronic processing of funds overtime or lengthy or complex disputes where paypal may have to fork out thousands.
Countless more scenarios, including your proposition.