Buyers paying Paypal fees?

[ch1]

No - This Buyer Does Not Pay Seller's Paypal Fees!

This Seller Will Not Ever Pay Seller's Paypal Fees - And No Seller On Ebay Can Ever Acheive Negative Feedback Post Becuase This Buyer Refused To Pay His Paypal Fees - So What Is The Argument?

Buyers Do No Pay Seller's Paypal Fees. If Sellers Ask Buyers To Do So - Only Stupid Buyers Do So!

There Is Not Item No Where Anywhere On This Planet That Would Get Me To Agree To Pay A Seller's Legitimately Incurred Fees.

[that's What "inflated" S&h Fees Are For!!!] 😉

 

[JoshRoot]

Well, no. This is not 'fraud', a criminal offense. This is a violation of a user agreement (contract) and is covered under tort law.

Actually, as I understand it, it is against the law in some states to charge more for accepting a credit card as payment. This was no doubt pushed through by the banking lobby when merchants were making credit cards less popular by passing the expense on to the customers directly (just as some in this thread were remembering).

I somehow doubt that it is a law that is enforced on any but the largest cases (if at all). But the fact remains that it is on the books.

 

[Goodyear]

And when I receive an international money order. My bank charges me to accept it.

And I do get charged fees if Paypal has to draw the money from the buyers account. I keep very close track of my fees. There is a fee for everything anymore.

G'man: I have only ever been charged Paypal's basic rate for receiving funds into my account (3.4% + 20p, iirc), which is the same whether the buyer is UK or abroad. This is despite transactions across various borders and currencies.

 

[wrenhunter]

My feeling is that Paypal has benefits for both buyer and seller, so splitting the fee makes the most sense if the question arises.

That said, if a seller feels the buyer should pay the whole fee, they should factor the fee into their price. Setting a price and then asking for 3% on top of it is what seems a bit chintzy to me.

 

[aterlecki]

That said, if a seller feels the buyer should pay the whole fee, they should factor the fee into their price. Setting a price and then asking for 3% on top of it is what seems a bit chintzy to me.

It seems entirely appropriate to me. If you factor Paypal costs into the price then those who pay by cheque or money order are paying too much. Asking extra for Paypal seems to show that you are being honest in how much you actually want, net after costs, for the item.

Of course Paypal use for ebay auctions is entirely different. It is absurd to talk of factoring in paypal fees for an auction as you cannot dictate the final auction price. The best you could do is seek to recover fees via inflated shipping (which most people are now wise to) or reduce potential fees by offering a reduction in price if payed for by methods cheaper than Paypal.

I don't care much for Paypal even though I grudgingly use them. They do not have the best of ethics (e.g. they are now trying to force me to sign a direct debit mandate for access directly into my bank account under the guise of security and fraud prevention).

Google's GBuy payment system will be brought in soon and I suspect they will clean up if they get it even remotely right.

 

[ch1]

Folks,

Let's get back to first princples here.

PayPal is a service offered to SELLERS to ensure timely payment from BUYERS. Since the beneficiary of the service is the SELLER, it stands to reason that the Seller should pay for the service.

I really do not understand the dilemma over this. If a SELLER wants to charge me for his benefit then I will use an alternative means of payment. This will delay his receipt of funds - hardly a wise overall selling practice. The reason why merchants accept the credit card fee is precisely because they get immediate payment. That is the benefit of their bargain with the credit provider.

You can be assured that no matter how tempting any item offered for sale is here - I don't pay the SELLER's vigarish!

 

[laptoprob]

It all depends on where buyer and seller are. If within Europe, it its usually easy anc free of charge to do a bank transfer. Costs a few days but I don't mind that.
When shipping out of Europe things change. Paypal is the easiest way then. But when I offer something for sale I don't know where a buyer might be located. Nor do I know the preferred currency. If there is a currency conversion needed it has to be paid for as well. I just make note of 'fees' in general.
It depends on which (Paypal) services are wanted.

makes sense?

Rob.

 

[wrenhunter]

It seems entirely appropriate to me. If you factor Paypal costs into the price then those who pay by cheque or money order are paying too much. Asking extra for Paypal seems to show that you are being honest in how much you actually want, net after costs, for the item.

That is a good point. However, I only use Paypal -- as a buyer to establish recourse for a bad transaction, and as a seller for convenience. (And I do eat the fees.) So checks/MO don't figure into my calculations.

It is absurd to talk of factoring in paypal fees for an auction as you cannot dictate the final auction price.

Not at all -- you can factor it into your reserve price. If you don't care to set a reserve, surely a 3% reduction in monies received won't kill you. Unless you object to Paypal on principle, which does seem to run strong on this subject 😉

 

[RJBender]

Folks,

Let's get back to first princples here.

PayPal is a service offered to SELLERS to ensure timely payment from BUYERS. Since the beneficiary of the service is the SELLER, it stands to reason that the Seller should pay for the service.

I really do not understand the dilemma over this. If a SELLER wants to charge me for his benefit then I will use an alternative means of payment. This will delay his receipt of funds - hardly a wise overall selling practice. The reason why merchants accept the credit card fee is precisely because they get immediate payment. That is the benefit of their bargain with the credit provider.

You can be assured that no matter how tempting any item offered for sale is here - I don't pay the SELLER's vigarish!

George,

Many people must have felt the same way about Bidpay which shut down at the end of last year. As a buyer, I paid a $4.45 fee to Bidpay for a $42 transaction ($34 item + $8 S&H) last summer. It seems high but I got the item cheap.

Online sellers lost yet another online-payment alternative when BidPay abruptly announced on December 23 it would cease operations on December 31, 2005. There was much speculation about why BidPay decided to close. A spokesperson from First Data, which owns BidPay, said it was a strategic decision. Sherry Johnson said BidPay was outside the scope of First Data's core business, and said there are no plans to introduce a similar service in the future.

eBay had recently introduced a Safe Payments policy that specifies which payment methods sellers can accept for eBay transactions http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y05/m10/i17/s01, and eBay allowed BidPay in the policy.

eBay-owned PayPal dominates online payments for auction transactions, and no major competitor remains. c2it, a service of Citibank, ceased operations 2 years ago, and CheckFree stopped taking payments for auctions in October 2005 (CheckFree's regular service remains). Yahoo also shuttered its service, Yahoo PayDirect, in May 2005.

ProPay, which allows users to send money to and from checking accounts and accept credit cards from members and non-members, is still operating, as is a payment service called Certapay. Both ProPay and CertaPay are accepted by eBay's Safe Payments policy. And Eddie St Clare wrote me to tell me his service in the UK, AuctionChex.com, exchanges US dollar money orders into Great British pounds to save recipients hefty bank fees. AuctionChex also services UK buyers by accepting payment in pounds to generate payments in US dollars in the form of a regular check from a US bank.

source: http://auctionbytes.com/cab/abu/y206/m01/abu0158/s01

R.J.

 

[raid]

Some time ago I put a listing on ebay, and stating that anyone who wanted to pay via paypal would have to add the 4% (I think) to cover the paypal fees.

Ebay emailed me to say that I wasn't allowed to do that, but said that I could charge a handling fee, and offer a discount for other-than-paypal payment!

There's always a loophole!

The same thing happend to me with ebay, but they did not offer me the loopholes mentioned by you, Chris.

 

[enochRoot]

Let's get back to first princples here.

PayPal is a service offered to SELLERS to ensure timely payment from BUYERS. Since the beneficiary of the service is the SELLER, it stands to reason that the Seller should pay for the service.

actually you are completely wrong. when paypal first started..it was marketed to BUYERS (or any "senders of money") as a great way to pay someone...*even if they don't have a paypal account*. it was also entirely free. i do not mean the personal/business account malarky. i'm talking free. then they came up w/ the notion of a personal and a business account. i had to upgrade to business (or whatever it's called) so long ago, that i can't even remember the details, but at the time it seemed rather silly. like there is no choice but to upgrade if you want to use the service. then...when ebay bought paypal..it FINALLY was marketed more as a "SELLER'S" service (as you say). but do you *honestly* think it was to benefit the sellers?! no chance in hell. it was to benefit EBAY. they realize that a lot of ebay buying is w/ money the buyers don't really have (look at how many non paying bidders there are). spending on credit on things you don't need in the ultimate way. so by making it seem like this great "service" for sellers...they made sure to include as many potential buyers as possible. that is when all the "paypal financing" crap came up. in the end...this benefits EBAY and no one else. as people have mentioned..it is ebay "double dipping".

and i would always wait for another form of payment. how is that hurting me? i offer payment via paypal, but the buyer is gonna pay the fee. i got sick of all the nonsense a while back (since ebay did yank a listing when i mentioned charging for the fee), so i said "cash/money order/check" only. guess what?! i had tons of people emailing me asking if i would accept paypal. so i told them "sure..if you cover the fee". so it is obviously something that is appealing to buyers more so than sellers. and the buyers are just being duped by the ebay hype.

on another subject...it is a service that is REALLY jacked up. go check out one of the many "paypal sucks" type of websites. i think some government agency needs to step in and take care of them, because i think that outright illegal activity is going on w/ them freezing people's accounts and such. i lost $750 several years ago to a fraudulent ebay sale. the guy gave the excuse that his father died, so i was the nice guy and was patient. i finally got the vibe he was full of it, and *tried* to file a claim with paypal. but you see...it had been 31 days since the payment, and you need to file it within 30 days. they could care less when people get ripped off.

anyhoo...done w/ the rant now. sorry 😉

 

[Sonnar Brian]

When I put items upon Auction, the "Paypal" accepted tends to get more bidders. Whether the high-bidder pays with Paypal or not, accepting it tends to push the prices higher.

Now with Fixed-Price items like those at RFF, I've thought about charging fees or offering a 3% discount for money order/ or checks. Or adding a surcharge for Paypal. They really take a big cut, especially from international payments. As far as protecting the seller, they are subject to chargebacks by unhappy customers or credit card fraud.

 

[T_om]

Actually, as I understand it, it is against the law in some states to charge more for accepting a credit card as payment. .

Which would be fine if we were talking about accepting credit cards instead of accepting PayPal. Two different things.

And yes, I realize you can pay PayPal debt by using a credit card... but that is between the credit card user and PAYPAL, not you, the seller. If PAYPAL charged the purchaser a fee for the use of their card, then what you said would be applicable.

Charging a fee to accept PayPal is not a violation of anything except the Terms Of Service agreement with PayPal.

Tom

 

[phquest]

When I put items upon Auction, the "Paypal" accepted tends to get more bidders. Whether the high-bidder pays with Paypal or not, accepting it tends to push the prices higher.

I couldn't agree with this more. The fact that Paypal payment is accepted brings a higher final price to the sellers pocket, so all this stories about recouping fees is just hogwash in my opinion.

I'd suggest a little experiment...sell two identical items (A and B), post them for the same duration of time, with only just one little difference - Item A can be bought using Paypal as well. It won't take rocket science to find out which one will rake in more money.

 

[Nick R.]

You can see the effect at anytime. Just look through ebay listings for an object you kind of know the price it should sell for and look for one which is selling for significantly less. Chances are they don't except paypal

 

[JoshRoot]

Which would be fine if we were talking about accepting credit cards instead of accepting PayPal. Two different things.

A good point. However, I would not be willing to bet on the chances of winning in court against a credit card company that wanted to make a stink about it. Not that I would EVER expect that to happen to an individual.

 

[Nick R.]

Tom, unless you've seen this hairsplitting stand up in court, I don't think your distinction is worth a hill of beans.

BTW, nice to see you back. I thought we'd lost you after the scanner thread debacle.

Which would be fine if we were talking about accepting credit cards instead of accepting PayPal. Two different things.

And yes, I realize you can pay PayPal debt by using a credit card... but that is between the credit card user and PAYPAL, not you, the seller. If PAYPAL charged the purchaser a fee for the use of their card, then what you said would be applicable.

Charging a fee to accept PayPal is not a violation of anything except the Terms Of Service agreement with PayPal.

Tom

 

[doubs43]

I leave my options open on something like this. IF I want it badly enough, I'd pay the extra. IF the seller, in addition to wanting PayPal fees from the buyer, sets a high shipping rate I'd see the combination as a rip-off.

Sometimes I see an open bidding auction on ebay and the auction house tacks on a 20% fee to the selling price as a "buyer's premium". I never participate in those.

Really, this is an academic question as far as I'm concerned because I don't use PayPal. Once they said I could not use them without providing bank account information, I stopped using them altogether. It's either credit card or money order for me. I don't give my bank information to anyone who can arbitrarily take money from my account.

Walker

 

[enochRoot]

You can see the effect at anytime. Just look through ebay listings for an object you kind of know the price it should sell for and look for one which is selling for significantly less. Chances are they don't except paypal

that might hold true for some items, but it is not universally true. items that are less common do just as well either way. my other hobby is vintage audio, and often sellers will not accept paypal. the prices go just as high as if they did. i think the same is true for collectible cameras. if we are talking about batteries, or cds, or something like that...then sure.

 

[raid]

I watched on TV a special on ebay, and it revealed that after not making profits, the new VP created a turnaround by introducing Paypal. It creates at least 25% of all profit for ebay. Not bad.