Paypal and fee free stuff. Not entirely understanding.

[Joe Nerve]

I hope I'm not violating any rules here because I'm not questioning talkbass policy, but rather looking for clarity. I read the updated "fee free" post, but I don't entirely understand. Want to make note also that I currently have nothing for sale, and have always abided by the rules whenever I did sell anything.

My understanding is that paypal protects the buyer more than the seller. Yet they charge a fee to the seller, but I'm not sure why. Blame my excellent business sense for that. Given this reason it makes perfect sense why someone would want to sell and do so as a "gift" or however else you do it, without having to pay a fee.

Again, I'm not doing this to question policy, I'm asking because I don't understand - what's wrong with asking a buyer to pay the fees, if they want the added protection? If I were buying I wouldn't have a problem with that, I'd just figure it into the cost and decide whether or not I wanted the extra cost. As though I were choosing whether or not to buy insurance. If I didn't want to pay it, I'd take the gamble and send a check, or buy it as a gift. In a retail store I've often been told I'd be given one price for cash, if I were to charge it though it would be more. I understand some (not all) of the reasons behind that are illegal, but I'm pretty sure there's nothing illegal with paypal fee thing. If I'm wrong, maybe that's where my questions come from. If the fee thing puts talkbass at risk, then that might be the missing puzzle piece.

I also think I might be misunderstanding the rule. Is it being said that we just can't dance around the fee, and MUST post a clear price - or that we flat out can't request a paypal fee. In other words, would it be OK for me to list something for sale and say:

Price: $300 check or money order. $320 via paypal.

Or better yet, $320 - negotiable depending upon payment type.

Or best: $320 - negotiable. And then work out the details privately.

Or would the above also be considered getting crafty to dance around the fee payment.

If the above is against policy, I really don't understand why. I believe there might be others who also don't understand. Could somebody please clear this up for me.

Bottom line is I dont' understand the policy and would like to. My mom used to often explain things with a short quick, "BECAUSE I SAID SO!". I'm certain that's not the case here, so I'd appreciate some clarity. Thanks.

 

[David Wilson]

There is an option to send a 'personal' payment, which must be from bank account or Paypal balance. When you do so, the payer gives up ALL rights to protection. A seller cannot insist that a buyer give up their rights to protection, we covered this in prior announcements on the subject: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/announcement.php?f=126&a=230

The long and short of it is, You cannot list something for X and say 'add fees if paying by paypal' whether directly or indirectly by saying 'fee free payment required'. Most people do not realize that they give up all their rights to Paypal protection by making these payments.

Now, price negotiation is *always* part of the classifieds. Prices are assumed to be subject to offer unless the seller price is firm.

You can certainly factor fees into negotiated price. So if someone offers, say, $100 less than listed price and you want to say "ok, as long as you pay by money order" then that is fine.

edit: the no surcharge rule has been around on TB for 5-6 years, we are just clarifying / reinforcing the position.

 

[Joe Nerve]

Haven't read the link yet but will. Quick question first....

If I list something for $300, and post nothing about payment policy - but the buyer wants to use paypal, is it against the rules for me to tell him (privately), if you want to pay with paypal I have to ask for $320 because of the additional fees?

Would that be considered unethical, illegal, or against talkbass rules? I think that's the part I'm not understanding. It seems the infractions regarding this are more severe than most also... I'll read the link now.

 

[David Wilson]

correct, you cannot add a surcharge based on payment method.

 

[pacojas]

it sure makes sense that the buyer pay for PP protection. i even offered to pay the fee on my very first TB transaction after i read between the lines. the seller insisted we follow the house rules and absorbed the fee on his end. he perhaps added the fee into his asking price.

only one thing for the sellers to do,... add the fees to the price just like the shipping cost.

 

[Joe Nerve]

correct, you cannot add a surcharge based on payment method.

OK. I understand, but even after reading the link I still don't understand why? And I hope this isn't coming across in a bad tone, the way I realize it might . I'm not challenging the policy. Looking to get something I'm certain I'm missing. I'd be happy to continue this via PM, or even drop it if need be - but I'm missing a piece.

If someone is willing to do that, why is it wrong in any way? Is it just the words we choose? How is anyone hurt, talkbass, the buyer, the seller, etc. ?

Maybe I'm not putting my question out as clearly as I can. Same instance as above... what if I get the buyer on the phone and he says, "I'd like to pay with paypal." I say, "Sorry, I'm only accepting check or money order". He asks why. I say, "Because paypal charges a fee and I want $300." He says then either that he'll pay the fee, or do it as a gift payment.... and I agree.

I don't get what the difference is between that, and what I was stating in my previous post, except for the words being used. And the penalty for doing this incorrectly is a possible permanent ban from talkbass. There's obviously some way the seller is trying to hurt someone or be misleading by asking for the paypal fee. Who gets hurt.

Last note, as I wonder why this is important enough to me to post a thread about it. One of the first things I ever sold here I think I sold for around $1000. I didn't know anything about the fee at the time and felt like I slapped in the face when I saw what they took, and realized all it really did was make MY part of the deal less secure. I paid, and the buyer got more protection. Bla, bla, bla

If this thread is getting inappropriate in any way I can investigate this in a another fashion. Just let me know. Thanks.

 

[nutdog]

When I was in the fuel business we were not allowed to charge 2-3% extra for customers that used a credit card. That's what it cost us to accept a card. We were, however, allowed to offer a cash discount.

I don't know why.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

The fee is roughly 3%, just work it into your selling price.

 

[Joe Nerve]

The fee is roughly 3%, just work it into your selling price.

I get it. I can follow it. I will follow it. I have no problem with with the details of he rule. I just don't understand why it's there.

And if I remember correctly they took a bit more than 3%. Maybe it's changed.

 

[boynamedsuse]

I wouldn't trust a buyer asking or hinting for a gift payment even if the TB rules allowed it. It isn't a gift. Its a purchase. It cheats Paypal of the fees they legally earned (and to which the seller agreed by contract) and removes the buyer protection from the seller.

 

[Joe Nerve]

I wouldn't trust a buyer asking or hinting for a gift payment even if the TB rules allowed it. It isn't a gift. Its a purchase. It cheats Paypal of the fees they legally earned (and to which the seller agreed by contract) and removes the buyer protection from the seller.

If someone refused to go through paypal and insisted it be a gift payment if they did, what you said is undertandable. If they said they'd be happy to do it, but you pay the fee, then how is that a problem?

 

[David Wilson]

I get it. I can follow it. I will follow it. I have no problem with with the details of he rule. I just don't understand why it's there.

And if I remember correctly they took a bit more than 3%. Maybe it's changed.

Really, we want the price people see listed to be the maximum they should expect to pay unless shipping is listed as extra. Include them into your price, and discount if you wish based on payment method during the negotiation process.

And that 3.5% does include seller protection as well. I'm not going to get into the relative merits of paypal seller protection, but it is not there when you use personal/gift payments.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

When you recieve a gift payment from PayPal you do not get a verified shipping address. If I ever decide to jump to a life of crime and steal PayPal accounts, I'll be super friendly and offer a gift payment to save them some fees. After you've shipped to my drop address I'll get the goods and you'll find out 30 days from now that the PayPal account was hacked and PayPal is taking the money back.

 

[Fiset]

I've always thought of it like this - if I require payment to be Paypal gifted, then I'm asking the buyer to give up his protections regardless of TB's rules. I couldn't justify asking the buyer to take that risk since he's sending me money before I send him the merchandise. Further, by requiring "gifted" payment, I would also be asking the buyer to misrepresent the nature of the transaction. I won't do that anymore than I would misrepresent the value or nature of the item on a customs form when an international buyer asks me to (I've been asked to do that several times).

That said, I completely agree that the buyer should pay for the protections he receives so I always add a few bucks to the price to cover the fees.

 

[Double E]

The seller is charged the fee for the privilege of receiving a secure, timely payment for their goods...it makes perfect sense to me.

This has been the case in retail sales forever, the seller must bear the burden of any costs associated with processing non-cash sales. It is considered a cost of doing business and ends up being reflected in the cost of the product.

Like others have said, the 3% should be accounted for in the asking price.

Alternately, you could simply not accept PayPal payments and wait around for a check or money order to arrive and then go through the hassle of taking that to the bank and holding your breath as it clears.

 

[Joe Nerve]

The seller is charged the fee for the privilege of receiving a secure, timely payment for their goods...it makes perfect sense to me.

This has been the case in retail sales forever, the seller must bear the burden of any costs associated with processing non-cash sales. It is considered a cost of doing business and ends up being reflected in the cost of the product.

Never said that didn't make sense to me. You're stating the obvious. What seems to have not made perfect sense to you is the actual question I'm asking. Which I've reiteretated several times. And which still hasn't been answered. I've resigned myself to it is what it is.

 

[Low Class]

If a seller doesn't want to pay the fees I suggest using a PayPal eCheck as an alternative. The fee is only $5 and it gives the buyer the same protection. Only drawback is the 3 day wait for it to clear, but it locks in both parties to the transaction right away whether than wait for a money order to arrive in the mail.

 

[boynamedsuse]

I hadn't heard of eCheck. Thanks for the info.

 

[Double E]

Never said that didn't make sense to me. You're stating the obvious. What seems to have not made perfect sense to you is the actual question I'm asking. Which I've reiteretated several times. And which still hasn't been answered. I've resigned myself to it is what it is.

So the real question is why can't seller's charge the fees separately to the buyer...correct?

Well, it's the same reason commercial retailers are not allowed to charge their customers credit card surcharges.

Credit card companies (and PayPal) are in business to make money. They don't want to discourage the use of their services by charging the person who is ultimately putting up the funds for the transaction, the buyer.

The retailer or seller benefits greatly from this because you have buyers who are eager to purchase and now have an easy method to pay with. The seller sells his product faster, gets his money faster and everyone is happy. It's simply worth the (approximately) 3%...especially since the seller can set his price accordingly in order to cover this "overhead".

So the policy is really there to protect PayPal's interest in making money.

Now, in order for PayPal to make widespread use of their system more palatable to everyone they also provide a service that allows it's users to transfer funds to friends and relatives without paying any fees...that's called a bonus, they don't have to offer that, but it's value added for using their service.

They have to keep folks from abusing this bonus feature by excluding those transactions from the buyer protections offered for the fee-based transactions.

So this rule is really PayPal's rule...TalkBass just enforces it as well because they are interested in maintaining a high level of credibility for the classified section plus they also don't want to be caught in the middle of a dispute where a buyer gave up the protections offered.

Ultimately it's just PayPal wanting buyers to feel warm and fuzzy about using PayPal so they keep on using it and everybody stays in business.

 

[Joe Nerve]

So the real question is why can't seller's charge the fees separately to the buyer...correct?

Well, it's the same reason commercial retailers are not allowed to charge their customers credit card surcharges.

Credit card companies (and PayPal) are in business to make money. They don't want to discourage the use of their services by charging the person who is ultimately putting up the funds for the transaction, the buyer.

The retailer or seller benefits greatly from this because you have buyers who are eager to purchase and now have an easy method to pay with. The seller sells his product faster, gets his money faster and everyone is happy. It's simply worth the (approximately) 3%...especially since the seller can set his price accordingly in order to cover this "overhead".

So the policy is really there to protect PayPal's interest in making money.

Now, in order for PayPal to make widespread use of their system more palatable to everyone they also provide a service that allows it's users to transfer funds to friends and relatives without paying any fees...that's called a bonus, they don't have to offer that, but it's value added for using their service.

They have to keep folks from abusing this bonus feature by excluding those transactions from the buyer protections offered for the fee-based transactions.

So this rule is really PayPal's rule...TalkBass just enforces it as well because they are interested in maintaining a high level of credibility for the classified section plus they also don't want to be caught in the middle of a dispute where a buyer gave up the protections offered.

Ultimately it's just PayPal wanting buyers to feel warm and fuzzy about using PayPal so they keep on using it and everybody stays in business.

Thank you.

I feel my question has finally been answered. My confusion came from the fact that I thought the talkbass policy was to somehow protect the buyer. Being there to protect the crediblility of talkbass, and respect the usage of Paypal makes complete sense to me.

And just for the record, I've been around for a while and remember the early days of internet where if we wanted to sell a cd we had to sign our lives away to companies like the orchard (anyone remember that?). I am extremely grateful for paypal, and have no problem with paying for the service. It's an awesome service that is very oten taken for granted.

I can stop loosing sleep over this now.