BrickLink Discussion Forum

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

I think BrickLink has a broken order process now due to the ever changing online
buying experience. For me I have seen an influx of buyers since the LEGO takeover
of BL, most new, but many clearly aware of the site though having limited use
of it in the past.

These buyers are often of the mindset that they are the ones calling the shots
on cancellations, payment time frames, etc. all while having no regard for the
BL or my store terms regarding such. Anything from unilateral ability to
cancel, expectations of free shipping, allowance to pay 10-days after ordering,
etc. and just the general "buyer rules" attitude that other selling sites (need
I name them?) have allowed buyers to abuse sellers with. These other sites have
taken some steps to protect sellers and buyer alike, but BL has fallen behind
the times.

Granted, these buyers are often new to BL which has a major learning curve, but
when you sell the exact same item 3 times in one week, and all 3 buyers want
to cancel after accurate shipping is invoiced for, it gets annoying. Why not
ask for a quote? And why only ask to cancel after days of the invoice being
sent? This and the increase in NPB buyers tying up stock have left me convinced
payment time-frame allowances need to be changed. The following is my view of
the changes this site needs to consider to move forward in a all-parties friendly
way:

Suggested Changes
1a: NPB should be changed to allowable to be filed 3-days from invoice (not
the order date). This would be similar to other online selling sites. Not
auto-started, but optional so situations and agreements allowing additions, extended
payment, etc. can all still run as before.

1b: NPB should be allowed to complete after 7-days from the invoice date (4
days of being opened). 14 days (21 if buyer responds) is a ludicrous amount
of time to send payment or tie up a sellers stock. 7-days is actually really
long, but much better than 14-21.

Most all decent buyers pay well before 3-days, and a NPB started is simply a
reminder to pay as it cannot be completed unless the buyer fails to ever pay.
So I can only see this as a positive change making bad situations end sooner
than later and keeping stock available on the marketplace.

2: Additionally I would suggest that a feature be added to protect sellers
WHILE allowing unconditional buyer requested cancellations. However, if
a cancellation is buyer requested the buyer should not be allowed to leave a
review (or an auto-positive given by default), and they should by default be
given a feedback showing an "Order Was Canceled By Buyer" message with a neutral
rating by default. Like an NPB's three-times-and-you're-out policy,
the buyer cancel option should be limited to 2, maybe 3 in a 6-month period,
or something reasonable. This allows buyers a true out when needed, and protects
the seller who after a customer gets pushy or rude the ability to safely allow
cancellation (when the buyer initiates) without needing the NPB and now current
2-3 weeks to prevent an unwarranted negative feedback. As is the system turns
good sellers into captive sellers, needing a NPB to save them from nightmare
feedback, but at the extremely high cost of wasted time and tying up their items
for weeks. No buyer needs 7, 14 or 21 days to pay and should not be granted
an ability to push payment back this far.

The current system for cancellations and NPB simply needs reformed. Buyers need
to be able to cancel in select situations such as a pushy seller trying to gouge
them on handling/shipping or holding the order hostage refusing to cancel, a
threat of pay or get an NPB. Sellers likewise need protection from the long
tied up inventory, or negative despite granting buyer an unwarranted cancellation.
The above should reduce 90% of all problem orders to being resolved in days,
not weeks, and all parties moving on largely unaffected. Bad sellers and buyers
will still get weeded out, and good ones will thrive.

Thanks for considering,
Jonathan

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Mar 18, 2020 13:13

Subject:

Re: Decorated categories

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, athornberg writes:

Replace "decorated" categories with 2 new categories, "printed" and "with stickers".

This idea was tossed around between administrators (including Dan) in 2007/2008.
It was deemed at the time to be an interesting idea with some positives, but
ultimately not preferable.

Thirteen years later, I can't tell that anything's changed.

Author:

yorbrick

Posted:

Mar 18, 2020 12:06

Subject:

Re: Decorated categories

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, athornberg writes:

Replace "decorated" categories with 2 new categories, "printed" and "with stickers".

I think for now learning to use search terms would be easier than adding loads
of new categories.

Author:

tonnic

Posted:

Mar 18, 2020 11:57

Subject:

Re: Decorated categories

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, axaday writes:

In Suggestions, athornberg writes:

Replace "decorated" categories with 2 new categories, "printed" and "with stickers".

I think there are so many categories right now that they are very averse to creating
more. I'm doubtful that a suggestion that would add more than a dozen new
categories is going anywhere.

I would rather have more categories with less entries per categorie so for me
the suggestion would work.
Categories are more easily to be found than subcategories/entries or whatever
they are named.

Author:

jennnifer

Posted:

Mar 18, 2020 10:45

Subject:

Re: Decorated categories

Viewed:

33 times

Topic: