Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Teup  | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 14:38 | | Subject: | Re: Refusing to sell or ship because of location. | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, mcmcmahan writes:
| | "If you are unwilling to ship to every Bricklink
user then you need to leave and sell your wares elsewhere"
|
You mean every seller has to ship to every user? How about Bricklink simply showing
correctly whether the seller ships to you or not? Seems like a more feasible
solution to me.
|
 |
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 13:00 | | Subject: | Re: IC and maximum Volume | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, cosmicray writes:
| | Shipping Methods currently have the ability specify a maximum volume.
In the USA, that might be used to trap orders that require dimensional shipping
(i.e. greater than 1728 cubic-inches). Some orders contain multiple items, and
the cumulative weight is less important than the fact that dimensional will require
a higher dimensional weight (and corresponding rate).
I suspect, that I can put a maximum volume on a shipping method (to satisfy those
with non-dimensional requirements) and implement a fall-back shipping method
with the same group number.
The problem that arises is, there is no way (that I can see) to specify the conversion
from volume (in cubic inches) divided by 166 to arrive at a dimensional weight
(in pounds), which could then be sorted out by the weight bands. Nor can I use
a volume band to directly apply the volume calculation,
Any thoughts ?
Nita Rae
|
How many "volume bands" do you need? You could consider making a separate shipping
method for each one and put them in the same group.
When you work with volumes, keep in mind "Bricklink volume" is some 50-70% of
real-life volume. I had to reduce the volume of the method by about half to get
orders that just fit.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 04:23 | | Subject: | Re: Parts smelling like cigarette smoke still new | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, CSC writes:
| | Would you and/or Bricklink consider parts/minifigs that smell like smoke new?
It is not just a bit of a smell, it is horrible on each minifig I ordered.
I also contacted the seller after placing the order that he should not send the
items if they smell like smoke as I saw that in his feedback. The seller never
responded but shipped the parts AFTER I sent my message.
Any ideas on how to handle this?
Thanks
|
In my experience the smell is gone within like 2 weeks. I once bought a huge
batch of plastic bags from an excessive smoker for packing lego, it smelled horrible
but even that was fine eventually, I am still using those and they just smell
like plastic now.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 04:07 | | Subject: | Re: When are you going to reopen my store? | | Viewed: | 124 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, Dino1 writes:
| | Hello Bricklink!
When are you going to reopen my store?
I have always paid my dues. The last payment was on 08/05 for the July contribution.
Until you issue a tax correct invoice, I am not obligated to pay taxes on it.
I pointed this out on the forum over a year ago. By the way, Bricklink's
accounting seems to be in a desolate state. My total of 4 payments were not taken
into account and are always re-invoiced, although I have pointed out the first
2 payments additionally by e-mail.
In addition, I expect the immediate deletion of the note "Reason: non-payment
of fees" on the store page.
This is a lie and also damaging to my reputation. Such a thing is illegal.
Regards
Werner
|
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1312127
Why do you repost if you didn't answer that?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 17:19 | | Subject: | Re: BUGS in Distance selling / OSS | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, jbricks writes:
| | A bit of a confusing answer.
Removing B2B sales would be an amazingly designerror.
|
In reply to this point which I also made:
Actually I think I was wrong and the problem is of a slightly different nature:
You can't "remove" B2B sales as such, B2B transactions are a fact of life.
Fact 1: When a business buys from another business, they have a legal right to
an invoice.
Fact 2: And the correct way of invoicing businesses in other EU countries, is
by charging 0% VAT.
Conclusion: It is not a separate optional service, it's simply the correct
way of doing it*
In other words:
Bricklink's choice is not whether or not to allow B2B selling, but whether
their VAT stats (and features around it) are going to reflect reality or not.
If they are going to go with this design error, it simply means that sellers
need to add a credit and do their correct administration outside of Bricklink
(which is a smart thing to do anyway, I would never trust Bricklink - again proven
right). Any VAT amounts that Bricklink indicates over a period of selling is
just going to be inaccurate, as it includes VAT in B2B sales that wasn't
there.
* This is what a specialised employee of the tax agency told me, but they do
make mistakes, so I'm about 80% sure this is correct
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 16:12 | | Subject: | Re: BUGS in Distance selling / OSS | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, kaat writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | In Help, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Help, kaat writes:
| | In Help, TDH_Bricks writes:
| | Confirm this BUG from my side. It was happened to me as well but I was not sure
if it was my fault or BL did it.
Happily there was only one EU order at that time and we switch OFF the OSS promptly.
As regards the VAT calculation - we do it same way like you described. This is
the best way for both sides. Difference between VATs we credit (lower recipient
VAT) or charge (higher) as Additional Charges 2. Sellers cannot be responsible
for higher recipient VAT rates.
|
I've reported these bugs to BL yesterday and was just informed the issue
where a status change would switch the VAT off was fixed. Haven't tested
it though. But great this was resolved fast!
VAT checkbox is still disabled, that isn't fixed yet.
|
This is expected behavior - it is disabled by design. When Distance Selling is
enabled in the VAT settings, this box will be automatically checked and disabled.
|
Huh? Why? How to do B2B transactions with Distance Selling enabled? 
|
Normally, if a EU based company buys from a company in another EU member state,
the VAT id is verified and a 0% VAT transaction is done. VAT accounting is then
delegated to the buying company and handled in the quarterly VAT report. Many
(if not all) of the larger EU sellers are companies. There is also a lot of design
agencies that build models that are also companies. We need this to do business
with each other.
I've done 0% VAT B2B transactions on BL for many years and would like to
continue doing so. It's a normal business procedure in the EU.
It also just works as-is. When you manually remove the disable property, it does
what it needs to do. Like it did for many years. Please reconsider.
|
Russell's response really confused me. Now I have so many questions.
-So Bricklink decided to... remove the feature of B2B selling? Which is significant
activity here on Bricklink?
-...because of some unrelated tax issue?
-...although only for members who have that feature enabled?
-...without warning them?
-...and not a mention about all of this in advance; We're just removing b2b
selling and expect it will all be fine and nobody cares? Did it occur to Bricklink
that maybe people want to make an informed decision...?
-Or are people expected to do b2b only with offsite payment or add credits
or something like that to substitute the old feature? Is that the idea?
This really needs some explanation, they can't just casually drop this information
like that.
| | There might also be an alternative:
If you could improve the BL invoices / order overview page, in a way they are
compliant and actual invoices, then when domestic VAT is charged we might be
able to claim it back at the tax office that way. However, right now the BL invoices
for orders do not meet the legal requirements. Would be great to improve that
too 
|
Well I always make proper invoices, and you can always ask sellers for one. But
AFAIK even with an invoice you cannot claim foreign VAT back domestically, hence
the 0% construction.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 15:45 | | Subject: | Re: BUGS in Distance selling / OSS | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Help, kaat writes:
| | In Help, TDH_Bricks writes:
| | Confirm this BUG from my side. It was happened to me as well but I was not sure
if it was my fault or BL did it.
Happily there was only one EU order at that time and we switch OFF the OSS promptly.
As regards the VAT calculation - we do it same way like you described. This is
the best way for both sides. Difference between VATs we credit (lower recipient
VAT) or charge (higher) as Additional Charges 2. Sellers cannot be responsible
for higher recipient VAT rates.
|
I've reported these bugs to BL yesterday and was just informed the issue
where a status change would switch the VAT off was fixed. Haven't tested
it though. But great this was resolved fast!
VAT checkbox is still disabled, that isn't fixed yet.
|
This is expected behavior - it is disabled by design. When Distance Selling is
enabled in the VAT settings, this box will be automatically checked and disabled.
|
Huh? Why? How to do B2B transactions with Distance Selling enabled?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 15:28 | | Subject: | Re: EU Distance selling feature is now live! | | Viewed: | 155 times | | Topic: | Administrative | |
|
| In Administrative, Admin_Russell writes:
| | Dear BrickLink Members,
We have released our Distance Selling feature for sellers who plan to or have
reached the EUR annual 10 000 distance sale of goods threshold. To see where
your current BrickLink sales totals are, you can download the order information
here:
https://www.bricklink.com/orderExcel.asp?orderType=received
|
Don't forget to exclude VAT in that calculation, and also no-VAT (B2B) transactions
| | or foreign VAT registration information and provide valid documentation. Once
enabled, the prices of your items will remain the same on your storefront, however
the VAT rate charged and collected will be changed to match the country’s rate
in which the buyer is located.
|
Uhm, that's kind of a dirty workaround solution. The whole reason for the
new legislation is making competition more fair. As far as I can see, keeping
the prices the same for all EU customers kind of negates the idea. Not saying
it's necessarily wrong, but did you check properly that this type
of approach is at least legal for a marketplace?
And be ready for sellers who are not going to be happy about this, and they have
a point. Profit will depend on who you are selling to, which is weird. Hopefully
there will be a more accurate solution in the future.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 11:58 | | Subject: | Re: No longer can ship toys to france or germany | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| | | | | Yeah, it might be down to labelling for LEGO pieces eapecially for Germany although
a boxed set with warnings is still a toy, so doesn't really make sense. If
this is the individual countries taking action and not the EU, presumably they
also apply for EU to EU transactions.
|
Can’t be. As Teup said, goods (and persons) are free to move in EU, no customs,
no borders.
|
Yeah, and at the same time, rules that don't apply at the border make no
sense either. The whole problem with Brexit was the issue with the Ireland/N-Ireland
border potentially becoming some kind of import "leak", which made sense. Would
be weird if the EU was actually suffering that type of problems all the time
because of having free movement in the EU but quirky national import rules at
the same time..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 10:50 | | Subject: | Re: No longer can ship toys to france or germany | | Viewed: | 108 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SimplyBricks writes:
| | In General, Mmartin1980 writes:
| | I dont know if this has come up yet but ive just been to my local post office
and the wonderful ladies there gave me a copy of the new prohibitions list for
France and Germany
they have now added:
Toys, games and sports requisites, parts and accessories thereof
they mentioned it to me as they know me from my daily drop off and that i sell
lego, and now i cant ship it to France or Germany
|
I think your ladies have their knickers in a twist!
It specifically says 'games and sports requisites' which has nothing
to do with Lego! Lego is a toy!
|
It literally says "toys" though? And even "parts and accessories" .. pretty accurate
description of LEGO.
I don't understand though A. Why there would be rules for some specific EU
countries at all? You can technically then send it to another EU country and
send it to those countries from there without a single check, it would be a completely
inconsistent rule. and B. Why precisely for Germany as well as France, exactly
the same rule, at the same time
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 24, 2021 03:05 | | Subject: | Re: Unieregeling | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, kaat writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | Iemand al ervaring met BTW aangifte doen met de unieregeling? Ik wil me er volgend
kwartaal voor aanmelden en ik vroeg me af wat ik kon verwachten aangezien ik
mijn software moet gaan aanpassen. Je moet dan een lijst met EU landen aanvinken
en invullen hoeveel omzet en hoeveel BTW je bij dat land hebt, zoiets? Verder
nog iets dat ik moet weten?
|
Ja dat is het wel zo'n beetje. Stelt niet zoveel voor: Inloggen via belastingdienst
zakelijk, linkje unieregeling (of zoiets dergelijks). Je vult per EU land je
omzet en de BTW in. Het totaal moet je dan overmaken (naar een ander rekeningnummer
dan de NL BTW) en dan is het geregeld. Als je zo'n lijstje omzet+btw genereert
kost het weinig moeite.
Als je de "distance selling" optie activeert op BL (hoop dat ze de bugs snel
oplossen) dan is het letterlijk 1-op-1 de bedragen overnemen die aangegeven staan
op de order.
|
Top, dank je! Dan ga ik even een exportfunctie voor zo'n lijstje maken
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2021 16:31 | | Subject: | Unieregeling | | Viewed: | 117 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| Iemand al ervaring met BTW aangifte doen met de unieregeling? Ik wil me er volgend
kwartaal voor aanmelden en ik vroeg me af wat ik kon verwachten aangezien ik
mijn software moet gaan aanpassen. Je moet dan een lijst met EU landen aanvinken
en invullen hoeveel omzet en hoeveel BTW je bij dat land hebt, zoiets? Verder
nog iets dat ik moet weten?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2021 10:38 | | Subject: | Re: Taxes and Documentation | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, oasis writes:
| | I'm sure discussion of this topic has already been raging, but..
They can't keep purging stuff after six months, like they've always done
in the past, because there are now VAT issues and tax issues, that we sellers
must address. Personally, the fact that they are STILL collecting sales tax,
instead of seller tax numbers, is an absolute insult. BL / Lego has increased
my costs by 8% this past year, and I have to go get it back myself.
|
If you click the "download" link, you can download general details about all
orders - those are never purged.
However, Bricklink is not a bookkeeping program, so whether it's Bricklink,
a website, garage sales or something else, in the end a seller is always responsible
for their own administration. (Personally, I don't trust Bricklink to do
anything for me)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 22, 2021 11:36 | | Subject: | Re: Adding items needs a little improvement | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, jennnifer writes:
| | In Selling, Teup writes:
| | - Why can I enter only the design ID and not the element ID from the "add item"
screen? They are in the database, so Bricklink might as well use them, right?
|
I take it you mean adding items to your inventory? and not the catalog?
https://www.bricklink.com/inventory_add.asp?act=a&a=P
If so, it would be a bit difficult to use our PCC's on that page as
there needs to be some kind of interface to allow you to choose between items
that have the same number. When working on inventories, a drop-down menu pops
up when you type in one of those codes on the Add Inventory screen. So, perhaps
the programmers could reuse that bit of code?
It's a good idea!
Jen
|
Ah, yep, I meant to your inventory. There could be either a separate box for
entering the element ID, or, even better I guess, just one box where you can
enter either the design ID or element ID, and in case of the latter it would
fill out the color selection too.
Takes more than 30 minutes to code that so probably not realistic on Bricklink..
but anyway it's a suggestion.
(Right now you can add things quite easily with the element ID just by looking
up the part, but well, since the "add item" screen exists, it might as well be
fully functional otherwise there's no point in using that route )
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 22, 2021 11:09 | | Subject: | Re: Payment methods | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, Cln6wmm writes:
| | How do you pay a seller if you do not have a Paypal account? I don't have
one and my proposed purchase is in the UK as I am.
|
You can also pay by using Stripe's credit (and some debit) card method, if
the seller has it enabled.
As a seller I've abandoned PayPal completely and switched to IBAN and Stripe's
card method, mainly because of the transaction costs and poor service to justify
them.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 22, 2021 09:54 | | Subject: | Re: Distance selling / OSS | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | […]
I don't get it. I think the descriptions are off..
"Distance selling are sales made from one EU country to a different EU country."
Ok,
"Distance selling is disabled"
Huh? I am literally selling to other EU countries today. Did they mean "OSS is
disabled?"
|
It means “Distance selling using the buyer’s VAT rate is disabled,” as you are
not obligated to use an OSS but can be registered in the other countries (as
the two options below corretly show).
They are just calling the whole feature “Distance Selling.”
|
Ok, makes sense, except that first line ruins it, where they directly mis-define
their terminology "Distance selling are sales made from one EU country to
a different EU country." Guess they should add "... using the VAT rate of the
country of the buyer"
| |
| | "You must complete the VAT registration verification in order to begin distance
selling in an EU country."
Uhm, I am VAT registered and verified, but this setting is about OSS. I think
they meant "you must complete the OSS registration verification?"
|
This sentence is above the choice, so it works for both options, and the second
option is a real VAT registration (or even several).
Also, registering to the OSS can be seen as being VAT-registered for all the
EU countries¹.
So it’s a VAT-registration in both cases
(¹ But your own, in which, IIUC, you may still not have to be VAT-registered
in your own country to be registered on the OSS.)
|
Actually it says:
"Distance selling is disabled
You must complete the VAT registration verification in order to begin distance
selling in an EU country."
I guess it means...
"Distance selling using local VAT rates is disabled
Youy must complete both the VAT registration verification and OSS registration
verification to begin distance selling using local VAT rates"
Bit of an amendment, hope it's really what they meant.. and hope they remember
to EXCLUDE VAT when establishing the €10.000 limit (which, by the way, should
actually be this year's sales, not last year's)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 22, 2021 08:48 | | Subject: | Re: Distance selling / OSS | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, Stellar writes:
| | In Help, TDH_Bricks writes:
| | Hello,
just recognized there is implemented Distance selling / OSS registration on the
Store Management Page already.
As I did not see any official announcement about this up to now, can you please
confirm this can be used now (switch it ON and insert OSS registration data and
file)?
And how is the recalculation to EU recipient country VAT rate done?
PS: Because of the ordering "Technical Error" discussed last few days on the
Forum we tried to switch it ON and fill in requested data. Today one EU order
was received and it seems there is no recalculation of VAT from our VAT rate
to recipient VAT rate but only calculation of recipient VAT amount from order
total. This would mean the VAT difference is on our store account what is not
good and we will switch this off. 
Thank you.
|
Interesting.
Maybe it is not enabled until someone at BL verifies it, so you probably have
to wait for it to work.
But seems it is worded as foreign countries shops, it doesn't mention VAT-Rate
per country selling within the EU.
|
I don't get it. I think the descriptions are off..
"Distance selling are sales made from one EU country to a different EU country."
Ok,
"Distance selling is disabled"
Huh? I am literally selling to other EU countries today. Did they mean "OSS is
disabled?"
"You must complete the VAT registration verification in order to begin distance
selling in an EU country."
Uhm, I am VAT registered and verified, but this setting is about OSS. I think
they meant "you must complete the OSS registration verification?"
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 21, 2021 10:41 | | Subject: | Adding items needs a little improvement | | Viewed: | 91 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| - Why can I enter only the design ID and not the element ID from the "add item"
screen? They are in the database, so Bricklink might as well use them, right?
- I can't enter a negative sale in the "add item" screen. It just doesn't
accept a "-" character in that screen. Has been reported 5 weeks ago and devs
were going to have a look at it, still not fixed. (=The usual pattern whenever
I report anything, so I'm not surprised, but still - come on guys!)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 19, 2021 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: Admin; please help, potentially serious bug | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, Heartbricker writes:
| | We just got a message from a domestic buyer (Ohio ) who sent us a screenshot
of their cart with a message that our shop doesn’t support shipping to Ohio.
We ship to Ohio almost every day (here on Bricklink )
Please help,
This can potentially block many buyer and sellers from conducting business here.
Please help,
The Heart Bricker crew
|
I can't explain that message but ask anyway what precisely your buyer has
in their cart, and see if you can reproduce an error with that cart. Maybe there's
like a square kilometer sticker sheet because someone made a mistake entering
dimensions or who knows what There are 54 lots, maybe one of them is acting
up. It would explain why other orders to Ohio are fine while this one isn't.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 16:05 | | Subject: | Re: Nieuwe posttarieven (zakelijk) | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, donja_nl writes:
| | Alle logica ontbreekt.
Tot 30 gram bijvoorbeeld:
België 1.55
Duitsland 1.40
USA 1.40
Denemarken 2.05
Rest van de wereld 1.60
En dan ook niet met enige logica verder in de staffels. Je zou verwachten dat
er iedere keer een vast bedrag bij komt of dat het verdubbelt of zo. Maar niets
van dat alles.
Kan een van jullie er chocola van maken ??
|
Ik vind het wel logisch, op z'n eigen manier:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1310272
Vanuit consumentenoogpunt (rechtvaardigheid) slaat het inderdaad nergens op.
Maar als "bedrijven onder elkaar" - dat zijn we immers met PostNL - kan ik die
tarieven wel begrijpen. Wordt nog een toer om m'n winststatistieken goed
te laten berekenen in mijn software met al die maffe tarieven; erg praktisch
is het allemaal niet.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 16:01 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | .
| |
Hmm, well, if BL removes an NSS when a seller only has proof of posting the order
(and not delivery) that basically means that BL has decided that the buyer is
lying.
|
No, they are believing the seller sent the order. That is not the same as believing
the buyer is lying.
|
But believing the seller sent the order is irrelevant. The buyer must receive
the order. It says in Bricklink's own terms - indirectly, by referring to
consumer rights - that buyers should get their order or their money back. Sellers
have all clicked "I agree" to these terms, here on Bricklink. Strange if Bricklink
would remove a penalty on a seller that is breaking their own terms.
|
Why is it irrelevant? The NSS is is about whether the buyer shipped the order.
Read the help page. https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=110 It is all about
whether the seller shipped, not whether the buyer received. If BL believe tge
seller shipped, then there is no NSS case. The NSS is different to the refund
process and local laws.
|
Well, yes, if you take the narrow meaning of shipping - posting it. But then
I don't really see the value of the NSS concept. It wouldn't really separate
the good sellers from the bad sellers that way. I don't have proof of shipping
on half of my orders anyway.
| | From a more practical point of view, BL cannot check whether refunds were sent
unless all payments are done onsite, thus removing payments such as bank transfer.
It is easy to fake text in an online bank statement, so they cannot be believed.
|
True, and obviously buyers can lie, too. And sellers can fake that they shipped
by shipping something else. So basically the whole NSS concept is pretty weird.
I think the only way out of all this, is by statistics. If a seller gets a lot
of ONR (order not received) points from several independent buyers, then that's
a red flag, and if a buyer is involved in a lot of them, then that is a red flag
too. Maybe that's the only way to figure out who's breaking rules without
depending on believing anyone. BrickOwl has these stats (not sure what they do
with it though)
| | | | But maybe we're thinking a bit too deeply about a system that was set up
by one guy in the early years of the internet and has inexplicably been frozen
in time even though it is now a big company in the modern e-commerce age  In
the end Bricklink just has to step forward and tell us all what exactly the rules
are, and what the penalties are. We've spent years trying to figure them
out, and Bricklink's cockpit is empty as always.. IMO it's better to
have clear rules for all of us anyway, rather than a patchwork of local legislations.
|
Yes, it would be good to have one fixed set of rules and avoid any local legislation
so long as BL rules do not force a seller to break local regulations. So for
example they could insist all payments are via insite PayPal or Stripe, and ban
sellers from charging for using PayPal. I doubt it would go down well though,
for sellers or buyers.
|
I don't understand why they could want to reduce the payment methods to PayPal
and Stripe and what it has to do with clear rules. BrickOwl has fixed rules and
also has many more payment methods than Bricklink has. Don't think people
complain there. Sellers tend to get upset if other sellers are trying to get
ahead of them, but if the same rules apply to everyone I think that would calm
everyone down. And most of the time sellers are hobbyists and simply are not
aware of laws, so they'll be happy to get some help. I think with clear rules
there will be much more willingness to comply, so there won't be as many
disputes. Usually the disputes I read about in the forum come down to different
opinions about what's right - and that's something you can take away
with rules.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 12:10 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | .
| |
Hmm, well, if BL removes an NSS when a seller only has proof of posting the order
(and not delivery) that basically means that BL has decided that the buyer is
lying.
|
No, they are believing the seller sent the order. That is not the same as believing
the buyer is lying.
|
But believing the seller sent the order is irrelevant. The buyer must receive
the order. It says in Bricklink's own terms - indirectly, by referring to
consumer rights - that buyers should get their order or their money back. Sellers
have all clicked "I agree" to these terms, here on Bricklink. Strange if Bricklink
would remove a penalty on a seller that is breaking their own terms.
But maybe we're thinking a bit too deeply about a system that was set up
by one guy in the early years of the internet and has inexplicably been frozen
in time even though it is now a big company in the modern e-commerce age In
the end Bricklink just has to step forward and tell us all what exactly the rules
are, and what the penalties are. We've spent years trying to figure them
out, and Bricklink's cockpit is empty as always.. IMO it's better to
have clear rules for all of us anyway, rather than a patchwork of local legislations.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 11:48 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, SylvainLS writes:
| | And even if you consider volunteers as a resource, BL can hardly put volunteers
in charge of policing stores.
|
Well? Volunteers made the entire catalog, which is an extremely complicated task.
If Bricklink showed some leadership and set some clear rules (something better
than "ok guys, look up what the law says and just go and do that, enjoy" ),
and set up an infrastructure to report incorrect terms, I bet we could have them
all corrected in a month.
Even better, of course, if there wouldn't be terms at all Just multiple
choice options within what Bricklink allows. Illegal clauses are often not even
malicious intent, so it would help sellers too.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 09:02 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, peregrinator writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | You can start a Non-shipping seller alert. If the seller still doesn't (re)send
the items, it will complete and if it happens 3 times, the seller will have their
selling privileges revoked.
|
Isn't proof of shipping sufficient to address a Non-Shipping Seller alert
though? I don't think you have to show proof of delivery.
|
Yes, for bricklink it is enough. But the (EU) business still needs to refund
the customer.
|
Well.. I assume it's NOT enough? Bricklink's terms say you need to abide
by consumer legislation, so surely they wouldn't go against their own terms
by removing an NSS? While PayPal would let the buyer win the claim in that same
situation...
|
That is irrelevant. NSS are nothing to do with consumer legislation. NSS are
an internal measure used on Bricklink to decide whether Bricklink management
allows a seller to continue selling after a customer complaint.
|
But not respecting consumer rights is a breach of contract with Bricklink, because
it says so explicitly in the seller terms that sellers have to observe consumer
rights. If a buyer has not received the items and the seller has no proof of
delivery, then the seller should be in trouble. You should get the same situation
as with PayPal.
|
But what does any of that have to do with BL removing an NSS after a seller proves
a parcel was sent? If BL is given court documents that indicate a seller is not
complying with their local legislation, no doubt they would do something about
the seller (no matter how many NSS they have).
|
Hmm, well, if BL removes an NSS when a seller only has proof of posting the order
(and not delivery) that basically means that BL has decided that the buyer is
lying. AFAIK, shipping ends when the parcel is delivered. Was the order shipped
(including delivery) or not? According to the buyer, no. The only person who
has proof of (no) delivery when there is no tracking, is the buyer. Maybe the
buyer is lying. But removing the NSS every time there is proof the order was
posted seems to defeat the whole system. What use is proof of postage when something
does not arrive? The buyer paid and got nothing. Per BL's terms (let's
say it's an EU transaction), the buyer should get their money back. But the
seller is breaking those terms. Although the buyer could be lying, it seems a
strange situation to be siding with the seller the moment that seller is breaking
the terms.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 08:00 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, peregrinator writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | You can start a Non-shipping seller alert. If the seller still doesn't (re)send
the items, it will complete and if it happens 3 times, the seller will have their
selling privileges revoked.
|
Isn't proof of shipping sufficient to address a Non-Shipping Seller alert
though? I don't think you have to show proof of delivery.
|
Yes, for bricklink it is enough. But the (EU) business still needs to refund
the customer.
|
Well.. I assume it's NOT enough? Bricklink's terms say you need to abide
by consumer legislation, so surely they wouldn't go against their own terms
by removing an NSS? While PayPal would let the buyer win the claim in that same
situation...
|
That is irrelevant. NSS are nothing to do with consumer legislation. NSS are
an internal measure used on Bricklink to decide whether Bricklink management
allows a seller to continue selling after a customer complaint.
|
But not respecting consumer rights is a breach of contract with Bricklink, because
it says so explicitly in the seller terms that sellers have to observe consumer
rights. If a buyer has not received the items and the seller has no proof of
delivery, then the seller should be in trouble. You should get the same situation
as with PayPal.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 06:26 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, peregrinator writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | You can start a Non-shipping seller alert. If the seller still doesn't (re)send
the items, it will complete and if it happens 3 times, the seller will have their
selling privileges revoked.
|
Isn't proof of shipping sufficient to address a Non-Shipping Seller alert
though? I don't think you have to show proof of delivery.
|
Yes, for bricklink it is enough. But the (EU) business still needs to refund
the customer.
|
Well.. I assume it's NOT enough? Bricklink's terms say you need to abide
by consumer legislation, so surely they wouldn't go against their own terms
by removing an NSS? While PayPal would let the buyer win the claim in that same
situation...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2021 06:24 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | […]
So even though Bricklink is more interested in censoring rude words on the forum
|
Volunteer moderators do the moderations, not the admins.
And we do that according to the ToS every member agreed to.
|
I know that, and I'm glad about everything volunteers do, but I just wish
Bricklink put the resources where they're needed most. But they don't
admit they don't have enough resources, which is kind of the first step..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 19:33 | | Subject: | Re: Does a seller have to accept my return | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, Teup writes:
| | If you don't have any return rights, then that's pretty much end of story.
|
Oops, forgot: Unless the payment method you used has additional terms of use
that include a return clause.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 19:31 | | Subject: | Re: Does a seller have to accept my return | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, CSC writes:
| | The item is used and it shows. I just do not like it that way. Others might think
it is OK.
|
Ok, so I guess it's a return then
| | Not sure how to handle it as I would like to solve it amicably, but the sellers
response does not show a lot of wiggle room here.
|
I'd say, find some sources, like some consumers union or legal sources, that
write what your rights are in e-commerce. If you don't have any return rights,
then that's pretty much end of story. But if it turns out you do, you can
just show the seller and then at least it won't be a back-and-forth of wants
and opinions, but just sharing facts that you can't really deny.
Bricklink explicitly states in its seller terms (whigh your seller has agreed
to) that sellers need to respect any applicable consumer rights. It doesn't
say *what* those rights are, though, so that's up to you to figure out
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 19:19 | | Subject: | Re: Does a seller have to accept my return | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, CSC writes:
| | Hi,
I bought something I would like to return.
The seller has no return policy in his store at all when I check the terms.
I sent the seller a message, he asked my why I wanted to return, I said, because
I am not happy with the purchase and he said that he can not accept a return
under these circumstances. All conversations were normal, so nothing bad. The
item itself is just "too" used in my opinion if that makes sense and I want to
return it. I understand that I have to pay shipping for the return most likely
and I am fine with that.
Can a seller just refuse the refund or what would be the best solution here?
Thanks
|
You should check some local sources on what your right as a consumer are considering
returns, and send what you found to the seller if it offers an opening for you.
EU customers only pay return shipping if that is explicitly specified by the
seller - if it isn't specified, the seller pays even that.
However, you say the item was in too poor a condition. If you really got something
that does not at all match what you could reasonably expect, then that's
not a return, that's failure on the seller's part. If you want to play
hardball, you could actually consider this nonconformity and start a non-shipping
seller alert and/or a PayPal claim if the seller does not cooperate. I don't
know what you got, but if it really is bad, we need to be clear here that you
are the disappointed one here, not the seller. If it was OK but it just made
you realise you prefer new parts, then it's a return.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 15:12 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Poncke writes:
| | In Shipping, yorbrick writes:
| | In Shipping, Poncke writes:
| | Hi, first post on Bricklink. Just trying to find my way around.
Question on shipping terms from EU stores on here.
I have come across shipping terms from stores that go against EU legislation
that governs these circumstances, Article 20 of Directive 2011/83/EU.
For example, stores that say that they are not responsible for damage after an
order is shipped. According to article 20 of Directive 2011/83/EU essentially,
the trader is responsible for the item until it is handed to the consumer. Thus,
if the trader organises a particular courier service to handle delivery, then
the trader remains responsible for the goods while the courier is in possession
of them. In such cases, the trader will need to replace the item or refund the
payment if the goods go missing or are damaged.
How is this dealt with in case of a dispute? Surely store T&Cs can never override
the EU directive?
|
|
yes, I guess payment via IBAN then comes down to willingness of the seller to
comply. When that happens, who interferes? Bricklink? I would assume there is
a report option. Otherwise report the seller to the consumer agencies in their
country for braking EU regulation.
|
You can start a Non-shipping seller alert. If the seller still doesn't (re)send
the items, it will complete and if it happens 3 times, the seller will have their
selling privileges revoked.
So even though Bricklink is more interested in censoring rude words on the forum
than it is in moderating illegal terms, there's at least that, and I suppose
that works. Anyway, when there's money involved the main thing I would do
is go to the police.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 13:34 | | Subject: | Re: Shipping terms for EU stores | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Poncke writes:
| | Hi, first post on Bricklink. Just trying to find my way around.
Question on shipping terms from EU stores on here.
I have come across shipping terms from stores that go against EU legislation
that governs these circumstances, Article 20 of Directive 2011/83/EU.
For example, stores that say that they are not responsible for damage after an
order is shipped. According to article 20 of Directive 2011/83/EU essentially,
the trader is responsible for the item until it is handed to the consumer. Thus,
if the trader organises a particular courier service to handle delivery, then
the trader remains responsible for the goods while the courier is in possession
of them. In such cases, the trader will need to replace the item or refund the
payment if the goods go missing or are damaged.
How is this dealt with in case of a dispute? Surely store T&Cs can never override
the EU directive?
Thoughts?
|
You're right. Unfortunately, there's no indication that Bricklink at
all cares. I've reported invalid terms several times, never heard anything
back. It seems like Bricklink only starts moving when authorities or other parties
pressure them. For example, Bricklink acts immediately when a seller located
in the US charges PayPal fees (probably under pressure of PayPal US), but if
any other seller charges a percentage that violates EU legislation, they don't
care about it.
It's Bricklink's loss, really, because it's one of the reasons casual
consumer shy away from Bricklink and why mainstream Lego sellers I know do not
feel comfortable referring customers to Bricklink when they ask them where to
buy missing parts.
In my experience, many sellers are honest and are not trying to rip anyone off.
When I message them about invalid claims in their terms, they're often willing
to learn and adapt. That kind of makes the fact that Bricklink isn't picking
up on this even more awkward.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2021 03:49 | | Subject: | Re: Help with b2b | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, BrickPhaisan writes:
| | Very good to everyone.
Today I had a small problem with an order since he asked me not to charge the
VAT since the buyer was from Italy and we from Spain, and in the end we have
to cancel the order, a colleague has told me something about the b2b , but I
have no idea how I can sign up for this, does anyone know where to sign up to
be able to make intra-community sales and not have to lose other sales? I currently
have VAT, but for B2C.
Thanks in advance,.
|
Officially it's something you're supposed to know once you register a
business There is nothing you need to sign up for. The correct way of invoicing
a business in another EU country is sending an invoice charging 0% VAT, since
the buyer is not able to reclaim foreign VAT domestically.
At the end of your VAT term, you report that amount (together with all other
such exports) as exports within the EU. You will then need to back up this info
by reporting these amounts as intracommunity transactions, where you write the
amount and the VAT ID of the receiver. That's why you always need to verify
their VAT ID before you proceed.
Over here, once you enter an EU export amount into the form, a message automatically
appears saying that you need to fill out an intracommunity transactions form.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 15, 2021 09:36 | | Subject: | Re: International Shipping | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, magicalbricks24 writes:
| | In Shipping, SandyMcPherson writes:
| | I just received my first international order and it appears the shipping fee
will not cover the shipping charge. How do you handle international shipping
so it doesn't result in loss? What service do you use?
|
I would only recommend using a manual invoice for international orders.
|
Is it really that unpredictable what shipping costs are going to be? IC offers
a good range of parameters, you should be able to formalize most things with
it. Would be a shame to toss out IC. Remember the shipping rates don't need
to match postage costs exactly.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2021 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: Blue border around image | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
| | In Technical Issues, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
| | SylvainLS:
can you please write me the code
|
It’s what Randyf posted at the same time I posted… and you say it doesn’t work.
You may try to add “important!”: “a style="border: none important!" ”.
|
not working
|
Did you already try this?
style="border:0; text-decoration:none; outline:none"
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2021 11:15 | | Subject: | Re: Blue border around image | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
| | SylvainLS:
can you please write me the code
|
It’s what Randyf posted at the same time I posted… and you say it doesn’t work.
You may try to add “important!”: “a style="border: none important!" ”.
|
Seriously? There's a keyword called "important" in html? My respect for
html has just sunk even lower
I see how it would look a little nicer without borders, but the main thing that
would bother me esthetically is that right now the top row has more buttons than
the bottom one.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2021 10:46 | | Subject: | Re: Blue border around image | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| AFAIK this is something the browser does. I think it's just the way html
links are rendered by default. Is it really a problem? At least users will see
that it's a link, and it gives UI feedback when hovered and being clicked
on this way.
In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
| | there is still a blue border
In Technical Issues, randyf writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
| | In Technical Issues, randyf writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Roxyncz writes:
In the "style" attribute for the "img" object, add "border-style: none;" to the
list.
|
can you take a picture of me where to write it?
|
In this part: style="border-style: none; width: 151px; height: 208px;"
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2021 04:13 | | Subject: | Re: How to restrict shopping to low-rated users? | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, peregrinator writes:
| | In Selling, Teup writes:
| | As far as I understand, yep, it restricts shipping methods but not necessarily
payment methods, so buyers just can't select manual invoice methods. Once
they select an IC method, I think they can then select any of the payment methods
that the seller supports.
(I'm not actually 100% sure so correct me if I'm wrong anyone)
|
I think this is correct, but I don't know what payment methods are actually
allowed under IC apart from onsite PayPal and Stripe.
|
Yes, those are the only “onsite” methods: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=18
And IC is Auto-invoice + Onsite payment: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2462
So if other payment methods are still possible for new buyers with this option
on, then it doesn’t do what it says it does.
|
It already messed up from the get-go, because BL has two definitions of IC.
In the store settings, those shipping methods that trigger an auto invoice are
called IC methods. Shipping methods can be IC or manual. And then payment methods
is a separate topic. So when there's that option that says new users can
only select IC methods, I'm 95% sure it just refers to the IC shipping methods.
Just when you compare it to the help section where they separate the concepts
auto-invoice and IC it's getting confusing. It's probably because when
BL thinks about it IC, they often forget the auto-invoice + offsite payment combination
- I recall a comment like that was made when I had a teams call with the BL team.
So I'm not even sure that option does exactly what BL wants it to do.
Anyway, I cannot recall my last NPB. Even though the majority of my orders are
paid offsite (and all are auto-invoice), they always pay. In my experience the
time between placing an order and getting an invoice has higher NPB risk than
after the invoice is sent.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2021 16:54 | | Subject: | Re: How to restrict shopping to low-rated users? | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Teup writes:
| | […]
| | 1. With Instant Checkout, the deadline is 0 days. So just use the option showned
by Cob earlier and the deadlines will be shortened for new members
|
Unless the store has offsite payment methods. Because, well, we already figured
out BL's own terminology is inconsistent, but in the case of the "Show only
Instant Checkout methods to new buyers" option, that does include the option
to pay offsite.
|
So what does it actually prevent? Only auto-invoice?
*sigh*
|
As far as I understand, yep, it restricts shipping methods but not necessarily
payment methods, so buyers just can't select manual invoice methods. Once
they select an IC method, I think they can then select any of the payment methods
that the seller supports.
(I'm not actually 100% sure so correct me if I'm wrong anyone)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2021 13:13 | | Subject: | Re: How to restrict shopping to low-rated users? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, ck.brick.lego writes:
| | I am a seller too, a relatively small one though. I understand new members are
relatively more likely to be NPB (in those cases, the buyer just wanted to try,
and changed mind for unknown reasons), but I agree everyone needs a start, and
it's unfair to assume new buyers are NPB.
I would say, you can specify payment must be sent within a short timeframe
(like 1 or 2 days), and I myself would emphasize if they need any help, I
am there to help, just to make sure unfamiliarity with the purchase procedures
is not a reason for disappearing; and, most importantly, they would need you
help indeed. BrickLink is quite complex from my point of view when I placed the
first order.
Also, cancel the order and restock if no response is heard in 72 hours
from purchase--and leave a neutral (or negative depending on the context)
feedback like "placed order then cancel/disappear" to remind other sellers.
If they are aware of the problem (the item is reserved for the buyer), they would
probably respond and apologize, and I myself would accept and withdraw the negative
feedback (if so)
|
Very well said.
| | In short, I won't assume new buyers are NPB, but I agree shorter payment
deadlines (for all buyers) plus a reminder would help protect the seller.
|
Two things:
1. With Instant Checkout, the deadline is 0 days. So just use the option showned
by Cob earlier and the deadlines will be shortened for new members
|
Unless the store has offsite payment methods. Because, well, we already figured
out BL's own terminology is inconsistent, but in the case of the "Show only
Instant Checkout methods to new buyers" option, that does include the option
to pay offsite.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2021 10:13 | | Subject: | Re: Can't mark order as shipped | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, Remko100 writes:
| | A buyer ordered with paypal onsite. I sent an invoice, buyer paid. I marked the
order as packed yesterday. Shipped it today and now I can;t change the status
to shipped or completed. Could this have to do with the paypal-onsite, but buyer
paid regularly with paypal? So the system doesn't recognize the order as
paid and doesn't give an option to mark it shipped?
If so @admin, please turn this off. I wasn't happy with all the automated
stuff to begin with, this would be a great example of a system making disicions
I don't want it to interfer with.
If it;s something else: What then?
Anyone?
Kind regards,
Remko
Its a Bricky World
|
Yeah, a while ago Bricklink had some plan to overhaul the order status workflow,
but the project kind of stranded in a situation where we just had what we had
before, but some updating statuses is now a bit bugged. You can click "edit order"
at the bottom of the order page, there you can control payment status and payment
method. Playing around with that should allow you to set the correct order status
afterwards.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 12, 2021 18:21 | | Subject: | Re: Seller requesting bank transfer not Paypal | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Payment Methods | |
|
| In Payment Methods, Badger6 writes:
| | Maybe I am missing something but how come a seller will not accept my money via
Paypal. He said due to the cost of the order I have to send the money to his
bank account rather than through paypal but this sounds like a potential scam
to me. For info I am American buying from Russian seller and the dollar amount
is around $250.
|
It could be bad news even if the seller is not an actual scammer. Not counting
Africa (or Russia-like countries), Russia possibly has the worst postal service
in the world. Talking about incoming mail, anyway. Maybe outgoing is just as
bad. The seller could have figured there's a lot of risk involved and they
have no intention to carry any kind of responsibility for that. Since he's
asking for it exactly because of the value, it's probably that. I wouldn't
do it.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 12, 2021 04:31 | | Subject: | Re: Weapon?? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, The_RealRedHex writes:
| |
These are all classified as weapons, however, they more look like either bars
or utensils to me!?
thoughts?
|
I agree. These parts should be recategorized.
David
|
But then where to categorize the multipack that they're part of? Because
multipacks are also considered "parts", and parts have a category. If a multipack
consists of parts of different categories, it would be difficult to decide where
to put it.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 12, 2021 03:53 | | Subject: | Re: How to restrict shopping to low-rated users? | | Viewed: | 81 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Brickroom writes:
| | Hi there,
as a seller,d I have to say that "low rated" /small amount of purchase/ buyers
are most demanding in operation, time, and requirements.
Is there any way how to restrict purchase options for users with fewer feedbacks?
|
Is it a serious question? Very surprised to see this coming from someone with
so much feedback. You have as much responsibility as other sellers have in dealing
with customers. You can't just let the other sellers do the dirty work for
you. Thankfully, there's no setting for this.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 11, 2021 04:56 | | Subject: | Re: Being Charged VAT TAX as a US Seller | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, MinifigureLand writes:
| | In Help, peregrinator writes:
| | In Help, peregrinator writes:
| | In Help, MinifigureLand writes:
| | yeah i saw the same. Thanks for the reply. How certain are you of this.
|
As certain as one can be from a Google search ... also I've never paid VAT
on any order I've placed from an EU seller.
|
This is an interesting thread:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=255747
And here is the relevant rule from the EU:
https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/taxation/vat/vat-rules-rates/index_en.htm
"For EU-based companies, VAT is chargeable on most sales and purchases of goods
within the EU. In such cases, VAT is charged and due in the EU country where
the goods are consumed by the final consumer. Likewise, VAT is charged on services
at the time they are carried out in each EU country.
"VAT isn't charged on exports of goods to countries outside the EU. In these
cases, VAT is charged and due in the country of import and you don't need
to declare any VAT as an exporter. However, when exporting goods you will need
to provide documentation as proof that the goods were transported outside the
EU. Such proof could be provided by presenting a copy of an invoice, a transportation
document or an import customs record to your tax authorities.
"You will need to provide this proof to be able to fully deduct any receivable
VAT that you have paid in a previous related transaction leading up to the export.
Insufficient documentation may mean you won't have the right to a VAT reimbursement
when exporting goods."
So yes, in the sense that sellers have to abide by applicable laws, it would
seem to be a violation of BrickLink's terms.
|
Thank you for your time and the reply. Its exactly what my thinking was but wanted
to make sure as the seller (funny enough is from Poland) won't budge and
claims that BL doesnt understand their VAT laws. Which is BS because VAT is a
Entire European tax. Not just set on one country.
I will inform them and just cancel the order most likely.
Thanks again!
|
I think it's not very rare for EU sellers to do this. No VAT is due on exports,
but that means of course that the seller must be able to prove that the goods
did indeed leave the EU. If they are using an "analog" shipping method, like
stamps, you could argue that you won't exactly have proof that it did. Also,
some countries may be more strict with this than others. That's what makes
some sellers decide to just treat all purchases as if they were made domestically
- as if you were a tourist visiting the shop - and charge VAT on everything.
Whether this is right or not, and allowed or not, I'm not sure.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 10, 2021 08:04 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, cosmicray writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | I guess it's a bit of a gray area. On the one hand, the seller has no control
over what goes on at the postal service, on the other hand, the seller is the
person who chose to contract them and is responsible for the entire process.
The buyer can complain to the seller, and the seller can complain to the postal
service.
|
But that ignores buyer choices. Buyers almost always want cheap and fast. You
can have less expensive and slow, or you can have more expensive and (hopefully)
faster movement. If the buyer chooses the least expensive option, the seller
should not have to work harder to make up for the buyer's choices.
|
I'm not offering choices any choices at all, since over here most webshops
don't. But when offering them, you can add a description what you will get.
You can simply add a description saying the cheap option can take months, and
then there's no reason to leave neutral or negative feedback, because the
buyer got what they could expect. I think postal services often have some statement
or indication on delivery time, so you can just copy that.
| |
| | But yeah, it's about finding a reasonable compromise... if the seller would
be involved and kept in touch about what the next steps would be, I would still
leave a positive. If they don't respond, I might leave neutral. Another problem
is that any negative feedback for long international delivery time isn't
relevant to domestic customers.. so I guess it's another one of those discussions
that ends up with: we need a better system than a positive-neutral-negative feedback
profile..
|
We need a system that clearly delineates the seller's performance, and does
not conflate it with the delivery service. If the buyer chooses a slow method,
they have no right to blame the seller for that.
|
I guess the fundamental question is: What question are you answering when you
look at a seller's feedback profile? Since you're using the word 'blame',
I guess for you that question is "is this seller an OK guy to do business with?".
That's a legitimate question, but as for me, I'm checking it to answer
"Do I end up getting what the seller's terms are stating?"
For example, if a seller would have a message saying they 100% guaruantee delivery
the next day, no matter what, I will want that feedback profile to reflect how
accurate their claims are. If people are getting it 3 days later, then IMO that's
a fair reason for negative feedback. Because it violates the created expectation.
If a seller says shipping is very slow (regardless of who is causing that), then
getting slow shipping can never be a reason for negative feedback. Finally, if
a seller has NO description, I'd say it's down to what you can reasonably
expect, without additional info. And that's where IMO several months does
not match what is reasonable to expect. So for me, feedback is just extra verification
info to figure out if what I am being presented (quality, speed) matches reality.
But again, just a matter of how you interpret what feedback means, I guess.
| | We also need a better shipping system on BL, one which will provide uniform service
choices, and clearly indicate what to expect from each. Leaving it to 6,000 odd
sellers, each presenting in their way, is bound to confuse the customers.
Nita Rae
|
Yeah, many of these dilemmas disappear if the archaic terms and feedback systems
are overhauled. For example, buyers could leave a specific score whether delivery
time matched the terms - besides rating the seller as a good person to do business
with. And if terms were not a free text field but a series of multiple choice
options, like BrickOwl has, it's all much clearer. You would see directly
"ah, this seller indicated they are slow" "oh, this seller indicated they are
fast, though the delivery score shows me it might actually take much longer"
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 10, 2021 07:02 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Well, I've never had packages taking 2 months. If the package didn't
arrive 2 weeks after what the postal service indicated as delivery time (which
is going to be some 20 days in total), I would consider it lost. I am not going
to ask the buyer to wait even longer. I would either resend it or send a refund,
and tell the buyer to pay it back once they get the items.
|
So how can the seller have know it would take two months at the time of posting
in this case? Sometimes random delays happen. Should the seller be responsible
for informing the buyer before they order that sometimes there are delays of
two months?
|
Well, if it's a random delay, and the seller refuses to consider the package
lost (which I would have done), then it's still only 1 negative saying delivery
time was long. It will be just that: a thousand people in their feedback profile
saying they're happy and one person saying it took very long. What will future
buyers think? That there's a high likelihood it will be fine but there is
actually a small chance it can take very long. I think that's a pretty accurate
reflection. I don't think that one feedback is going to suddenly make buyers
believe the seller is all bad.
And yes, if it is more than just an incident, then the seller should indicate
it. So it's either going to be the one or the other. Seems fair to me.
As a buyer I will want to know as much information as possible about ordering
at that store. Whose fault it is doesn't matter to me, just like I don't
care about how much of what I pay for shipping goes to the seller for handling
and how much goes to the postal service. I just want to know what it costs, and
what I can expect.
|
Sure, it is just one negative feedback. I doubt it matters.
What I was responding to was that the seller should have told the buyer how long
it would take to reach the buyer at the start of the order. The seller doesn't
know that. They might know how long on average it would take, they might know
how long it could take, but they don't know how long it would take. Especially
as we now know the buyer had the tracking number, and so should know where it
was stuck, leaving a negative for the seller seems even worse.
|
I guess it's a bit of a gray area. On the one hand, the seller has no control
over what goes on at the postal service, on the other hand, the seller is the
person who chose to contract them and is responsible for the entire process.
The buyer can complain to the seller, and the seller can complain to the postal
service.
Personally I am not using DHL because I know they're pretty good at beating
up packages. Would it be my responsibility if they do? Not really, but I am
responsible for the consequences of it. If a part is broken, it doesn't really
matter for the buyer who broke it, so in a similar vein, it doesn't really
matter who caused the delay.
But yeah, it's about finding a reasonable compromise... if the seller would
be involved and kept in touch about what the next steps would be, I would still
leave a positive. If they don't respond, I might leave neutral. Another problem
is that any negative feedback for long international delivery time isn't
relevant to domestic customers.. so I guess it's another one of those discussions
that ends up with: we need a better system than a positive-neutral-negative feedback
profile..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 10, 2021 03:06 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, calebfishn writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | In Help, firestar246 writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | my place? Keep in mind feedback reflects your own experience with the transaction.
Anything you want to post is fair by definition, as it is your own experience.
|
I can see your point, but don't agree 100% with it because sure, maybe the
shipping time wasn't positive, but it isn't fair to blame that negative
aspect on the seller because they had no control over that point. Just like it
wouldn't be fair if the package arrived completely destroyed because the
delivery man backed over it and the buyer leaves negative feedback to the seller.
The seller had nothing to do with it.
|
That's true but my point was that feedback isn't about the seller, it's
about the community. Sure the seller is not to blame, but if what you get significantly
deviates from what you could expect, it's relevant info for future buyers
to know. I'm thinking as feedback simply as a tool for doing that, not for
blaming.
|
Sorry, I don't agree that feedback isn't about the seller. Of course
it is about the seller, because the seller wears the negative feedback, and the
seller's feedback score is affected negatively.
It is about the community also, but feedback given based on the actions of third
parties, or natural disasters, etc. rather than about the seller and the service
the seller provided, provide no helpful information to the community at all.
|
But I can't see any purpose for the seller. Just for future transaction partners.
Messages are for the seller. If you want a seller to change something, you message
them. Feedback, even though it's called "feedback", isn't really feedback
to the seller. You can give them feedback in emails or messages if you want to
give tips or tell them to change something. A feedback post is a marker for the
community. By far the most users do not address the other party in the feedback
post but direct them at the community ("did not ship order", "did not pay", "beware",
etc)
| | I don't agree that a buyer's or seller's subjective expectations
are relevant at all. They are irrelevant, because again, the seller does not
usually have control of the buyer's expectations. If I order from you, but
have an unrealistic expectations about what you can provide, how can that be
relevant to the community? It isn't and it gives the community of buyers
no guidance about what to expect from the seller.
|
It's about non-conformity. If something is significantly off what you can
reasonably expect, you can mark that. That notion is not really that subjective
that it becomes impossible to work with, there's actually consumer rights
legislation based on the concept of (non)conformity.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 18:26 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Well, I've never had packages taking 2 months. If the package didn't
arrive 2 weeks after what the postal service indicated as delivery time (which
is going to be some 20 days in total), I would consider it lost. I am not going
to ask the buyer to wait even longer. I would either resend it or send a refund,
and tell the buyer to pay it back once they get the items.
|
So how can the seller have know it would take two months at the time of posting
in this case? Sometimes random delays happen. Should the seller be responsible
for informing the buyer before they order that sometimes there are delays of
two months?
|
Well, if it's a random delay, and the seller refuses to consider the package
lost (which I would have done), then it's still only 1 negative saying delivery
time was long. It will be just that: a thousand people in their feedback profile
saying they're happy and one person saying it took very long. What will future
buyers think? That there's a high likelihood it will be fine but there is
actually a small chance it can take very long. I think that's a pretty accurate
reflection. I don't think that one feedback is going to suddenly make buyers
believe the seller is all bad.
And yes, if it is more than just an incident, then the seller should indicate
it. So it's either going to be the one or the other. Seems fair to me.
As a buyer I will want to know as much information as possible about ordering
at that store. Whose fault it is doesn't matter to me, just like I don't
care about how much of what I pay for shipping goes to the seller for handling
and how much goes to the postal service. I just want to know what it costs, and
what I can expect.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 18:21 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, firestar246 writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | my place? Keep in mind feedback reflects your own experience with the transaction.
Anything you want to post is fair by definition, as it is your own experience.
|
I can see your point, but don't agree 100% with it because sure, maybe the
shipping time wasn't positive, but it isn't fair to blame that negative
aspect on the seller because they had no control over that point. Just like it
wouldn't be fair if the package arrived completely destroyed because the
delivery man backed over it and the buyer leaves negative feedback to the seller.
The seller had nothing to do with it.
|
That's true but my point was that feedback isn't about the seller, it's
about the community. Sure the seller is not to blame, but if what you get significantly
deviates from what you could expect, it's relevant info for future buyers
to know. I'm thinking as feedback simply as a tool for doing that, not for
blaming.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 16:50 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, yorbrick writes:
| | | | I am actually not sure. What you describe makes total sense. Clearly, the seller
did not indicate clear enough that it would take unusually long, so what you
got totally didn't match with what you could reasonably expect, in a negative
way. Hence, negative feedback.
|
So you expect a seller to know what will happen in the future? Customs clearance
times are hugely variable and occasionally can take much longer than expected,
and is out of the seller 's hands. How is the seller meant to know how long
each package will take to arrive?
|
Well, I've never had packages taking 2 months. If the package didn't
arrive 2 weeks after what the postal service indicated as delivery time (which
is going to be some 20 days in total), I would consider it lost. I am not going
to ask the buyer to wait even longer. I would either resend it or send a refund,
and tell the buyer to pay it back once they get the items.
And anyway, even if the seller chooses to let the buyer wait and ends up with
a negative, I don't think it will affect business. Unless these cases pile
up, but in that case it's structural so it's something that buyers want
to know about.
And if it's structural, it doesn't need to mean the seller ends up with
a lot of negative feedback. It's just about managing expectations. If they
put clear warnings in their store that delivery time may be exceptionally long
because the Italian postal service is slow (I think the seller could have known
that), the buyers will still get what they can reasonably expect, so there's
no negative experience. Right now the OP's experience totally didn't
match with what you could normally expect.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 16:42 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Help, Teup writes:
| | […]
Anything you want to post is fair by definition, as it is your own experience.
|
Don’t go too far with that, becase it justifies:
1. Retalation, because the feedback I received is a bad experience, I’m giving
a negative feedback too, na!
2. Those who don’t give feedback until they have been given feedback because
feedback is part of the whole experience (but, of course, that doesn’t apply
to the other party ).
|
Ok, fair addition, let's say your own experience BUT stick to what's
relevant for future buyers/sellers
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 15:56 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback Etiquette and Retaliation | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, SailorMan20 writes:
| | Thank you all for your feedback. The point of this post was to find out if I
was out of line - clearly I was.
|
I am actually not sure. What you describe makes total sense. Clearly, the seller
did not indicate clear enough that it would take unusually long, so what you
got totally didn't match with what you could reasonably expect, in a negative
way. Hence, negative feedback.
IMO it qualifies as an issue that is worth flagging for future buyers. Many (beginner)
users make the mistake in taking feedback personally and think it's for them,
when really feedback is for the community. Such a long time is going to be unacceptable
to many people (my orders to the US take 3 days typically) and it wouldn't
have been unfair to flag it. Whose fault it is doesn't matter. Feedback isn't
about blaming the seller - in a way it is not about the seller at all, it's
a reference for future buyers.
It really isn't going to make any difference for a customer's if the
postal does the screwing up or the seller. Can I not give a restaurant a negative
review if the food was cold because the delivery took too long? Does my level
of satisfaction depend on whether they're using a 3rd party to get it to
my place? Keep in mind feedback reflects your own experience with the transaction.
Anything you want to post is fair by definition, as it is your own experience.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 05:24 | | Subject: | Re: Store suspended | | Viewed: | 92 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, unrealuser writes:
| | Last suspention (few weeks ago) was for giving out external tracking links.
|
What o_O
Did that really happen? Would be a very strange mistake. Sellers do this all
the time, so I'm not sure why they would suddenly make that mistake. Are
you sure you didn't refer the buyer to anything else than tracking info?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2021 03:30 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer's Remorse order cancelleations | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Terms and Policies | |
|
| In Terms and Policies, cosmicray writes:
| | On this Help Page ...
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=79
It says ...
| | Buyer no longer wants the items - This is the most common example which BrickLink does not tolerate. Buyer should make sure he or she wants to buy the items before submitting an order, not after. After an order is submitted, the buyer enters into a legally binding contract with the seller to purchase all items in that order.
|
is an Invalid Reason for a buyer to request cancellation.
It also says that ...
| | Buyer no longer wants to purchase items
|
Is a valid reason for a Seller to cancel an order.
The primary reason for the first part very likely has to do with buyers hitting
the buy button before they took the time to read the listing (and especially
the extended description).
That policy was put into effect before IC came into widespread use, and before
the payment services began retaining the payment fees (and costing the seller
for doing a refund). Other than negative feedback, there is no penalty towards
buyers who violate the Invalid Reason on their side.
Have we arrived at the point where buyers need to be reminded why they should
not place orders they will ask to cancel the morning after ?
My thoughts (partially formed) is for something like a BRC (Buyers Remorse Cancellation)
procedure. That would give the seller feedback coverage, and would remind the
buyer that they get a limited number of strikes before they lose their buying
privileges. Currently, other than the prohibition in the Help Center, there is
no penalty for bailing on an order (and many sellers are reluctant to leave feedback
because of retaliation).
There is the additional consideration in this entire issue, that implementing
a split authorize/capture on the payments will lessen the burden on the seller.
But it will not change buyer behavior.
Nita Rae
|
Yeah, I agree we need something better than the feedback system. It works a little
bit like this on BrickOwl; non-payments get marked on the buyer's account.
I think that's great (however, the adminstration doesn't do much with
it in terms of how many strikes you get. But they could).
As for the legal aspect: The whole paragraph about "legally binding contract"
is utter gibberish and Bricklink is aware of that - but as with many issues,
they simply do not care. They never change anything as long as there's no
institution outside of them pressuring them to change. On the one hand, Bricklink
explicitly asks/forces sellers to respect consumer rights (which for EU, UK and
to the best of my knowledge US consumers means the right to cancel or return
a purchase for a full refund), on the other hand they add a silly illegal paragraph
like that, making themselves the biggest rule breaker.
However, sellers have every right not liking the fact that a buyer used their
right. After all, this is not a webshop for board games, we're sorting thousands
of tiny products into an almost custom-made purchase for the buyer. So flagging
non-payments is very relevant. Rather than the convoluted negative feedback tool,
which can mean anything from "you didn't pay" to "you were rude" to "I'm
taking revenge on you" to "you didn't read my terms that include illegal
clauses", it would be much more informative if we could simply see how often
a buyer placed an order and then canceled.
Alongside other statistics, such as how often a buyer has claimed that an order
did not arrive. It's a similar situation. Actually it's pretty crazy
that we don't have access to that number. Right now, a scammer will get the
benefit of the doubt every single time. They could claim 1000 orders did not
arrive and nobody would even know. They may even get positive feedback for those
transactions for their "good communication" and a thousand sorries. Again, BrickOwl
has this statistic.
In short, the feedback system is flawed as we all now, and we really need statistics
to understand our buyers track records a little bit better. How often do we see
topics along the lines of "I have a buyer that does so and so, would you trust
it?" and we all go and speculate whether it's a good guy or a bad guy sharing
some anecdotal experiences. The great thing about all being connected to one
platform is that we should have a wealth of statistics. But since Bricklink never
improves until it is forced to, none of that is being put to use...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2021 10:23 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer asking for customs fraud | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Hurt writes:
| | Hi!
I've a user who is asking for customs fraud (not including an invoice) because
it's a gift.
It's nice that he gifts the set (EUR 75) to someone, but I don't gift
it to him
How do I avoid negative feedback?
I don't want to issue a NPB.
And I also don't want to force him to buy the set with normal customs process
(which I will use of course).
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Michael
|
That doesn't sound like fraud to me.. AFAIK including an invoice is not obligatory?
Over here it's an optional checkbox.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2021 10:14 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer asking for customs fraud | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, THODYO writes:
| | Once in a while we see this same discussion pop up.
I will always be willing to adjust the reported value so the buyer will save
on taxes. It is my right to avoid paying taxes and I believe I have to do my
best so to prevent a buyer of paying too much on taxes. Without the customer
asking me, I will reduce the value!
Enjoy the day!
|
Geloof dat je nu belastingvermijding en belastingontduiking door elkaar haalt
De koper betaalt niet te veel, de koper betaalt precies genoeg. Valse declaraties
zijn wel degelijk strafbaar.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2021 15:29 | | Subject: | Re: Bricklink advice to European sellers on custo | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, snarf1974 writes:
| | Why do sellers feel the need to always print off a invoice when all the information
is available on your account. I would guess that 99% of this wasted paper ends
up in the bin.
Not only is this unnecessary but a large waste of plastic and paper and I feel
Bricklink/The LEGO group should not be adversely wasting these resources.
|
Orders under GBP 135 need to be accompanied with a printed invoice, that's
the rule. The invoice proves that you have paid VAT to Bricklink. If no such
invoice is present, you'll be charged VAT a second time upon import.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2021 15:27 | | Subject: | Re: Bricklink advice to European sellers on custo | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, snarf1974 writes:
| | Hello,
Not sure this is the correct forum to post this but I think a lot of European
sellers are missing out on sales as they are charging unnecessary costs for postage
related to customs fees.
I have been in discussion with a number of French and German sellers who were
unaware that their local post offices provide a customs form sticker which just
like the UK equivalent can be obtained for free from the post office and comes
in the form of a sticker which you attach to your package for customs.
Bricklinks advice on customs forms may be incorrect as all the information that
customs in the Uk and the EU can be written on these official customs stickers,
you do not need to add and waste paper adding it to packages.
I have attached a picture of the UK customs sticker
Regards
Christiann
|
The usage of CN22 and CN23 forms is basic practise and well known amongst sellers.
Probably the ones you talked to are just making excuses for charging high postage
fees. Some sellers even charge fees for making 0% VAT intracommunity invoices,
even though that's just supposed to be part of selling.
However, AFAIK all of this is pretty much a thing of the past since the new global
postal system was introduced in 2019 and this is now mostly happening digitally.
I still have a whole pile of both CN22's and CN23's that I will probably
just have to throw away...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2021 03:47 | | Subject: | Re: order uit Japan | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, patriekske writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Heb weer een bestelling uit Japan. Order 20 cent, verzendkosten € 2,49, totaal
€2,69 met PayPal betaald. WOW!
Het adres beslaat 6 regels en geen van deze kan ik koppelen aan de velden die
ik op postnl moet invoeren, zoals:
- postcode
- straatnaam
- huisnummer
- plaatsnaam
- provincie of regio
Ik heb de besteller (op dat moment 0 FB, nu 3) gevraagd om aanvullende gegevens
gevraagd: wat is wat in jouw 6 adresregels, maar na 36 uur nog niets gehoord.
Vraag aan verkopers die hier ervaring mee hebben: hoe hebben jullie de ingewikkelde
Japanse adressen vertaald naar de velden die je op postnl moet invullen? Zie
screenshots van het adres en van postnl.
Ik moet ook een telefoonnummer invoeren maar de koper heeft dat niet ingevoerd.
Overigens: Ik hoef geen advies over hoe ik mijn minimum orderwaarde enz. kan
tweaken, dat weet ik wel. Maar ik heb Japan wel meteen van mijn lijst geschrapt,
want dit is niet de eerste keer dat ik een dergelijke order krijg uit het land
van rijzende zon maar dalende winsten. Neem dat laatste met een knipoog
|
Bedenk als eerste dat het adres van onder naar boven staat genoteerd.
Vanuit je screenshot:
postcode
regio
plaats
straat (met huisnummer er voor, maar die plak ik meestal samen in het straat
veld, ook bij andere landen)
Gebouw naam (tenminste daar zou ik neerzetten).
Wat je voor alle zekerheid kunt doen is een 2e etiket er op plakken met naam
en hele adres zoals het door de klant is aangeleverd.
Telefoonnummer is overigens niet persé nodig, een mail adres kan ook
|
doe ik inderdaad ook altijd gewoon een copy paste van het adres zoals in bricklink
is opgegeven door de koper.
dat zet ik op een dymo label en plak het over de uitdraai van postnl heen of
los op de enveloppe erbij
|
Ik vraag me af in hoeverre de tekst op de envelop uberhaupt enige waarde heeft?
De lettertjes zijn superklein en soms nauwelijks leesbaar. Ik kan me goed voorstellen
dat de gegevens gewoon uitgelezen worden via de barcode en wat er fysiek op het
label staat niet eens bekeken wordt, maargoed, ik weet het niet...
|
Je moet een CN22/23 ook niet op een 89*36 etiket printen
Ik denk dat de barcode weinig doet, alleen voor PostNL wordt het volgens mij
gebruikt om het land van bestemming te bepalen. Ik geloof niet dat de code voor
de rest wordt gedeeld met andere posterijen. Als je soms ziet wat er aan extra
etiketten (met daarop de nodige fouten) op komt in het buitenland (Europa) dan
zou dat niet hoeven als de barcode zou worden gedeeld vanuit PostNL
|
Hmm, nou, Duitsland bijvoorbeeld lijkt alleen nog voorgemelde zendingen toe te
laten. Amerika geloof ik ook. Volgensmij is het dus een centraal digitaal systeem
en wordt zo'n code wel degelijk uitgelezen in het bestemmingsland. (Alleen
lijken veel landen in de praktijk misschien niet zo'n interesse te hebben
in het systeem, dus die gebruiken dan misschien wel het etiket) Ik kan me voorstellen
dat als het aankomt op JFK airport ze bijvoorbeeld en masse de codes scannen
en een algoritme bekijkt wat erin zit en het matcht met röntgenscans van de zendingen
enzo (of dat ze dat in de toekomst gaan doen). Er is niet echt een reden om elk
label van elke zending helemaal handmatig te lezen als je alle informatie netjes
digitaal hebt, in elk geval niet in de depots.
Ik weet niet.... ik zou vanuit programmeursgewoonte nooit A invoeren en de uitkomst
daarna met B overschrijven door er iets overheen te plakken.... straks krijg
je mismatch of ambiguiteit. Laat staan te weinig invoeren. Iets erbij plakken
voor de bezorger kan natuurlijk nooit kwaad
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 6, 2021 07:15 | | Subject: | Re: order uit Japan | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, patriekske writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Heb weer een bestelling uit Japan. Order 20 cent, verzendkosten € 2,49, totaal
€2,69 met PayPal betaald. WOW!
Het adres beslaat 6 regels en geen van deze kan ik koppelen aan de velden die
ik op postnl moet invoeren, zoals:
- postcode
- straatnaam
- huisnummer
- plaatsnaam
- provincie of regio
Ik heb de besteller (op dat moment 0 FB, nu 3) gevraagd om aanvullende gegevens
gevraagd: wat is wat in jouw 6 adresregels, maar na 36 uur nog niets gehoord.
Vraag aan verkopers die hier ervaring mee hebben: hoe hebben jullie de ingewikkelde
Japanse adressen vertaald naar de velden die je op postnl moet invullen? Zie
screenshots van het adres en van postnl.
Ik moet ook een telefoonnummer invoeren maar de koper heeft dat niet ingevoerd.
Overigens: Ik hoef geen advies over hoe ik mijn minimum orderwaarde enz. kan
tweaken, dat weet ik wel. Maar ik heb Japan wel meteen van mijn lijst geschrapt,
want dit is niet de eerste keer dat ik een dergelijke order krijg uit het land
van rijzende zon maar dalende winsten. Neem dat laatste met een knipoog
|
Bedenk als eerste dat het adres van onder naar boven staat genoteerd.
Vanuit je screenshot:
postcode
regio
plaats
straat (met huisnummer er voor, maar die plak ik meestal samen in het straat
veld, ook bij andere landen)
Gebouw naam (tenminste daar zou ik neerzetten).
Wat je voor alle zekerheid kunt doen is een 2e etiket er op plakken met naam
en hele adres zoals het door de klant is aangeleverd.
Telefoonnummer is overigens niet persé nodig, een mail adres kan ook
|
doe ik inderdaad ook altijd gewoon een copy paste van het adres zoals in bricklink
is opgegeven door de koper.
dat zet ik op een dymo label en plak het over de uitdraai van postnl heen of
los op de enveloppe erbij
|
Ik vraag me af in hoeverre de tekst op de envelop uberhaupt enige waarde heeft?
De lettertjes zijn superklein en soms nauwelijks leesbaar. Ik kan me goed voorstellen
dat de gegevens gewoon uitgelezen worden via de barcode en wat er fysiek op het
label staat niet eens bekeken wordt, maargoed, ik weet het niet...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2021 17:54 | | Subject: | Re: Can we talk about set 6087 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, runner.caller writes:
| | In General, Teup writes:
| |
As a kid staring at the 1997 catalog, I always wondered...
What even is this?!
Not sure if this BURPfest is supposed to be a castle (it's completely open
on one side) or some kind of mountain ambush, but anyway... what is that black
thing sticking out behind it (on the catalog image)?
And I always wondered: Is the witch with the bat knights or against
them? In my catalog they seem to have a rivalry but it seems the knights are..
guarding this thing?
And what's that dark forest guy doing in the midst of this? (not that we
can even know it's a dark forest guy unless you live in the US, since that's
the only place where the dark forest sets were released - why even?). Is he guarding
this thing, or is he getting crushed under a rock? That's kind of a difference
you know!
And why is there a dragon flying around aimlessly? Or rather: Why does the witch
have a... helicopter? I mean, if there's literally a dragon right there to
fly around on...
And just the scene in general on the box art.. all figures are just running random
directions, someone shoots an arrow at a rock, everyone is too busy to even pay
attention to the scary skeleton. As a kid I had no idea what I was looking at!
I wonder if LEGO even knew what they were doing here? Maybe the worst castle
set ever made? Seems to me that 1997 is the year that things started to become
weird...
|
O.M.G. This is a gold review! Hilarious.
Haha, I actually had this as a child and it was my biggest set until I bought
Amazon Ancient Ruins on clearance.
|
My first impulse is.. pity.. but I am glad you liked it
| | The forest guy would get trapped in the hollow space between the two LURPS.
I seem to remember some literature billing it as a "secret dungeon" Not sure
how they'd ever lift it off of him though. Maybe tie the chain to the dragon?
|
That sounds odd..
"Ha ha, we trapped you in a rock!" "You wish... I'm in a secret dungeon now!
Wow, it's full of gold!"
| |
Also, the other "jail" felt so lazy with the fence piece thing covering like
half of the opening.
|
Yes, and when you close it, you no longer have a fence on that side. I guess
the logic is that when you catch the intruder, you no longer need a fence? Gee,
the deeper I think about this set, the more it becomes a piece of art
| | Also, the black posts that the lurps slide in don't make any sense either.
What castle faction took the time to forge those, then chisel a space out up
in the mountains to set those in so that they could slide a rock up and down?
The secret rock dungeon is also a door? Also, are they chilling on grass up there?
Childhood me proceeded to lose the BURPS very early on so I could never rebuild
it until I was about 24, I found them in a duplo bin in storage.
|
Hm yes, without those you don't have much left 
I just checked this review, it's hilarious, his confusion/disappointment
is just exactly how I felt https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOMh7PnnVrE
(There's also a speechless review on Youtube - I thought it meant the guy
was speechless about it, but it's just literally a review without speech
)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2021 17:40 | | Subject: | Re: Can we talk about set 6087 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, Teup writes:
| | […]
Okay, I just read some info about this faction and seems the witch belongs
with the rest of the gang - ok, so the dark forest guy is the intruder here,
and the rest defends the "castle" - it makes slightly more sense now In the
Dutch catalog, the knights are portrayed as the enemies of the witch, and I always
assumed the dark forest guy was her bodyguard or slave or something. Bit of a
weird battle: a witch in a helicopter and a sidekick without armor who appears
out of a rock, surrounded by an army...
|
I’ve never seen backstories in the French catalogues I had.
I had only access to this type of catalogues:
I just dug that one out (the last I got) and there’s no story in it. The only
thing there’s in there is the mention of “white space” and “black space” (litterally!)
for the new Space Police sets.
Was there more in yours?
|
Ah, '89 is when the stories kicked in I guess In '88 Blacktron was
still just "space sets but now in black". But in '89 it was decided they
had to be bad guys (Blacktron lives didn't matter anymore). Yes, we always
had some descriptions in them, like about the motives of the pirate captain and
the governor, space police, that M:tron is a rescue and repair faction (in spite
of what American AFOLs think!! ), things like that.. hmm, it doesn't say
much in the 1997 one, but it has a maze with a description saying the Bat Lord
is trying to steal the witch's treasure in the cave. And they appear kind
of pitted against each other in the pictures (except for the main castle where
she has a room with magical things, but it could be the Bat Lord's room that
she's just raiding )
| |
Anyway, even if there had been, I think I’d just have taken them as commercial
blah: my LEGO, my stories
|
I didn't care about official sets at all, but I did insist my MOCs be lore-correct
| | | | […]
| | Nah, to me, LEGO jumped the BURP sharks around 1990… justifying my entering in
my dark ages
|
Hey, BURPs came in 1992, and even that year it was fine.. And in 1993... well...
a dragon's den has to be a dragon's den...
|
I meant more BigPieces than actual BURPs: raised baseplates, space panels (okay,
those were somewhat cool… or would have been if sets weren’t only made of
two big panels and three antennas), and already castle panels a few years before,
or also the stupid and ugly gimmicks like Light & Sound (a tiny blinking light,
a tweeter and a battery box big as a house, really?).
|
Ohhh I LOVE raised baseplates They really spark imagination and a different
kind of building approach - flat is just flat, empty canvas, you quickly end
up with boring regular floor layers like an apartment building... when you build
on a raised baseplate you always get something unpredictable Especially if
you connect them to flat baseplates or other raised baseplates!
| |
, what’s that? A flatiron? Its underside is not smooth enough!
|
I got that one for christmas, so I don't care what you say about it! And
I don't care it comes with 5 windscreens
| |
Also, I don’t know if it was all France or just me in my small town but LEGO
were (expensive, but that’s a given,) hard to find and always late, at least
a year late. The time I knew about Futuron, it was already over.
Anyway, lots of good reasons to dump LEGO back then
|
Whoa, here it was right on time and what I liked a lot was that it remained in
stores for several years. I think I bought the big M:tron wagon like 4 or 5 years
after it was released (after drooling over it since 1990). Same with the Futuron
monorail. I loved how space and castle where just continuing universes, rather
than just new line after new line, or reboot after reboot, with all the good
guys and bad guys baked into the sets. Back then there was something to love
and hold on to, now you just get bombarded with endless numbers of new product
lines every 6 months... which is great for my shop though in terms of stock variation
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2021 15:35 | | Subject: | Re: Can we talk about set 6087 | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, Teup writes:
| | what is that black
thing sticking out behind it (on the catalog image)?
|
An error from the graphist?
As far as I can see in the instructions, it’s not in the built set….
|
Yeah seems so, I'm still curious what it could be!
| | | | And just the scene in general on the box art.. all figures are just running random
directions, someone shoots an arrow at a rock, everyone is too busy to even pay
attention to the scary skeleton. As a kid I had no idea what I was looking at!
|
Looks like either it’s a Battle Royale: each for their own, or everybody is fleeing
the united attack from the witch and her dragon (yeah, that’s a contradiction
to what I said abode ).
The dragon seems to be trying to burn the chain that maintains the hanging rock.
The witch is swooping down to throw spells and curses.
And the skeletton is unhappy of having been awaken by all this mess.
So, maybe the “normal” humans (the black forest guy being a local guide) tried
to loot the witch’s lair while she was away but she was not far enough or not
for long enough?
|
Okay, I just read some info about this faction and seems the witch belongs
with the rest of the gang - ok, so the dark forest guy is the intruder here,
and the rest defends the "castle" - it makes slightly more sense now In the
Dutch catalog, the knights are portrayed as the enemies of the witch, and I always
assumed the dark forest guy was her bodyguard or slave or something. Bit of a
weird battle: a witch in a helicopter and a sidekick without armor who appears
out of a rock, surrounded by an army...
| | | | I wonder if LEGO even knew what they were doing here? Maybe the worst castle
set ever made? Seems to me that 1997 is the year that things started to become
weird...
|
Nah, to me, LEGO jumped the BURP sharks around 1990… justifying my entering in
my dark ages
|
Hey, BURPs came in 1992, and even that year it was fine.. And in 1993... well...
a dragon's den has to be a dragon's den...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2021 13:50 | | Subject: | Can we talk about set 6087 | | Viewed: | 178 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
|
As a kid staring at the 1997 catalog, I always wondered...
What even is this?!
Not sure if this BURPfest is supposed to be a castle (it's completely open
on one side) or some kind of mountain ambush, but anyway... what is that black
thing sticking out behind it (on the catalog image)?
And I always wondered: Is the witch with the bat knights or against
them? In my catalog they seem to have a rivalry but it seems the knights are..
guarding this thing?
And what's that dark forest guy doing in the midst of this? (not that we
can even know it's a dark forest guy unless you live in the US, since that's
the only place where the dark forest sets were released - why even?). Is he guarding
this thing, or is he getting crushed under a rock? That's kind of a difference
you know!
And why is there a dragon flying around aimlessly? Or rather: Why does the witch
have a... helicopter? I mean, if there's literally a dragon right there to
fly around on...
And just the scene in general on the box art.. all figures are just running random
directions, someone shoots an arrow at a rock, everyone is too busy to even pay
attention to the scary skeleton. As a kid I had no idea what I was looking at!
I wonder if LEGO even knew what they were doing here? Maybe the worst castle
set ever made? Seems to me that 1997 is the year that things started to become
weird...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2021 12:14 | | Subject: | Re: Experience in parting CMF ? | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Brick_Qc writes:
| | Hi, I'm getting my hands on a couple of series 18-19 sealed CMF boxes and
a DC sealed box. I never had CMFs before.
I see the sealed boxes would fetch a nice price, but would it be worthwhile to
part the CMFs ?
I'm not sure I can get more bang for my buck if I sell the minifigs and accesories
separately.
Time isn't an issue.
Any input would be appreciated.
|
I've always parted them out, it's not a lot of work if you consider the
value per piece. And easy in terms of storage. Then again, if everyone recommends
you to part them out, then don't. It pays best to be unique
And if you wait a few years with it, prices will go up up up
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 4, 2021 13:25 | | Subject: | Re: VAT double charged (continued) -> Admin?? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Erkiles writes:
| | There are already a few threads out there regarding this issue (https://www.bricklink.com/messageList.asp?nID=&q=VAT&qS=Y&qM=Y&v=c&max=20&mTP=Y)
and I now finally know what is causing European buyers to pay VAT twice on their
non-European orders.
The "customs invoice" sellers are asked by BL to include in their parcels does
NOT mention the IOSS nr of Bricklink.
To Customs this simply means no VAT has been paid. Only, and ONLY when
a valid IOSS nr is mentioned in the customs declaration will it be accepted that
VAT payment has already been fulfilled.
I cannot imagine other e-commerce platforms are failing to ignore such a blatant
omission, otherwise we (Customs) would see a 90% decline in international orders
(which is clearly not the case).
I can however imagine international trade on Bricklink is heavily suffering from
this.
Could the people responsible correct this so the Bricklink IOSS nr is mentioned
in the customs invoice? It should be mentioned on the customs declaration on
the outside of the package as well btw.
If people keep being asked to pay VAT twice they will eventually turn to other
platforms to fulfill their Lego needs.
Erikk
|
Strange, the invoices to the UK do mention the UK VAT ID (if I understood correctly
there is no separate IOSS number). I wonder if UK buyers have the double tax
problem or not?
|
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 3, 2021 18:31 | | Subject: | Re: Do you sort Lego in bulk? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, yorbrick writes:
| | In General, pitz8008 writes:
| | In General, popsicle writes:
| | My son showed me this the other day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN4hL0uuTUY
I initially thought “what a great idea!” to then quickly wonder if it’s a very
useful one. We’ve only ever sorted Lego from new set part-outs, and in that regard
I can’t see it’s usefulness. Though I do appreciate the build and design.
Those of you that sort Lego in bulk, would you find it useful? Is it something
you’d use in your business or hobby?
Just curious
|
All of these lego sorters always look like the dumbest thing in the world to
me.
|
They don't do a very good job at sorting, but not bad at pre sorting by size.
Of course there is still the job of sorting everything by hand. Presumably pre
sorting like this does mean there will be a narrower range of parts in each batch,
so less pots needed when doing the manual sort.
|
Even for pre-sorting I'm really sceptical - I expect you will always have
overlap between the segments of parts that "kind of" fit through the holes, and
only part of them made it through. Which means all segments end up overlapping
each other, and that kind of defeats the point of presorting as far as I can
see.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 3, 2021 13:02 | | Subject: | Re: It is just one of those days | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, calsbricks writes:
| | Just looked at the major sellers in usa and europe - but to buy from usa I think
I am going to pay sales tax, and import duty and a handling fee and a similar
situation from EU.
I know the lawmakers were after the Amazons of the world but is it really necessary
to clobber the 'bit players' in this way.
This saga has shown us it is no longer viable to buy outside the UK and I am
sure lots of others see it that way as well.
|
This isn't about targeting either Amazon or small fish. The consumers
are the ones who have to pay taxes. We are just the ones who are tasked with
making that happen. That's part of the "deal" we made when we registered
as businesses.
I don't like the amount of extra administration I will be facing (when selling
over €10000 to EU countries particularly) but I understand these things are part
of the natural evolution of ecommerce. The thresholds of the past are no longer
feasible today, considering how much people buy online these days.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 3, 2021 10:25 | | Subject: | Re: Has the number of D2C sets affected sales? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
|
| In Buying, Kinggregus writes:
| | Lego released this year an incredible number of Direct to Consumer sets. I was
wondering if this has affected the price or number of sales of older sets?
|
My supplier sells those sets along the rest of the range, do for me it's
just business as usual.
Besides, I noticed things being called "D2C" that are just normal sets available
through the regular retail channels, such as the Ninjago City Gardens.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 3, 2021 03:31 | | Subject: | Re: Assemble New Mini Figures? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, yorbrick writes:
| | In General, MiniFigKen writes:
| | In General, yorbrick writes:
| | In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, infinibrix writes:
| | […]
There is no need to go to the trouble of stating ‘Assembled’ as the minifigure
photos in the catalog already show the minifigs assembled and so it should come
as no real surprise to people to find that they may arrive this way
|
|
There is a need, it is so buyers are clear what they will receive. Just like
if a box is damaged, it is good practice to warn a buyer so they are not unhappy
when received. I have a number of sellers as least favourites as they sent an
order with minifigures already built without noting this. If a seller chooses
to build them first it is fine, just inform buyers.
|
Makes sense...I guess you can say New Built (NB) or New Not Built (NNB). Thank
you.
|
There is already a listing choice for new vs used, so just assembled or not assembled
is all you really need to add. Just saying what you do in your terms is fine,
so customers can decide before ordering, if it is important to them.
|
Just as a bit of info to everyone - in my 15 years of selling, I've never
once heard a buyer complain or mention disappointment about the fact the new
figure they received was assembled. Not that you would always hear it if there
would be, but over the years I have seen comments about many different kinds
of aspects of my store, either in messages or in feedback.. but not about that.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 2, 2021 16:51 | | Subject: | Re: Can not change Order Status from "Packed" | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, BasKrie writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Teup writes:
| | In Technical Issues, novabrick writes:
| | In Technical Issues, BricksGazette writes:
| | Greetings!
One of the current orders in my store is perpetually stuck in the "Packed" status.
I has been invoiced manually and payed over the provided PayPal adress.
Then I changed the status to "Packed" and later wanted to change it to "Shipped".
But it won't let me. While the order is on its way and should reach the customer
soon, I do worry about the optics of perpetually packed order, as I as a costumer
would be confused.
Please Help?
Sincerely
Noah P. Z.
BricksGazette
|
Switch it to Paid first. Then you can put it on shipped.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Lol, Bricklink still didn't fix this... that plan to make order statuses
more streamlined really worked out very well
|
How is there a fix for this?
Paying with offsite method, there is no way for BL to know that an order has
been paid, hence the status won't change.
So as far as I can tell, this is working as intended (whether sellers like it
is another thing)
|
I was referring to this issue that you need to change it to a different status
first in order to unlock others. From a UI perspective it's an absolute sin
to make options available only after you've picked an option that you did
not want to pick
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 2, 2021 14:44 | | Subject: | Re: cant loadprices via bricksync and brickstore | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, ShipABrick writes:
| | see unfortunately, I dont know what that means. I dont know what a path is on
a computer. I probably should have kept dating that computer dude I was dating
|
Oops Paths is a pretty fundamental principle. Maybe sign up for a course?
Knowing - no offense - this little about computers in the modern age could make
you vulnerable if something goes wrong or some other situation arises where you
need to improvise. Knowing the ropes a little is probably more than worth your
time!
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 2, 2021 14:25 | | Subject: | Re: cant loadprices via bricksync and brickstore | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, ShipABrick writes:
| | this is the first time ive done it via brickstore but I think I did it correctly.
I updated my prices on brickstore, saved as a bsx file. opened bricksync and
put the updated bsx file into the bricksync file, typed loadprices today.bsx
into bricksync but I get this:
11:38:40 LOG: User command "loadprices today.bsx"
11:38:40 ERROR: We failed to load a BSX file at path "today.bsx".
11:38:40 INFO: Current working directory is: "C:\Users\Owner\Desktop\bricksync-win64".
I wasnt great at it when it was brickstock, now twould seem im even worse. please
help
sherry
|
You could try typing the full path of the file in the command, rather than only
the name.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2021 16:27 | | Subject: | Re: Seller insists couldn't have sent wrong part | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, crimson30 writes:
| | To be fair, there are just lots of shady people on this platform. It's quite
a contrast with my dealings on little-e as a seller and a prolific buyer.
Thing is... if I put myself in the shoes of the seller, I'm not sure how
I wouldn't realize the mistake. Surely I would figure out what I did wrong...?
|
Well, I think the forum kind of skews reality because you only get to see the
bad stuff. I've sent out thousands of untracked orders and as far as I know,
nobody tried to pull my leg, even though it would have been extremely easy to
do so.
It's nice that you're trying to be understanding, but I think you deserve
better than to have to waste time on seeing the seller's perspective. It's
not your problem that the seller doesn't realise it. Imagine the customer
service of a large professional webstore replying "well probably you're trying
to scam us"... it's pretty wild. Sure a seller may have suspicions, but if
they feel scamming is a significant issue, then they should take measures (such
as taking pictures of all orders before sending them). If they don't
believe scamming is a significant issue, then they have to believe the customer.
It's either the one or the other.. "I'm not checking anything, but if
you say something is wrong, then I will assume I did it right" is not really
a fair policy
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2021 15:58 | | Subject: | Re: Seller insists couldn't have sent wrong part | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, crimson30 writes:
| | "accusing" is not the most accurate word... perhaps "suggesting"
|
What a rubbish paranoid seller. You could make exactly the same accusation about
him, plus the fact that he really did send the wrong part.
This is really like standing in an elevator with 1 other person and insisting
that you were not the one who farted.
You can consider starting an NSS if you consider it important enough. Not shipping
part of an order also counts as an NSS. It would at least protect you against
receiving another copy of those 'suggestions' in a negative feedback
post against you.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2021 12:34 | | Subject: | Re: Pot vs bucket | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | So... the pot has been moved to utensil, but the buckets are still container
(as well as the handle for both).. may I ask why
|
This has now been completed per https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
|
Thanks!
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2021 08:36 | | Subject: | Re: Can not change Order Status from "Packed" | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, novabrick writes:
| | In Technical Issues, BricksGazette writes:
| | Greetings!
One of the current orders in my store is perpetually stuck in the "Packed" status.
I has been invoiced manually and payed over the provided PayPal adress.
Then I changed the status to "Packed" and later wanted to change it to "Shipped".
But it won't let me. While the order is on its way and should reach the customer
soon, I do worry about the optics of perpetually packed order, as I as a costumer
would be confused.
Please Help?
Sincerely
Noah P. Z.
BricksGazette
|
Switch it to Paid first. Then you can put it on shipped.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Lol, Bricklink still didn't fix this... that plan to make order statuses
more streamlined really worked out very well
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2021 12:33 | | Subject: | Re: 40107-1 how many ice skates (93555)? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, xdennisma writes:
| | Hi,
I would like to see if anyone can confirm how many of the 93555 Flat Silver Ice
Skates are in set 40107-1.
The constructed image with the set shows that there should be 4x (2x on minifig
hol052, 2x loose to the side of the rink), yet the image on the instructions
and on the box only shows 2x in total (to the side of the rink, not on hol052.)
The set inventory shows 2x 93555 included, while the minifigure inventory for
hol052 also has the 2x 93555 listed.
I bought this set locally, used, on the weekend from a reputable adult collector,
and it only has 2x skates included.
Thank you!
Dennis
|
Review op brickset also has 4
https://brickset.com/article/13071/review-40107-ice-skating
It should be 4, or 5 with extra parts included.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2021 08:34 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer wants to cancel order due to shipping.. | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, rainbowmist writes:
| | Ok. A buyer wants to cancel an order of 625 parts due to the high shipping cost.
I spent almost 2 hours finding the parts. How is this fair? I don't make
the shipping fees from the post office. If I leave them a negative they will
most likely leave me a negative too. I even state in my terms "please ask about
shipping before placing an order". Does anybody read anymore or have time to
ask questions? Any thoughts?
|
That's a pain, yes. Buyers can cancel anytime, that's life. To avoid
this problem, remove the need to pack the order first from your shipping cost
calculation routine. Either by enabling instant checkout, or by simplifying your
shipping rates so that you can quote or invoice the buyer based on a simple calculation
without needing to pack anything (and possibly eliminating the need for buyers
to ask for it - or to be surprised by it - in the first place).
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 29, 2021 18:20 | | Subject: | Re: Double charged VAT | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Problem | |
|
| In Problem, woodelf writes:
| | In Problem, Teup writes:
| | IMO the seller should pay up. It was their mistake. It is the seller's responsibility
to ship correctly, and it includes this. If sellers don't know about it,
they shouldn't be shipping to the EU.
Hopefully the seller will realise this, refund your extra costs and improve their
shipping procedure.
|
Can you clarify what "ship correctly" means, exactly? Now I'm worried I've
been causing problems for my recipients, though none have complained to me.
When I receive an EU purchase, there's a note that says "An order receipt,
along with your customs invoice, should be included on your parcel for efficient
processing at the customs office." Since normally with international mail from
the US, all documents other than the customs form (which is part of the mailing
label) are put inside the parcel, that's what I've been doing.
But now I'm wondering if by "on" they mean it should be taped to the outside
of the package? Does it need to be removable? Should it be taped on in such
a way that it's not casually readable, or precisely so that it can
be read without removing it? Do I need to get some of those little clear adhesive
document pouches?
And the Bricklink instructions say that the IOSS number should never be written
on the package, but then also say to write the IOSS number on the customs form...which
is taped to the outside of the package, for all the world to read. I kinda feel
like whoever wrote those instructions has never actually mailed something international
from the US (or, at least, not in the last ~decade, since the forms went electronic).
|
Good questions really, as Sylvain said I think yes, it should be on the outside.
However, 1. Many orders are shipped in padded envelopes, I guess they might as
well open those? and 2. The customs forms have a specification for what kind
of shipment it is and, if commercial, whether it contains an invoice. You would
think that if it's written in the official fields, visible on the outside
of the shipment, that there's an invoice inside, they should open the package
and refer to it first before deciding to tag on VAT (if that is at all how it
works..). Otherwise, what's even the point of having to specify that information.
Anyway this is just my speculation, I am not sure either and therefore I've
discontinued shipping to the UK for orders where BL handles the VAT. Besides,
I don't have a printer anyway
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 28, 2021 11:40 | | Subject: | Re: Package returned to sender: refund or not? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, wyldkat1976 writes:
| | Hi
Everybody as already answered the basic points, but one thing to bare in mind
for future orders. If the buyer insists on not paying the extra for tracked and
insured and it is a biggish order, agree and then pay the extra few Euros yourself
and still send it tracked and insured. It may cost you a few Euros extra, but
trying to force the buyer to pay insured if they do not want to usually ends
in the buyer cancelling the order and you lose the whole profit from a big order
rather than a few Euros in extra shipping. Also it protects you against claims
and is also proof of the whole journey of the shipping and is needed for any
claims in paypal or disputes. It also scuppers scam buyers as they think you
are sending it uninsured, and if you do they will receive the item with no tracking
and just claim it hasn't arrived, whereas they cannot make this claim if
there is traceable trail. A few extra Euros at the start is always better than
a lot further down the line.
Kev
|
Actually, in situations like these it's an advantage not to have any
insurance. Without insurance it's possible to deliver it to the neighbours
(although seems this time they didn't do that), so there would have been
a bigger chance the order got delivered even when the buyer wasn't home,
because it doesn't require a signature.
(Of course, you can't know in advance the buyer won't be home, so it's
kind of captain hindsight)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 28, 2021 04:44 | | Subject: | Re: Package returned to sender: refund or not? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, Schenkel writes:
| | Hi all,
I have an issue with a customer: the package he bought was returned to me after
shipping, because the buyer was not at home when the delivery service offered
the package (3 times they tried). I want to resend the package to him and even
offered to pay 50% of the shipping costs for this second time. He states it is
not his fault the package was returned (however; the package was shipped without
insurance). Now the buyer wants a refund and cancel the order, because he does
not want to pay for any extra shipping costs.
Since it was a big order, I don't want to cancel or refund the order. And
I will definitely not pay back the shipping costs. What are your thoughts about
this? How should I proceed?
In general: when a buyer chooses a cheap shipment (without insurance) and anything
goes wrong (for example; the package got lost); it is not my responsibility,
is it?
Last thoughts: you don't want negative reviews/ratings of your store, but
what to do when a customer is just unreasonable?
Let me know what you think or your experiences were! I am very curious...
|
That's annoying, yes, and the customer does not have a right to free shipping
if they messed up the first time. After all, how long can that go on? Who's
to say the same thing won't happen 10x?
Looking at their perspective, it feels a bit like extortion and hard to believe
that someone would actually cancel a big order over a few euros. Maybe they spent
an hour compiling it, they were counting on having those parts, and now they
are going to throw all of that away over a few euros? Really?
I would refuse, because it's their fault, and because I think it's bluff.
|
By the way,
| | | | In general: when a buyer chooses a cheap shipment (without insurance) and anything
goes wrong (for example; the package got lost); it is not my responsibility,
is it?
|
|
It is. But there's a difference between a fault in the mail (which is under
your responsibility as you contracted that service) or a fault made by the customer,
such as a wrong address or not opening the door.
| | | | Last thoughts: you don't want negative reviews/ratings of your store, but
what to do when a customer is just unreasonable?
|
|
If the buyer wants to cancel in such an unreasonable way, you could debate if
that makes someone a non-paying buyer (you are immune to feedback from non-paying
buyers).
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 28, 2021 04:41 | | Subject: | Re: Package returned to sender: refund or not? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Schenkel writes:
| | Hi all,
I have an issue with a customer: the package he bought was returned to me after
shipping, because the buyer was not at home when the delivery service offered
the package (3 times they tried). I want to resend the package to him and even
offered to pay 50% of the shipping costs for this second time. He states it is
not his fault the package was returned (however; the package was shipped without
insurance). Now the buyer wants a refund and cancel the order, because he does
not want to pay for any extra shipping costs.
Since it was a big order, I don't want to cancel or refund the order. And
I will definitely not pay back the shipping costs. What are your thoughts about
this? How should I proceed?
In general: when a buyer chooses a cheap shipment (without insurance) and anything
goes wrong (for example; the package got lost); it is not my responsibility,
is it?
Last thoughts: you don't want negative reviews/ratings of your store, but
what to do when a customer is just unreasonable?
Let me know what you think or your experiences were! I am very curious...
|
That's annoying, yes, and the customer does not have a right to free shipping
if they messed up the first time. After all, how long can that go on? Who's
to say the same thing won't happen 10x?
Looking at their perspective, it feels a bit like extortion and hard to believe
that someone would actually cancel a big order over a few euros. Maybe they spent
an hour compiling it, they were counting on having those parts, and now they
are going to throw all of that away over a few euros? Really?
I would refuse, because it's their fault, and because I think it's bluff.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 27, 2021 10:31 | | Subject: | Re: Vat charges to EU customer | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, SylvainLS writes:
| | In General, rathdolcu writes:
| | Have had an order come through from Spain I'm an Australian seller.
The order is for AUD $5.62 and shipping is about AUD $26.40.
Bricklink are collecting AUD $6.91 in VAT??!!! How is the vat greater than the
parts? Surely you don't pay tax on the shipping as well? Is this an error
from bricklink.
Customer has paid the invoice but it doesn't seem correct to me.
Anyone able to shed light?
|
No, it’s correct. Shipping is a service that adds value to the product, therefore
the Added Value is Taxed (VAT).
There’s some rules INSIDE EU that allow to not have VAT on shipping (when shipping
is clearly separated and at cost (i.e., it’s pure shipping, not shipping & handling))
but, AFAIK, they don’t apply to out-of-EU orders.
|
Actually the rule here is that the shipping rate has the same VAT percentage
as the thing you're invoicing for. If you're selling Lego, that'll
be 21% on the shipping rates, and if it will be books (not instruction booklets)
it will be 9%. The reason the tax agency here give for that, if I may be so free
to paraphrase, is that they are too lazy to check it all in detail.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 26, 2021 11:45 | | Subject: | Re: "Legal" for US seller to not ship to CA? | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, jfksdca writes:
| | The seller in question will ship to every state but CA? Is this allowed?
|
As long as he's not shipping to people living in CA and not people
born in CA, that's legal
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: Lost Order? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, anort23 writes:
| | Hi!
I submitted an order on August 7th from Germany to US. I still have not received
the order. Seller believes it is lost and says it was shipped. I have no reason
to not believe seller, took a while to get ahold of him but seems above board.
What are the normal expectations/actions in a situation like this?
Thanks!
|
The seller is probably right that the order is lost (as far as I know it should
be there within 2 weeks - my orders to the US usually take a few days), but he's
definitely wrong not sending you a full refund.
You can start an NSS to help motivate the seller a little bit to get you either
your Lego or your money back. Read about it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=110&q=nss
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 09:07 | | Subject: | Re: I thought you could add to "Ready" orders? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, kaat writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Teup writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Teup writes:
| | One of my customers added something to his order and it created a new order.
Even though the order was "ready". I thought it would always create a new batch
to the existing order, as long as the order isn't marked "packed"?
He first got a message saying that the value was lower than the minimum order
value, which I thought was already strange since it was supposed to be an addition.
I gave him the bypass password and it spawned a new order.
|
Thanks for the replies! Also, I switched off VAT for this order. Right now I'm
thinking it's probably either one of these two things:
Switching off VAT bars additions (I wouldn't know why though, if the transaction
is 0% VAT the amount should not matter) - or - having been set to 'packed'
permanently ruins the ability to add something even when the status is changed
back.
|
I checked a couple of orders that had this issue and I think it's indeed
when 0% VAT is selected on the order. Once that is selected, you cannot add a
new batch. This behaviour started from around the time that the VAT changes were
deployed. Hope that provides some hints to solve it
|
Thanks! If it started happening around that time, it must be a bug then. I will
report it
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 05:07 | | Subject: | Re: Nieuwe posttarieven (zakelijk) | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, paulvdb writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | Kijkend naar het tarievenboekje mis ik nogal veel landen. Ik vraag me dan ook
af wat de kosten naar die landen worden.
Ik zou verwachten dat voor bepaalde landen aparte tarieven zouden komen en er
dan nog kolommen zouden zijn voor overige EU1, EU2, Wereld.
Nu lijkt het er (naar mijn idee) op dat je naar bepaalde landen niet meer op
deze manier kunt gaan versturen.
Het wordt er in elk geval niet duidelijker op.
Misschien hier iemand die daar een idee over heeft?
|
Er staat boven dat de landen erbij staan als voorbeeld. Er moet ergens een compleet
overzicht zijn. Maar ik heb het idee dat dat nog niet gemaakt is, want er is
in elk geval niks te vinden op de plekken waar ze naar verwijzen. Maar in de
"bezorgtijd buitenland" lijst kun je zien dat onze geliefde buspakjes nog altijd
naar alle landen gaan - mits dat document is geupdate voor 2022, dat staat er
dan weer niet bij.
Verwacht dat er binnenkort wat meer info komt over die tarieven per land..
|
Van de landen die zijn vermeld wordt Duitsland dus het goedkoopst terwijl ons
andere buurland België vreemd genoeg samen met Frankrijk het duurst wordt van
de Europese landen.
|
Ik denk dat Nederland gewoon veel meer handel drijft met Duitsland dan België,
dus dat de partijen die die kant op gaan groter zijn, kleinere marginale kosten..
Denk dat ze bij de consumententarieven iets verzinnen wat eerlijk/logisch eruit
ziet, en zakelijk gewoon puur zoals het economisch uitkomt. Gelukkig verschilt
het niet al te veel en zijn de tarieven buiten Europa allemaal gelijk als ik
de beschrijving goed begrijp.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 24, 2021 03:44 | | Subject: | Re: Nieuwe posttarieven (zakelijk) | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | Kijkend naar het tarievenboekje mis ik nogal veel landen. Ik vraag me dan ook
af wat de kosten naar die landen worden.
Ik zou verwachten dat voor bepaalde landen aparte tarieven zouden komen en er
dan nog kolommen zouden zijn voor overige EU1, EU2, Wereld.
Nu lijkt het er (naar mijn idee) op dat je naar bepaalde landen niet meer op
deze manier kunt gaan versturen.
Het wordt er in elk geval niet duidelijker op.
Misschien hier iemand die daar een idee over heeft?
|
Er staat boven dat de landen erbij staan als voorbeeld. Er moet ergens een compleet
overzicht zijn. Maar ik heb het idee dat dat nog niet gemaakt is, want er is
in elk geval niks te vinden op de plekken waar ze naar verwijzen. Maar in de
"bezorgtijd buitenland" lijst kun je zien dat onze geliefde buspakjes nog altijd
naar alle landen gaan - mits dat document is geupdate voor 2022, dat staat er
dan weer niet bij.
Verwacht dat er binnenkort wat meer info komt over die tarieven per land..
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 17:09 | | Subject: | Re: I thought you could add to "Ready" orders? | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, Teup writes:
| | One of my customers added something to his order and it created a new order.
Even though the order was "ready". I thought it would always create a new batch
to the existing order, as long as the order isn't marked "packed"?
He first got a message saying that the value was lower than the minimum order
value, which I thought was already strange since it was supposed to be an addition.
I gave him the bypass password and it spawned a new order.
|
Thanks for the replies! Also, I switched off VAT for this order. Right now I'm
thinking it's probably either one of these two things:
Switching off VAT bars additions (I wouldn't know why though, if the transaction
is 0% VAT the amount should not matter) - or - having been set to 'packed'
permanently ruins the ability to add something even when the status is changed
back.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 16:55 | | Subject: | Re: I thought you could add to "Ready" orders? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| In Technical Issues, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Technical Issues, Teup writes:
| | One of my customers added something to his order and it created a new order.
Even though the order was "ready". I thought it would always create a new batch
to the existing order, as long as the order isn't marked "packed"?
He first got a message saying that the value was lower than the minimum order
value, which I thought was already strange since it was supposed to be an addition.
I gave him the bypass password and it spawned a new order.
|
Is the payment status on paid?
|
Well, the order was set to 'packed' at first (either I did it or my software
did, don't remember) but I changed it back to 'ready' when the buyer
said he couldn't make an addition. When I changed it to 'ready' the
grand total wasn't shown in bold, meaning he hadn't marked the order
as 'paid' and it should be a regular unpaid ready order.
Maybe having been set to packed at first ruined the ability to add something...
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 16:25 | | Subject: | I thought you could add to "Ready" orders? | | Viewed: | 128 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
|
| One of my customers added something to his order and it created a new order.
Even though the order was "ready". I thought it would always create a new batch
to the existing order, as long as the order isn't marked "packed"?
He first got a message saying that the value was lower than the minimum order
value, which I thought was already strange since it was supposed to be an addition.
I gave him the bypass password and it spawned a new order.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 13:38 | | Subject: | Re: order uit Japan | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, paulvdb writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | Hoe dat volgend jaar gaat worden is nog niet duidelijk. De zakelijke tarieven
gaan nogal veranderen, maar dat even terzijde.
|
Oh? Heb je wat meer info?
|
https://www.postnl.nl/tarieven/tarieven2022///
https://www.postnl.nl/Images/tarievenboekje-2022_tcm10-212709.pdf?version=1
Nieuw tarievenboekje. Is nog niet helemaal up-tp-date omdat nog niet alle tarieven
voor 2022 bekend zijn. Maar voor de zakelijk (bus)pakjes komen er verschillende
tarieven per land in plaats van de huidige tarieven die voor alle landen gelijk
zijn (voor buspakjes) of alleen onderscheid maken tussen Europa en Wereld (pakjes).
|
Ah, je was net iets sneller!
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 13:37 | | Subject: | Re: order uit Japan | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | Hoe dat volgend jaar gaat worden is nog niet duidelijk. De zakelijke tarieven
gaan nogal veranderen, maar dat even terzijde.
|
Oh? Heb je wat meer info?
|
Ah, laat maar - de tarieven van 2022 staan nu online!
https://www.postnl.nl/tarieven/tarieven2022/
Het volledige tarievenboekje:
https://www.postnl.nl/Images/tarievenboekje-2022_tcm10-212709.pdf?version=1
(Pagina 8)
Het is nu helemaal per land opgesplitst, in plaats van Europa en Wereld. Lastig
als je (zoals Leftoverbricks zo te zien ) graag precies wilt zijn. Voor de
rest verandert er niet gek veel, de tarieven van buspakjes gaan volgens hun wijzigingsoverzicht
gemiddeld met 4,4% omhoog.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2021 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: order uit Japan | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, BasKrie writes:
| | Hoe dat volgend jaar gaat worden is nog niet duidelijk. De zakelijke tarieven
gaan nogal veranderen, maar dat even terzijde.
|
Oh? Heb je wat meer info?
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2021 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: API failing to retrieve particular item | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Help | |
|
| In Help, carlwain74 writes:
| | In Help, carlwain74 writes:
| | In Help, Minifigforlife writes:
| | That item is a Gear not a Set.
Your API call will have to look it up in the Gear section.
|
It's a set and the set is Pirates Chess Set, Pirates III
Not sure how you determined it was a gear?
|
Sorry, I just went back and saw, it's been incorrectly classified in Bricklink.
So the API is fine, but the item itself is wrongly assigned as a gear and not
a set.
|
Well, that's just a decision. Things that are not regular lego sets are classified
as gear. Gears may or may not contain Lego parts. Even though this article happens
to be entirely made from Lego parts, it is still a different kind of item than
a Lego set - namely a board game. Its number is also not similar to that of the
regular Pirates III sets.
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2021 06:32 | | Subject: | Re: PayPal fees... | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | LANG Nederlands | |
|
| In LANG Nederlands, BlockBox writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, Teup writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, BlockBox writes:
| | In LANG Nederlands, TempleOfBricks writes:
| | Graag jullie mening met PayPal en eventuele Fees
Wat is volgens jullie als verkopende partij het meest optimale en eerlijke systeem
om te hanteren bij de verkoop als er met PayPal betaald wordt. Ik kopers niet
teveel laten betalen en ik wil er ook niet bij in schieten.
Alvast bedankt,
Alexander
|
Blijft lastig die Paypal transactie kosten, vooral bij kleine bestellingen. Standaard
plak ik er 6% paypal fee boven op en bij orders onder een bepaald bedrag handlings
kosten van 0.75 euro. Compenseert elkaar redelijk. Maar het blijft altijd wat
bijleggen helaas. IBAN altijd gratis. En IBAN is net zo snel tegenwoordig , in
onze shop heel het invoice systeem gaat compleet automatisch. Maar goed, helaas
weten klanten dat niet en paypal is ook een stukje gemak voor de klant natuurlijk.
|
Tja, dat is dus in ieder geval wat níet mag: Je mag nooit meer in rekening brengen
dan de feitelijke kosten van het betaalmiddel. Dat is de EU wetgeving. En met
6% zit je daar in veel gevallen dus wel boven.
Aangezien Bricklink geen manier ondersteunt om de exacte PayPal kosten te rekenen
zijn je enige opties om ofwel een korting te geven (van bijvoorbeeld 6%), of
om te zorgen dat je altijd minder in rekening brengt, bijvoorbeeld 3%. Of natuurlijk
het in de verzendkosten te verwerken die voor iedereen gelden ongeacht het betaalmiddel.
Bricklink is overigens al 2 jaar aan het proberen om betere betaalmethoden toe
te voegen, jammer alleen dat het tot dusver nog zonder resultaat is.
|
Tja zolang bricklink een verkrampt bagger systeem heeft met verzend- en betaalmethodes
doen we het gewoon zo. Ik zie dat jij met de verzendkosten speelt, ook een slimme
manier.
|
Precies, dat is 1 van de 3 opties - te veel transactiekosten rekenen niet. Maargoed
- mij maakt het verder allemaal niet uit, maar dan weet je in ieder geval dat
het officieel niet mag. Op dit moment treedt Bricklink er nog niet tegen op,
maar het zou kunnen veranderen. (Gek genoeg treden ze er alleen bij Amerikaanse
verkopers tegen op, klaarblijkelijk heeft PayPal ze ertoe gedwongen om dat te
doen)
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2021 06:23 | | Subject: | Re: currency POV | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Currency | |
|
| In Currency, Derk85 writes:
| | Hi there,
I would like to know the part out value of some of my sets.
Unfortunately the price guide only shows the POV in US dollars.
In my account settings the current value = euro's, so I'm not quite sure
why the part out value is shown in US dollars.
So I'm, wondering Is it because I'm only a buyer (not a seller)?
Any help would be appreciated!
Kind regards,
Mendy
|
As far as I know, yes. There is a 'store currency' setting which determines
it, and you can only access that setting as a seller.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Netherlands, Utrecht
![https://www.imgup.cz/images/2021/11/14/MINIFIGURE7bad8529e7e35e7d.png"](https://www.imgup.cz/images/2021/11/14/MINIFIGURE7bad8529e7e35e7d.png"){kind=link}