Asking for the 3% PayPal fee

I accept both credit cards and paypal. When I accecpt a credit card I am charged 1.75% and I get the money in my account in 48 hours. When I accept paypal they charge 3.0% and take 3 to 4 days to put money in my account. I have had a few paypal transactions take a week. I joined up with paypal when they first started and I don't recall anything in the user agreement about not charging the fees. Paypal/ Ebay is like WalMart, one day Paypal will be the largest financial institution in the world.

What makes paypal so special that they don't have to be competitive with their rates.
 
This is actually a great topic. I absolutely agree that if you have an online business and accept PayPal, you eat the 3% fee, just as you do with regular credit card charges, as others have said, its the cost of doing business. You are (hopefully) making profit on your sales which offset the fees you pay. BUT, if you are simply a knife nut who likes to sell a few of his knives so he can buy others, and you are not making any profit, in fact losing significant money on each sale, i really dont think its fair to say its the cost of doing business, the fact is, youre not doing "business" in any shape or form, you're selling at often a big loss, well below wholesale and that 3% just adds insult to injury.

As others have said, BOTH parties benefit from PayPal, the buyer gets his knife shipped much faster and gets to buy on credit, the seller gets his $ in a fairly timely manner and possibly attracts more buyers, so, since both parties benefit, why not split the 3%? As others have said, i will usually not even bother with the 3% on a $100 sale, or even a $200 sale, i just cant seem to worry about $3-$6, but, on a $1500 high-end custom knife that i paid $2,000 for, then yes, that 3% ($45) bothers me since im already eating a big loss, and i think its fair to split the fees if the buyer chooses PayPal over a money order. Now, if im breaking even on the knife, or miracle of miracles, actually making some $ (hasn't happened yet :) ) then i wont bother with the fee, but since usually im selling the knife at a significant loss, im obviously NOT in "business" and thus, this is NOT the cost of doing "business" and so i think since both parties benefit in their respective ways, the fee should be split, how is that not fair?

I do have an online business not remotely related to knives and yes, i accept PayPal and i eat the 3% as the cost of doing business, but when im selling my knives as a hobby, always at a loss, no, thats not business in the normal sense of the word, and i do see a difference between the 2.

Oh, and if any of you use AOL, i suppose you would never think of putting up a webpage with any subject matter related to knives or guns, since its against their user agreement, much like child pornography, apparently some companies dont see the difference between a god given, vital and constitutional right and illegal porn.
 
As a merchant, I include PayPal fees in my pricing. However, If I am blowing something out at my cost(as in a close-out), I will charge the 3%.
 
The 3% charge is a cost of doing business.

If you're going to start tacking on business costs to all your sales, why not a 5% "Gold Membership fee" or a 1% "Type in the ad fee"? Gosh, it takes effort to deposit a money order, and gas to get to the bank, how bout a $2.00 "Money Order acceptance fee"?

The practice of adding 3% is very dishonest. If you are unwilling to take a 3% hit, then don't accept paypal. Charging a customer extra for the pleasure of paying you is ridiculous.

In regards to the "I'm already selling a knife at well below cost and they're getting a deal" argument: If the market was willing to pay you the full purchase price of a knife, that's what you'd be selling it for. But since the knife is not being sold by a dealer and is basically used, people are not willing to pay full price. If you don't want to lose money by buying knives new and selling them later, don't buy them in the first place. It's your own fault that you're losing money. Using it as a lame excuse to violate a TOS agreement and basically screw the buyer is in very poor taste. While you're at it, why not charge 5%, or 200%? You're just trying to cover costs, right?

-- Rob
 
Just a note for those that weren't aware. When you upgrade your account to accept credit cards with PayPal, you are eligible for a debit card through PayPal were you can take money out of your PayPal account at the ATM or use it as a credit card. When you use it as a credit cad/debit card, you receive 1.5% instant cash back from all of your purchases. So for those that think splitting the cost is fair, just use your debit card to recoup the buyer’s portion, you will only be eating 1.5% of the sale AND you will not be in violation of any agreements. I imagine allot of the folks here that sell their knives are either doing it to purchase another or for an emergency that popped up, so a using the debit card feature may be in your best interests anyway.
 
I sell on ebay for a living (my feedback is 2305 - id ukusstuff) and I have a business paypal acct. I dont charge for the paypal fee per se, but I charge $1.50 extra per auction, and in return I guarantee to ship the same day you pay. No one's ever complained. Mostly they just leave a comment about how fast I ship. that way it covers my fees, and they're happy too.
 
The idea that if you're selling something but you're not making a profit you shouldn't have to pay the costs of doing business is interesting. Sometimes basic members I catch spamming the discussion forums with ads tell me that.

Maybe they shouldn't have to pay postage either -- maybe the post office should pay it for them. And maybe they shouldn't have to pay for the gas they need to drive to the post office.... :rolleyes:
 
I dont charge for the paypal fee per se, but I charge $1.50 extra per auction, and in return I guarantee to ship the same day you pay.
Click to expand...

That idea is interesting in another way! I think I would much rather pay $1.50 extra for same-day shipping and plain 'ol first class mail than pay extra charges for so-called express mail etc. that often turns out to be much slower than expected.

I can't see that it has anything to do with Paypal fees but hey, thread drift happens, and it's a great idea!
 
I could understand if a seller were forcing the buyer to use PP, then of course the seller should pay the 3%, but if the seller simply says, ill take a MO, check or PP +3%, and the buyer wants to use PayPal for whatever reason, the buyer CHOOSES PayPal, why is the seller soley responsible for the fees? Your answer seems to be its the cost of doing business, well, again, selling at a loss, with ZERO chance or intention of making a dime isnt "doing business" in any sense of the word, you are not making a profit, and what you really seem to be saying is, hey, using PP helps you, the seller, so suck it up and pay the 3%, so in effect, youre saying the seller should pay the fees because he benefits from using PP, well, once again, let me point out, SO DOES THE BUYER! He gets to buy on credit and gets immediate shipping, its also more convienient for him to pay with PP. So, since BOTH buyer and seller benefit and seller is NOT selling for profit and already losing on the deal in all liklihood, i ask again, why is it not fair to split the fees? Another thing i wonder is how many of you who think its petty to ask for help with the 3% are consistantly selling high-end knives, which may be selling for $2,000+, sure, on a $100, $200, heck, even a $500 knife, the 3% isnt that big a deal, and as i said earlier, i dont bother worrying about a $5, $10, or even $15 PayPal fee, but what about when youre selling a high-end custom at already a $500 loss and then you get hit with another $60 in PayPal fees because the buyer chooses to use PayPal, you might change your thinking. As a seller, you offer payment options, if the buyer chooses PP because he benefits by it, why is it not fair to ask him to split the fees?

Again, yes, if you are selling at a profit in an actual business, then yes, offering PP is the cost of doing business, no different than accepting credit cards, but when a hobbiest is selling at a loss to finance another purchase, he is not in business and thus by definition should not be subject to the same rules and fees that are the cost of doing business.

The irony here is, i rarely even ask for any help with the 3%, the rare occasions i do is if im selling a knife at a very cheap price and then i may ask the buyer to split the fees with me, and frankly, maybe ive done it 2 or 3 times out of maybe 100, and yet, i still believe that in principle, for a non-merchant, a hobbiest who sells his knives at a loss to finance new knives, the fair thing to do is split the fees since both parties benefit and the buyer CHOSE to use PP!!! The seller did not hold a gun to the buyers head and insist on PayPal, the buyer chose it because he prefers it, a fee is therefore incurred, why should the seller, who is not selling at a profit in anything resembling a business absorb the entire 3%, particularly on a sale where the fee isnt a measely $5, but maybe $75, are you that wealthy that you can throw away $75 at the drop of a hat, is $75 a "petty" amount of $$$? Especially if it happens several times?
 
the buyer wants to use PayPal for whatever reason, the buyer CHOOSES PayPal, why is the seller soley responsible for the fees?
Click to expand...

B/C that’s what seller agrees to when they upgrade their account!! Chances are that if a buyer would prefer to use PayPal, that he wouldn't be interested in another method of payment. So if the seller wants to move the item, they should make a choice. Eat the 3% and open up there item to a larger audience of buyers or save themselves that 3% and take the chance of missing a sale and having to do a price reduction or two.

I have seen guys on BFC selling a knife I was interested in and didn't accept PayPal at all so I passed on the buying the knife. A couple days later, they go with a $50 price reduction, and then another. If they were accepting PayPal they would have sold the knife at their original asking price, but by the time they did the price reduction, I already purchased another knife with those funds. Fact is, when you openly accept PayPal, you open yourself up to more potential buyers and that’s the one of the reasons PayPal charges those fees to begin with, not to pass them on to the buyer.
 
If they want 3% then I ain't buyin!!! Everybody wants their percent, when do I get mine????
 
"I have this (insert item) for sale and will accept best offer, buyer to pay shipping."

All I can do is snicker when I see adds like this.

What is so difficult about figuring your bottom line, as a seller?

"PayPal, add 3%."
There are times when it has worked for me, as a buyer. Heck, I've even given makers their previous, to rock bottom, prices plus the 3%. (Hi Chuck)

What is so difficult about figuring top dollar, as a buyer?

My last forum buy (not here) involved a piece that was around for months. The seller dropped his price to $350, shipped, and I couldn't PM quick enough. "PayPal ok?" I ask. He replied in the affirmative and Next Day USPS the piece arrives. This guy absorbed the fee and payed $42.30 to ship the item. A new value on this item would have been around $550.00 (a one off from a semi-production outfit). I guess he had his bottom line pretty well figured out.

Anyway, buyers and sellers have a responsibillity to communicate clearly and consisely. If you don't like the deal, walk away. If you can't sell for less, start high.

Cheers

GC
 
I guess the moral of the story is that everyone accepting paypal should just add 3% to the original price and give a 3% discount to any non-paypal payments. People aren't just going to eat the costs forever, they are always transfered onto the buyer one way or the other.
 
Originally posted by Chuck428
I guess the moral of the story is that everyone accepting paypal should just add 3% to the original price and give a 3% discount to any non-paypal payments. People aren't just going to eat the costs forever, they are always transfered onto the buyer one way or the other.
Click to expand...

How did you come to this conclusion? Did you read the whole thread?

Considering that of the so-called 18,000 BFC members less than 30 have chosen to post here on this thread hardly qualifies as "the moral of the story".:rolleyes:

Bottom line, "fees" "shipping" "handling" are all costs of selling (and buying) here on BF. The people who sell here are not retailers. The prices on BF are negotiable and whatever goes into the bottom line is just that, a bottom line.

Retailers display fixed prices and "add" costs on for these things, except fees for credit cards.

Credit card fees ARE built into the price of the item. If you think I am wrong on this, just consider that any retailer that discounts below the MSRP is choosing a price that is not consistent with the manufacturer's chosen price point. There is no longer a "level" playing field between retailers, which presumably would be "customer service".

Since it is clear that each retailer "chooses" a discount level that is consistent with their expectations and the money they want to make with each sale - whether the basis of part of the cost is credit card fees or not makes no difference. It's called the free market for a reason.
 
Could somebody point where in the terms of service agreement that Paypal has that it says that when you become a premier member you agree to eat the 2.9% + $.30 fee? I can not find anywhere in the agreement where it says that the seller can't recoup these fees.

I still believe that if it is the buyers decision to use paypal they should be willing to cover the fee. If it is the only way a seller will accept payment then in my opinion they should eat the 3%.

As far a Danelle's system is concerned, this would be ok with me as long as I am paying the true cost of shipping. I would not want this $1.50 added just to insure the item be shipped to me the same day that payment is received. I have seen people charge $10.00 for shipping when the actual cost was under $2.00. I would be really pissed off if someone charged a $10.00 set charge for shipping and then added $1.50 to guaranty same day shipping.
 
I can not find anywhere in the agreement where it says that the seller can't recoup these fees
Click to expand...

Hey Keith, I have quoted the section and someone also put up a link. Here it is:


Under Visa, MasterCard, Discover and American Express regulations and the laws of several states, including California, merchants may not charge a fee to the buyer for accepting credit card payments (often called a "surcharge").You agree that you will not impose a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as payment.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Jason.

So I guess there shouldn't even need to be a discussion about this. If it is against the rules set forth by Paypal then people should not be doing it, plain and simple.
 
Originally posted by Megalobyte
the buyer wants to use PayPal for whatever reason, the buyer CHOOSES PayPal, why is the seller soley responsible for the fees?
Click to expand...
The seller agreed specifically not to impose a surcharge in the TOS of paypal. Doing so violates the TOS. It also violates California law (Civil code section 1748.1), and probably other state's laws as well.
well, again, selling at a loss, with ZERO chance or intention of making a dime isnt "doing business" in any sense of the word, you are not making a profit,
Click to expand...
Actually, I would define "doing business" as the exchange of products or services for money. More importantly, there is no requirement that you make a profit for it to be "business", although it is generally recommended.

For example, the California civil code dealing with credit cards defines a retailer as: (1747.02e)

""Retailer" means every person other than a card issuer who furnishes money, goods, services, or anything else of value upon presentation of a credit card by a cardholder. "Retailer" shall not mean the state, a county, city, city and county, or any other public agency"

I didn't notice an exemption for people not making a profit.
i ask again, why is it not fair to split the fees?
Click to expand...
Because you agreed not to, and because it is actually illegal in some situations.
when a hobbiest is selling at a loss to finance another purchase, he is not in business and thus by definition should not be subject to the same rules and fees that are the cost of doing business.
Click to expand...
So, as a hobbyist, I can violate all the laws, rules, and regulations that I want?

Great!

I'm a hobbyist bridge collector - and I have a great bridge in Brooklyn that I'd love to sell you at a big loss (just so I can buy this big dam in Nevada)... as long as you're willing to pay the 3% paypal fee.

-- Rob
 
Originally posted by Architect

Credit card fees ARE built into the price of the item.
Click to expand...
I don't think we are in disagreement. I was trying to point out that this is basically an argument over semantics. Whether the seller tells you he is charging the 3% or just raises his price by 3%, the result is the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top