On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:22:08 +0000, with neither quill nor qualm, Mark
Rand quickly quoth:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 14:15:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

Bob Engelhardt wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
The sellers get their money from the buyers, so who pays?

If the seller sets a higher start or higher reserve, then the buyer
pays, if he still wants it at the higher price. If it is the auction
competition that sets the price, then the buyer isn't going to bid more
because the seller fees are higher!! It really boils down to the fact
that the selling price is determined by the buyer and higher seller fees
aren't going to affect that. The buyer doesn't pay more.


Only if the seller accepts less that they wanted. If the seller has
to have $20, then the buyer pays that, the Ebay fees and shipping. Are
you willing to accept less for what you list, so the buyer doesn't pay
more?


Small, rhetorical comment:-

What would it cost sellers per item to run a physical shop?

What would it cost sellers per item to run their own internet shop?


If it's less, the answer is clear.
If it's more the answer is also clear

More, in both cases. BUT, you forgot that there are other venues
available to the sellers, so eBay is simply shooting themselves in the
foot. By alienating their entire base with an unnecessary price hike,
they'll likely kill themselves. After the raise, they'll be like the
$2,000 hooker. Hey, she's beautiful, but there are a lot of other
ladies out there with almost the same traffic (cringe) and much better
prices. Once the bailout starts, I'd sure hate to own eBay stock.

Has anyone checked their stock prices lately? I'll bet they're already
down quite a bit. Ah, here is it. Down from $40 in Oct 07 to $27 this
month. When did they release the news about their price "drops"?
http://quote.morningstar.com/Quote/Q...px?ticker=EBAY Click the
year ticker graph. They're headed for the toilet.

--

SALMON -- The Other Pink Meat