Will the shipping price of items sold on MP be charged the 5%? That’s why I always hated selling on eBay, the seller had to pay a fee on the shipping price even if it all went to the post office.
1 Like
This depends on the ‘regulation’ of the title market you would like to operate under as a merchant.
TMHO for the little information I got from your post, I would suggest to start your own title market and ‘set’ the terms and conditions as you like it; then you decide how the shipping is paid for and what shipping method is used.
Shipping is a step apart from the purchase of the product. So in our flow you are able to buy a product, negotiate shipping, then pay shipping.
Therefore it is easily excludable from the % fee of the purchase price.
2 Likes
The only 5% is already a great deal. If eBay sellers hear of the no extra fee on shipping cost they will probably be all in. When this MP starts getting lots of traffic EBay will have to change or go down. They have been robbing people for too long. They call it a final value shipping fee.
2 Likes
Not to sure we want to create loopholes, as on ebay and alibaba the seller can lower the item price and up the shipping price, resulting in an exploit that could be abused to avoid fees. I dont think that it would be common practise by reputable sellers, but never the less the option is there to be manipulated?
Item>shipping>5%= total sfx
5 Likes
Whats stopping a seller from listing all items for 15.00 (shipping cost), paying the 5% fee on that, then in a seperate non fee transaction, charging 85.00 (item cost) for shipping? Holders just lost divs on 70.00 each transaction
3 Likes
I don’t think it’s practical to have someone have to pay for the product before discussing shipping options.
If it needs to be a distinct step for some technical reason, maybe you put a “hold” on your coins for the order, it calculates the 5% fee (or whatever it is), but none of it gets added to a block until you select which shipping option? If shipping options aren’t reasonable/fair, then the coins get released?
4 Likes
I agree with you but when the seller prints out a shipping label for the exact price the buyer paid for shipping 5% should not get added. That money goes straight to the postal service. Just saying if this could happen, there are a lot of eBay sellers that would definitely leave for the MP. I have no love for eBay but it is the best auction site. I hope someone makes a good auction on MP.
1 Like
As a buyer I actually don’t care what’s shipping and what’s the price of the item I just care what I pay at the end. Therefore I hate it, that on Amazon you don’t see the shipping costs directly, but have to search it in hidden sections.
Happend that I put thinks in my chart, was happy with the overall cost then what to pay and saw its 50% more expensive than it said first 
1 Like
Ok so
Small satchel
22.5 x 35.5cm Up to 500g $41.35 + 5%= $2.065
Medium satchel 26.5 x 37.5cm Up to 1kg $51.25 + 5%= $2.56
Large satchel 31 x 40.5cm Up to 2kg $72.65 + 5% = $3.62
Box 22.5 x 31 x 10.2cm Up to 5kg $98.15 + 5% = 4.90
These are small amounts to add to the total of the shipping
These are calculated prices from Australia to newyork, you could justify these prices as the sellers has to put effort into packing and sorting items to be collected, and it also stops any sort of manipulation. Those prices are $AUD
2 Likes
Yep, and it’s a very small increase to have it included and avoid any possibility of abuse/exploitation of the MP protocol by manipulation of the item/service price vs the postage/shipping fee.
4 Likes
My understanding is the seller should be paying 5% on total transaction. Total transaction should be inclusive of shipping costs. Otherwise it’s to easily open to exploit. The 5% fee is a small amount on the shipping and it’s a cost born by the seller not the purchaser. The only way I could see shipping being with no transaction fee would be if it’s provided directly by a third party “Safex Freight” whom have an exemption voted for by token holders to have a discount on the 5% fee to encourage such a company to form and provide the service. Say there was a shipping company connected somehow, you sell your product, checkout and then enter into seperate shipping transaction with the shipping provider, not the vendor of the goods you purchased.
3 Likes
Now there is an idea🚢, good thing about these topics is it brings out some great ideas along the way.
1 Like
gaming the system makes your shop unreliable for buyers. They won’t know what is going on and make the experience difficult to complete a transaction.
My comment directly relates to technical flexibility to set the process as we need to see it fit, whether shipping fees are paid at the point of sale or updatable at some later point in the purchase finality process.
I believe also an important consideration is that who bears the fee: seller or buyer: I concluded with some discussion that it would be held by the seller since the seller can adjust their price to compensate the fee and their profit requirements.
4 Likes
Allowing sellers to have a place with 0 fee invoice is an antiquated idea that already been proved ineffective, repropose it today expecting people won’t game it is naive.
Every single implementation that relies on people acting only like good actors is doomed to fail. That’s why for a dex ecommerce we also need a strong feedback system.
Think twice about what you say and what you DECIDE to do. What it cost an average national shipping? Just charge the 5% of that and you are done. Talking about cents. If a seller is asking for that is because he wants to game the system. Reputation is not a factor if everybody is doing it. it’s called free market.
2 Likes