
I just received an interesting e-mail from my friend Christine, who's a home-schooling mother and a frequent buyer on Amazon Marketplace.
Last month Christine placed a Marketplace order that was never filled by the seller, with no explanation. Christine left negative feedback, and now the seller is offering to send a "free" book -- but only if Christine removes the negative feedback.
Is this unethical? It surely seems that way to Christine. Here's a snippet from her e-mail, and you can get the full rundown here
on her blog, The Thinking Mother:
I feel that this seller's practices should be against the rules, if they are not already. I feel that trust is important, and that this seller is in the wrong. I would love to know that ethical Amazon Marketplace sellers do not endorse this practice.
I think this case points out two important things:
1. Once you get below 95 percent feedback, it *can be* a warning sign. I am sure there are many reputable sellers who have feedback below that -- especially if you have employees helping to run your business whose livelihood isn't directly dependent on buyer feedback.
However, most online sellers with high ethics will attempt to fix every problem, no matter who's at fault -- it's just the way they operate. And so when you start getting below 95 percent, I think you could also have a situation where there's a percentage of buyers who didn't complain when they got the shaft -- either because they can't be bothered, or they forgot about the order. Who knows, they might even be embarrassed at having been "ripped off," lots of people who get swindled never report it to the police, they're ashamed. OK, maybe I'm over-dramatizing. The point is, the actual level of service provided by sellers with suspect feedback could be worse than it appears.
2. I know that Amazon will suspend or close a seller account if they suspect "feedback manipulation." And I'll explain just how I know this: Every time I get a negative feedback, I'll offer the customer a carrot to delete their negative feedback. To give a typical case, sometimes I'll get a negative feedback like
"1/5 - Slow! Book took four weeks to arrive!"My usual response to the customer will be, "I'll refund your shipping fee of $3.49 if you'll delete the negative feedback." If it was a really cheap book sometimes I'll offer to refund in full. And of course I'll point out that I shipped promptly, it was the Postal Service that was slow. For really clueless customers, sometimes I'll explain a bit more, gently telling them their negative rating is actually defeating the whole purpose of feedback, which is to warn buyers of slipshod sellers, not those who bend over backwards making things right.
Anyway, I've done this probably 200 times since Amazon began allowing customers to remove negative feedback a couple of years ago. One time, however, a customer complained to Amazon about my doing this (talk about hard to deal with!) and I received an e-mail from Amazon, warning me about "feedback manipulation." Apparently some of the folks at Amazon believe that any time you offer a special deal in exchange for feedback deletion, it's "feedback manipulation" -- something you tend to hear more about
in regards to eBay, not
Amazon.
Maybe "feedback manipulation" came up because of what my customer said to Amazon, which I didn't see. The case I'm thinking of also involved an A to Z claim (the anonymous kind), so maybe that's why it got more scrutiny.
In the case Christine brings up, however, I must agree it's a shady practice. It's bribery because the seller is trying to cover up something. So participating in the cover up would be a definite disservice to the Marketplace, and work against the purpose of feedback. What's your take?