Fact Check: The Math Adds Up for Trump’s Claim That USPS Undercharges Amazon

[jg121783 3,921]

44 minutes ago, bcking said:

I didn't realize that. That's definitely wrong. I would expect Amazon to get it back from USPS. It seems pretty clearly their fault in this situation. I'm calling them later today for an update though so we'll see.

I had multiple items returned after Christmas with the only reason given being "item delivered late by carrier". Amazon deducted the refund amounts from my account immediately. Keep in mind as a seller who uses Amazon fulfillment I ship my products to Amazon warehouses then Amazon sells and ships the products. The only responsibility I bear in the process is the quality of the product. But Amazon puts the full financial burden on the 3rd party seller when either they or the carrier mess up. I had to spend hours on the phone and sending emails to get Amazon to agree to give me a refund on these items in 45 days if the item isn't returned to them (after a $5 per item refund administration fee). Not a very efficient use of time when I'm trying to run a business while working a full time job. Something for people who return stuff to Amazon on a regular basis without a legitimate reason to think about.

 

Anyways sorry for the rant but my point is Amazon takes advantage of their 3rd party sellers, employees and the tax payers to grow into a huge monopoly and something needs to be done to reign them in. I don't claim to have the answer on what should be done. Amazon is great for buyers looking for a deal and fast delivery and it is great for sellers looking for a (somewhat) hassle free way to sell products but they are getting too big for their own good at the expense of others.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

I had multiple items returned after Christmas with the only reason given being "item delivered late by carrier". Amazon deducted the refund amounts from my account immediately. Keep in mind as a seller who uses Amazon fulfillment I ship my products to Amazon warehouses then Amazon sells and ships the products. The only responsibility I bear in the process is the quality of the product. But Amazon puts the full financial burden on the 3rd party seller when either they or the carrier mess up. I had to spend hours on the phone and sending emails to get Amazon to agree to give me a refund on these items in 45 days if the item isn't returned to them (after a $5 per item refund administration fee). Not a very efficient use of time when I'm trying to run a business while working a full time job. Something for people who return stuff to Amazon on a regular basis without a legitimate reason to think about.

 

Anyways sorry for the rant but my point is Amazon takes advantage of their 3rd party sellers, employees and the tax payers to grow into a huge monopoly and something needs to be done to reign them in. I don't claim to have the answer on what should be done. Amazon is great for buyers looking for a deal and fast delivery and it is great for sellers looking for a (somewhat) hassle free way to sell products but they are getting too big for their own good at the expense of others.

Interesting...

 

So the product on Amazon says that the seller is "Amazon services" or whatever. But you are saying there still may be a 3rd party seller? They are PNY memory cards so obviously PNY sold them but I figured Amazon is selling them directly. That may not be the case?

 

I called for an update and wanted to know what the USPS investigation found...Amazon essentially just wanted to waive it off and say "Well they haven't found it, so we'll send you new ones". Your post made me question it a little more, but in this case it seems like it truly is lost.

[Italian_in_NYC 259]

It's really simple to check.

A company which loses $60bn/year is either charging too little or spending too much.

In this case probably both.

[jg121783 3,921]

15 minutes ago, bcking said:

Interesting...

 

So the product on Amazon says that the seller is "Amazon services" or whatever. But you are saying there still may be a 3rd party seller? They are PNY memory cards so obviously PNY sold them but I figured Amazon is selling them directly. That may not be the case?

 

I called for an update and wanted to know what the USPS investigation found...Amazon essentially just wanted to waive it off and say "Well they haven't found it, so we'll send you new ones". Your post made me question it a little more, but in this case it seems like it truly is lost.

If the seller name has Amazon in it that is Amazon selling the item. That's another thing Amazon does. They find the top selling products then muscle 3rd party sellers out of them by tanking the price. Can't blame them for that as it is a smart business move. But yeah most people are unaware that a majority of products on Amazon are sold by 3rd party sellers and either fufilled by Amazon in the case of prime items or may even be fufilled by the seller out of their own warehouse or even their house. I choose to have Amazon fulfill everything as it is more convenient though fees are higher.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

2 hours ago, jg121783 said:

I had multiple items returned after Christmas with the only reason given being "item delivered late by carrier". Amazon deducted the refund amounts from my account immediately. Keep in mind as a seller who uses Amazon fulfillment I ship my products to Amazon warehouses then Amazon sells and ships the products. The only responsibility I bear in the process is the quality of the product. But Amazon puts the full financial burden on the 3rd party seller when either they or the carrier mess up. I had to spend hours on the phone and sending emails to get Amazon to agree to give me a refund on these items in 45 days if the item isn't returned to them (after a $5 per item refund administration fee). Not a very efficient use of time when I'm trying to run a business while working a full time job. Something for people who return stuff to Amazon on a regular basis without a legitimate reason to think about.

 

Anyways sorry for the rant but my point is Amazon takes advantage of their 3rd party sellers, employees and the tax payers to grow into a huge monopoly and something needs to be done to reign them in. I don't claim to have the answer on what should be done. Amazon is great for buyers looking for a deal and fast delivery and it is great for sellers looking for a (somewhat) hassle free way to sell products but they are getting too big for their own good at the expense of others.

    Take your business elsewhere?  If you think Amazon is bad though, definitely avoid eBay.

[jg121783 3,921]

21 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

    Take your business elsewhere?  If you think Amazon is bad though, definitely avoid eBay.

As soon as I raise a little more capital I plan on diversifying and moving away from Amazon but at this point I have to play by their rules and accept the issues I brought up as the cost of doing business. Yes eBay has their issues too. I have dealt with eBay in the past but it takes too much time to create listings and manage them so I stopped doing eBay. I am not so much complaining about what I deal with as a seller as I am about what I deal with as a tax payer (subsidizing the business of the richest person in the world) but I was just pointing out how Amazon got so big on the backs of their sellers and employees then treats them horribly along with ripping off tax payers.

[TBoneTX 46,119]

I recently learned that USPS also gives eBay vendors a considerable discount on shipping.

[Dashinka 24,792]

7 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

I recently learned that USPS also gives eBay vendors a considerable discount on shipping.

Is eBay even relevant anymore?  I saw a lot of ads over the Christmas season for eBay which made me wonder if they have lost business.  Personally, I avoid eBay completely as I have a couple of good friends that have been ripped off by sellers on that site.  Sure I realize that is not eBay's fault, but it does make one think when using them.

[yuna628 9,712]

On ‎1‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 12:45 PM, bcking said:

The UK.gov site says you can get a separate gift exemption if the gifts are for different people, even if they are in the same box.

 

Something to keep in mind for the future.

 

https://www.gov.uk/goods-sent-from-abroad/gifts

It says that, but there is fundamentally no way to get around such fees unless the person receiving then disputes the charges via a lengthy paper trail afterwards. The US has a procedure to follow for doing this.. the UK has no clear guidance on this, and the customs forms used on the USPS side of things certainly don't allow for it.

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Is eBay even relevant anymore?  I saw a lot of ads over the Christmas season for eBay which made me wonder if they have lost business.  Personally, I avoid eBay completely as I have a couple of good friends that have been ripped off by sellers on that site.  Sure I realize that is not eBay's fault, but it does make one think when using them.

I have a large amount of stuff that needs to be sold.. likely on eBay eventually. Plenty of people still seem to use it so it must still be useful in some way. I've seen a lot of people be ripped off though. Etsy might also be an option for some people... had some success with that.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Is eBay even relevant anymore?  I saw a lot of ads over the Christmas season for eBay which made me wonder if they have lost business.  Personally, I avoid eBay completely as I have a couple of good friends that have been ripped off by sellers on that site.  Sure I realize that is not eBay's fault, but it does make one think when using them.

I used to do a lot of business on ebay before Amazon existed.  I had ZERO issues with ebay, ever.  

 

I do much more buying on Amazon now, but have had problems there.  It’s usually resolved to my satisfaction, but still issues.  One of the biggest lately, which I have just let slide, is delivery in 3-4 days instead of 2.

[TBoneTX 46,119]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I avoid eBay completely as I have a couple of good friends that have been ripped off by sellers on that site.

Despite my crystal-clear instructions, a seller nevertheless sent me a wrong item.  It cost me more to send it back to the vendor (via USPS) than the refund for the purchase itself.  The vendor never responded, and eBay said, "Tough."

[-Trinity- 513]

Isn't USPS government owned?

[yuna628 9,712]

16 minutes ago, -Trinity- said:

Isn't USPS government owned?

It's complicated.

 

Quote

The USPS is often mistaken for a government-owned corporation (e.g., Amtrak) because it operates much like a business. It is, however, an "establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the United States", (39 U.S.C. § 201) as it is controlled by Presidential appointees and the Postmaster General. As a government agency, it has many special privileges, including sovereign immunity, eminent domain powers, powers to negotiate postal treaties with foreign nations, and an exclusive legal right to deliver first-class and third-class mail. Indeed, in 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that the USPS was not a government-owned corporation, and therefore could not be sued under the Sherman Antitrust Act.^[89] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

I guess you could kind of say it's not exactly a government owned business, but more like an extension of the executive branch permitted to be designated by Congress under the Constitution. It's a government agency with diplomatic powers. It's run by a board of individuals selected by the President who gives them authority to make decisions for him and set fees and policies.  I'd argue that perhaps originally it was intended for it to have more control via Congress, as an essential and fundamental public infrastructure and should have had more direct accountability. http://savethepostoffice.com/who-owns-postal-service/

 

[-Trinity- 513]

19 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

It's complicated.

 

I guess you could kind of say it's not exactly a government owned business, but more like an extension of the executive branch permitted to be designated by Congress under the Constitution. It's a government agency with diplomatic powers. It's run by a board of individuals selected by the President who gives them authority to make decisions for him and set fees and policies.  I'd argue that perhaps originally it was intended for it to have more control via Congress, as an essential and fundamental public infrastructure and should have had more direct accountability. http://savethepostoffice.com/who-owns-postal-service/

 

That's indeed complicated.