Back in January, e-commerce giant eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) announced some very controversial changes to the site that led to an uproar and seller boycotts within the eBay community. One of the most controversial changes was the decision to remove sellers' ability to leave negative feedback on the buyers, and this change is slated to start this upcoming Monday.

The decision to remove the sellers feedback has led to many eBay sellers finding alternative e-commerce sites to sell their goods, and those who remained are very worried about the impact this decision will have on their business. Sellers insist that the feedback is crucial in sifting through the large amount of buyers that give sellers hassle during transactions, but eBay feels that the change will benefit everyone on the site and prevent sellers from leaving retaliatory ratings for buyers.

The two sides just cannot see eye to eye on this one. Sellers insist that the feedback system allows the site to have a better buying community, while eBay believes that the changes are "really to make sure that we've got buyer accountability and seller accountability."

When changes happen at eBay, Inc. (NASDAQ: EBAY), it's usually sellers who become angry at, well, anything. From fee changes to feedback changes to anything that affects their business, eBay sellers can be a finicky lot. And, that discontent doesn't stew -- that "vocal majority" definitely lets those opinions be heard.

Again, many eBay sellers are becoming hostile in the wake of recent selling fee changes implemented just as new CEO John Donahoe steps into his role. Donahoe surprised sellers when he cut some seller fees, but then raised others. While Donahoe argued that the deletion of "flat fees" for sold items with a "minimal fee" will lower the risk to eBay sellers, many disputed this argument, and some even threatened to "strike." Seeing as though eBay sellers aren't employees, that made me laugh a little. "Taking a week off" would be more appropriate, but you get the picture.

But, if some angry sellers do "strike" for a week, eBay's coffers will notice the revenue difference. This is a prime opportunity for a company like Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN) to really punch up its auction business and really begin to recruit former eBay sellers to an alternative auction platform in the wake of so many disappointments in the last 18 months. That, or just go ahead and buy eBay already.

An announcement from eBay states that a new auction bidding assistance feature is being added to their site. Overall the eBay sellers have again responded by questioning this change. A basic (edited) explanation of the feature as described to eBay sellers is as follows:

When a seller uses the prefilled item information provided by eBay (a product description template), and a potential buyer confirms a bid they make on that item which is then deemed by the eBay system to be substantially lower than the average selling price for identical items, the eBay system shall post for that bidder the current average selling price for identical sold items. Thus, the bidder may be prompted to enter a higher maximum bid.

eBay representative, Evan Liang states:

"We have been testing this enhancement with a small sample since March and have seen an increase in the number of buyers who use proxy bidding. We will continue to carefully monitor buyer behavior and we can and will turn this feature off if we see any negative impact. That being said, this feature will be seen by very few buyers, mostly inexperienced users with unrealistic expectations. If the community does find instances where this is negatively affecting bidding prices please feel free to get in touch." Evan can be reached at eliang@ebay.com.

Of the 160 eBay seller responses I've reviewed: (responses, not individual sellers)

Approximately 80% of the responses denounced this move by eBay. Approximately 10% of the responses were gaurdedly positive. Approximately 5% of the responses were genuinely positive. Approximately 5% of the responses were neutral.

eBay sellers were unaware this move was being considered. eBay testing data and projections have not been made available to the sellers. This announcement was placed on the eBay general announcements page and was not directly sent to sellers in the same manner as less important promotional items.

Some of the concerns expressed by long term eBay sellers follow:

1.) Doesn't this "fly in the face" of what classic selling by auction truly embodies and isn't this contradictory to Meg Whitman's "restoring the magic" claim?

2.) Will this change actually discourage bidders from exceeding the system generated average?

3.) Will this system actually create a downward trend in it's own averaging?

4.) Why are the test results unavailable to sellers?

You may view one discussion about this subject using this link: eBay Seller Central Discussion Board

Today I posted a story focused on business strategy GOOGLE, APPLE use U.S. Marine's Constant Mission Improvement! and giving credit to Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL) for having a clear one, similar to what I perceived the U.S. Marines Corps would do. I mentioned many other companies too. First comments back came from eBay sellers. Seems no matter what the story, eBay sellers will relate it back to eBay and won't let go. I have noticed this with almost all of our posts. Should we start an eBay forum at AOL nicknamed 'Pit Bulls of the Web'?

I have written numerous articles about eBay from different perspectives and I have been supportive of the seller's point of view, but a question still remains for 'sellers'. If eBay has lost its magic, or is just plain lost, why not just move on and find another avenue to sell your wares? If you think it's the only game in town (monopoly), then have you petitioned the FTC, SEC, Justice Dept., not individually but collectively?

EBay has been stirring things up on blog sites around the world with its recent fee increases and business plan alterations. At this point there is no question it has been insensitive to a large group of angry and frustrated sellers. The unhappy store owners seem to want nothing more than to be heard. So heard they shall be...

I was impressed with the quantity and quality of the comments two days ago when I posted "eBay's message to sellers: Grow or die!" the storm of comments did not die down when I posted a follow-up yesterday: "eBay was revolutionary - now "peasants" are revolting!" If you want the details you can refer back to these posts. Now it's time to move forward.

While sellers have plenty of reasons to be frustrated, they can be sure they are being heard by eBay. When I last checked there were over 600-700 links to my posts. EBay management is getting an earful (and eyeful) given this, and so many other blog sites and editorial pages and direct communications to the company.

Unfortunately, no one should expect a response from eBay. They should get one; they deserve one; but they won't. EBay does not want to change its plans and it does not want to stoke the fire by giving objectors a platform. I, on the other hand, don't mind at all. I think it is important. This Marketwatch story gives a little more insight into eBay's thinking.

Yesterday's heartfelt comments from readers to my post, "eBay's message to sellers: Grow or die!" were incredible. I was amazed at the quantity I received (and continue to receive). Even more impressive was the quality of the responses. No peasants here.

MEG, ARE YOU LISTENING?

The thoughtfulness, understanding of the issues and real concern from knowledgeable people went way beyond the usual whining that I see from some quarters. Many people even made good suggestions on how eBay could accomplish its financial goals and still accommodate the disenfranchised sellers.

Another thing that surprised me was that ALL of the comments were similar in their disdain for eBay. Not one person, seller or shareholder (of course nothing from eBay) supported eBay's rate increases, business strategy, or future as a company. I found that bewildering, but perhaps this post will give any supporters another chance to express their views.

Points of consensus:

• EBay does not care to directly address the concerns of many of their sellers. They treat this subject like so many others where they choose to "play innocent bystander" like they were not involved. I do not know why eBay chooses not to be more accommodating and pretend all is well. Pretending is not usually a good thing.
• There is real market pressure for an alternative to eBay so Google or any other entity that can gain traction in this space will be gloriously welcomed. To date this has not happened and there are only meager signs, at the fringe, that might be chipping away. Despite portrayals of seller options, nothing I read was convincing.
• I noted that; "if they raise rates for sellers by any percentage you choose, say 25% then they will make more money as long as something less than 25% of the sellers don't run off to do something else." This most certainly is the way eBay looks at it and, given that the facts will speak for themselves in the marketplace, eBay to date has calculated correctly -- BUT ONLY FOR NOW. Strange as it seems eBay could lose a high percentage of sellers and be fine. WHY shouldn't they do this?
• EBay is perceived as a monopoly and if it is not thwarted in the marketplace there could come a day (under a different Federal administration) when it comes under closer scrutiny. They are not Baseball, they have no exemption.

Why does all the protesting, screaming, crying, ranting, raving, begging, petitioning, pleading, and threatening appear to fall on deaf ears at eBay? That is very simple, they do not care. Oh they do care very much overall, but they may not care about you in particular.

Every time eBay increases its fees, modifies its procedures, changes its format, the noise starts up in earnest by those directly affected and they all wonder why eBay does not care about them anymore, or more importantly, why they are pushing them so hard, perhaps to their financial limits.

Consider the math, eBay has; if they raise rates for sellers by any percentage you choose, say 25% then they will make more money as long as something less than 25% of the sellers don't run off to do something else. What are the chances of that? Where would they go? Who would leave first? The ones generating the least revenue with the weakest business models would be the first ones by their own admission. Even then some of the business of those that left would be picked up by the sellers that remained making eBay and the established sellers stronger. That is how the macro-economy is supposed to work and generally does. When and if eBay fails to meet their projected goal by misjudging the marketplace then they will make more changes and adjust again. They have always done that and they will continue to do that. Why can't sellers do that too?

I have a disenchanted young friend that left a $45,000-a-year junior architect position to try her luck selling things on eBay. She had been unhappy with the pressures of her chosen profession and eBay offered her an option. Last year I was told she made $100,000 profit on about $300,000 in gross receipts selling clothes. She is working about 20% more hours (for herself) and still more during the holiday season, however she more than doubled her income and it's growing at a much faster rate than any employee could hope for. She grumbled at the recent rate increases and figures they may eat into profits by 10% to 15%, still leaving a healthy profit, more than she was making working for someone else. She figures this will be absorbed in her business growth. She is expanding. She does not have time for whining. She is in business and must keep moving, adapting, and growing ! That seems to be the message -- grow or die.