The point of this thread and the FAQ update is not whether gift payments are good or bad. That is another conversation that has been had and can be continued in link in the first post.

This is simply explaining that if a seller expects a buyer to pay their paypal fee, or send a gift payment, that needs to be disclosed ahead of time, the same as any other terms of the sale. If the seller fails to do so before the transaction is accepted, the default is the seller pays the standard paypal fee.

Just changed the policy in my thread. I had no idea I was turning away so many people from my thread by having that option at the top. I apologize for that. Many responses and explanations people gave in this thread made me change my policy on my thread and I totally removed the gift option.

Thanks for the response. But I just want to be clear, would this be acceptable in my (or any) FS thread?

For Sale: NES Game CIB

Paypal Gift Price: $65 + $5 shipping = $70 total
Paypal Non-Gift Price: $67.25 + $5 shipping = $72.25 total

People obviously feel differently about this, so I'd like to give buyers the option. 

And I probably wasn't clear in my original post but I put the information about gifting or paying the fees in the transaction PRIOR to the buyer accepting. I've NEVER required a gift payment, I just asked that if they buyer doesn't want to gift that they should include the fees (prior to them clicking Accept Terms). They can decline if they don't want to pay and not gift. I think its covered in this sentence from the FAQ "If other arrangements are made, users do so at their own risk and all terms must be disclosed and agreed upon prior to the transaction being accepted by both parties."

 Anywho, going forward I'll use the above format in my FS thread to avoid confusion.

^^ I see no problem with that at all. That may be the way to do it from now on.

Why not meet in the middle and call it $66 

Certainly a logical way to handle it. But we need to assume that if a seller puts a price that he or she wants, they will be getting that amount. Thus the For Offer option where there is a little wiggle room. But what about the person that knows/trusts the seller and wants to gift, but doesn't want to pay the extra buck?

I think that giving two options to pay for something covers both the seller and the buyer, fairly. Just my opinion though, to each their own.

I personally won't buy from anyone that does it this way either. I may be the minority or maybe the only one but I'm just not going to buy from someone that is forcing me to choose between paying to be protected or paying less and not being protected.

Well said Scott

Excellent rule & explaination. This answer some of the questions I had in a past thread.

Yeah, not for me either.  If people like using paypal to sell things, they can absorb the associated fees.

Guess you better stop paying any kind of insurance that you have considering they take your money for protection and then if you do have an issue they have a million reasons they can't cover you even though you've been giving them basically free money for what could be years.So well I do understand that you don't like certain things sometimes it's the nature of the beast.In this case it's only a few dollars though.I mean from what I understand your basically saying you don't like it when someone gives you the option but if they don't say anything and just charge extra up front than thats ok?

For me, it's a matter of shadily trying to skirt Paypal fees. It's dishonest. Using Paypal's service protects both the buyer and the seller (albeit, some can argue it is weighted more heavily towards the buyer), not just the buyer... yet you expect the buyer to absorb the fees for your protection as well as the convenience of getting you their money? That sounds like horseshit. If you want the buyer to absorb potential fees, use postal money orders and wait on your money. At least in that situation, there is some level of protection. At the end of the day, this is just about greed. As a buyer, I want to know up-front what I will be paying, not have to figure out based on my payment type (which is a violation of Paypal policy mind you... as well as pretty much every merchant services agreement I've been privy to). As a seller, I want the convenience of getting my money in a timely fashion, and the ability to accept credit card payments. I don't mind paying a few cents extra for either.

Also mind you... you're already saving the costs of using a free service (NA) to hawk your wares.

That is true but I would hope when someone buys something off NA they get it a little cheaper because the seller doesn't have to pay fees to ebay and paypal if the person chooses to gift.I know I've personally sold some things on here way cheaper than prices on Ebay.Now when you talk about paying for protection  when you buy anything from say a retail store your paying it then too the only difference is you don't have a choice and its already factored into the price.So what I want to know is are people mad about paying the paypal fees only if the seller says something about it or if they just threw the paypal fee on top of what they wanted for the item without saying anything would you be fine with that?

I don't know why it's so frowned upon. If people want to be covered then pay the extra 3% or whatever. When I first joined the forum, every person I bought from requested that I paid with "gift." I had no problem doing so if their feedback was in line.. I guess were going in circles. Thanks for the post, when I sell from now on I will be sure to mark up my prices a little and tell people to not pay with "gift." That why I don't loose interest from all the "gift" haters.

Ya know... I've been at this since the mid-late '90s and until NA, I'd never had someone request a "gift" payment for an item (though some of that span is pre-paypal), and the only places I've really ever seen it "expected" is here.  When you are merchant, you factor your expenses into your price, this is standard practice.  However, having a buyer offer gift payment as a haggling tactic is not something I would personally frown upon, it's just the expectation that irks me.  Perhaps I have a different view because I've actually owned a store before (a "real" one, ya know, with a building and a license, and taxes and everything).

If you decide to charge a dollar more than you otherwise would because you expect most people will want to pay via paypal, no biggie... most people are not going to notice (or care), you're just compensating for the cost of business.  However, if you charge a differing amount based on payment type, you are discriminating against a group of buyers, or at least that's how it's viewed...  Think of it more that way... it's not a matter of the difference in cost (since people are going to buy from whatever the cheaper option is in a competitive market), but one of perception.

This shouldn't stop two grown [wo]men from having a transaction of whatever form they wish (I'll trade you five donkeys... and a pack of fruit stripe gum).  For instance, I was recently shopping for a new bicycle and as part of the purchase process I haggled the price a hair by offering to pay in cash money (for a bit over a two-thousand dollar purchase) and saved myself a few dollars because the money was going directly into the coffers of the seller.  I wasn't being expected to pay in cash, but when I offered to make it easy for the seller, he extended me the same courtesy.  It's the same thing.  Charge what the market will bear and if the buyer wants to "help you out" pass the savings.  I'm not saying NA needs a flat ban on gift payment, but saying you can't ask for it is fair for the buyer and still allows you to make whatever sort of side deal you wish.

Once again, this is not a debate on paypal fees or gift payments...We are clearing up any grey area some people might have thought this process fell into.

It's very simple, a seller can ask whatever they want. It's up to a buyer if they are willing to accept those terms. The point being it needs to be addressed ahead of time.

You only saw it here because it's a fairly new option. Nothing dishonest about it either. One of the options under personal payments is called payment owed. They wouldn't include that option if they didn't want peoole using it. It's basically a discount for taking the risk off paypal's back. I don't ask for gift payments, but I wouldn't turn it down if someone I know offers it either.

I'm done with the debate now b_a. It's a good change to the rule.

First sentence sums it up perfectly.  It's not a matter of which method is right or wrong - you still have the option.  For me, it's all about trust, and in the end it's your own decision.  There are a few members here I've done multiple transactions with that I would feel comfortable gifting to.  If it's my first time speaking to someone/dealing with someone/etc., chances are I won't gift. 

Simply put, nice of NA to recognize the gift payment dilemma.  If you gift, you accept responsibility, bottom line.  You just have to be smart about it. 

Just for the record, let me remind everyone (or educate the newcomers) that gifted payments never existed on NA until a MODERATOR (Dangevin) typed up the how-to thread. I had never heard of or used gifted payments until that thread existed.

So we followed the recommendations of a MODERATOR, now other MODERATORS act like you are the devil if you accept gifted payment. Let's take a step back and just admit it's a matter of personal preference. No need to stereotype an entire group of people based on your moral stances. Let's not forget that paypal / eBay are the same company yet have no problems taxing you twice on a sale, and even taxing your shipping (meaning you lose money if you charge actual shipping nowadays)...

GASP!!! People have differing opinions on preferred ways to do business?? What is this world coming to? (BTW, dangevin was an ADMINISTRATOR not a MODERATOR, if that matters for some reason).

Set up your deals however you want, just disclose it before the transaction is accepted.

I could have sworn I said this wasn't a debate about paypal or gift payments, but I must not have since people won't drop it. If you want to debate gift payments start a new thread, or take it to this one:
http://www.nintendoage.com/forum/...

Any additional off topic posts will be deleted.

Anyone else having trouble with the above link?

Link fixed.

Although BA said things will be deleted, i wanted to throw in my 2 cents.

Most are quick to forget that you could have a personal paypal account and if you didn't accepted credit cards (just current funds or instant transfers) you were not charged Fees.  Ebay did away with that system and we had no idea of how to transfer funds w/o being docked a fee.  I had two seperate paypal accounts - one for conducting transactions for current funds and one for conducting transactions with CC only.

After ebay / paypal did away with the system - Dangevin - an ADMIN and a stand up guy, figured out that one could pay Gift payments and not be charged a fee.  This was a great work around for a while, but with it we didn't realize there would be consequences that wouldn't product sellers.

Not trying to harp on you or anything Jonas, it was just a suggestion back then to still do small transactions and not get docked on them for no reason (i.e. transferring of current funds shouldn't be and still shouldn't be charged a fee, but that's a different battle).

We do not endorse gift payments because it makes our jobs harder to enforce rules when people don't protect themselves.   If you feel comfortable sending gift payments to certain members or all members, that's on you, no harm no foul... we just don't like people bitching to us when it blatently states DO NOT SEND GIFT PAYMENTS, that's all.

Like B_A has said quite a few times, the point of the thread is that sellers must disclose ahead of time (before a transaction is accepted) the fact that they are charging more for an item UNLESS you gift the payment. This is to avoid the situation described several times in this thread where a buyer makes an offer, the seller accepts it, and then tells the buyer they are REQUIRED to pay for the fee after they've already accepted the terms of the transaction.

There isn't any kind of gift banning going on and I'll still send gifts to certain people.

About 4 out of 5 buying transactions I have engaged in here have the seller agreeing to a price, accepting a transaction, and then telling me that I have an ultimatum to either pay more for the item or send a gift. It leaves the buyer in a pretty awkward situation where they have 3 options, none of which are desirable. They can either 1. Pay the fee, 2. Gift the payment and assume 100% risk, or 3. Awkwardly back out of the deal.

Just for the record, let me remind YOU that people thought Asbestos was the best thing since sliced bread when it came out.

Opinions are allowed to change over time, especially when newfound evidence points out that something just isn't that safe after all.