Payment Instructions

michellew2k  Why?, People can still select cash and make bank deposit, It is a buyers choice, and a sellers choice too to offer it, and I have it from Trade Me yes you can offer cash on auction so people can still make Bank deposit, which I did screen shot on another post way back when Ping was forced on Intrade sellers, from the E-Mail I got from Trade Me,

Cash is not only for Pick ups, it is Bank deposit just reworded, 

Payment Instructions are also sent for pick ups as well that have details in them for arranging pickups,Phone numbers etc.

so you cannot in reality remove them, that would be the final straw for most and also for Trade Me, as more members would leave,and once someone has made a sale where cash is selected sellers can still sent details in a personal E-Mail,

So why on earth remove the payment Instructions?,

Not everyone wants to use ping, or cannot use ping like some of my customers, where 2 people must sign off a purchase for organizations for a Bank deposit, e.g. schools, Play groups toy Libraries etc.

Not sure how cash = bank deposit from a TradeMe payment option is concerned. Trademe is referring to handing over actual money when you go to collect something on pick up ("cash on pick up"). However I do find the "policy" from trademe confusing/contradictory. On one hand, they state that using bank deposits is against their policy and if you use this you "may" have action taken against your account. On they other hand, they say that people can pay for postage using bank deposits IF the postage amount was not included in the original auction.

Yes the two things are related. If Trade Me are not going to mandate sellers to add shipping costs then if someone buys with Ping and it doesn't have a shipping cost they have to pay it *somehow*

The answer is to either mandate sellers add shipping costs (Which will cause an outcry by some) Or allow sellers to amend the Ping payment amount after purchase. Also full of problems. Tricky situation they've got themselves in. 

AJ - Its clear from how the recent changes were implemented that Trademe completely forgot how buyers would pay for shipping for items paid by ping, (where shipping charges need to be calculated once a sale is completed and an address is known).

Overall, I find the recent changes very poorly considered, I think i could have conjured up a better implementation with my eyes closed.

What would be your solution to that issue greg23?

Callum — the logic here doesn’t really stack up.

You can’t remove bank deposit as a payment method on the basis of fraud risk (this is their entire reasoning), while still effectively relying on it for shipping costs because Trade Me’s Ping system doesn’t properly accommodate variable freight. If bank transfer is supposedly unsafe, then allowing it in any part of the transaction undermines that entire rationale.

At the moment, Trademe's position is contradictory. Bank deposit is “not allowed” for purchases, but is still required (or at least unavoidable) for shipping in many cases. That’s an illogical policy, it’s a partial restriction that doesn’t actually solve the problem it claims to address. If anything, it creates confusion and inconsistency in how users are expected to transact, one payment using ping, then sellers reaching out to request separate payment for shipping. Trademe's solution is to create a new listing for shipping only so it can be paid using ping - yay lets clutter the site with shipping only listings.

If bank transfer is acceptable for part of a transaction, it should be acceptable for the whole transaction. The only clear difference between the two scenarios is that one avoids fees, and the other (Ping) introduces them. It’s hard not to conclude that the real driver here is revenue capture rather than risk mitigation. Its plain and obvious what the driver is.

On the buyer fee side, this is where things get genuinely risky.

Introducing buyer fees into an auction-style marketplace goes directly against how makes those platforms work. Auctions depend on low friction to bid, high participation, and psychological momentum. Adding even small fees at the buyer end interrupts all three.

There’s a fundamental marketplace truth: if you keep buyers happy, sellers are happy. If you lose buyers, the whole system fails.

What Trade Me has done is incentivised sellers to list more by removing success fees, while simultaneously discouraging buyers through additional costs. The end result is a massive increase in listings, without any buyers.

That imbalance is dangerous. Sellers don’t create value on their own, they need active buyers. Reduce buyer engagement, and you lower buying activity, ultimately making the platform less attractive for sellers as well.

Even if the total cost to transact hasn’t changed much, shifting fees onto buyers feels worse. Buyers see the fee at the point of purchase, it’s immediate and tangible. 

Marketplaces live and die on user sentiment, not just economics.

The entire approach feels like a short-term play to increase listings and revenue via Ping, at the expense of long-term marketplace health. If you want to destabilise a two-sided marketplace, the fastest way to do it is to disincentivise buyers and this moves uncomfortably close to that line.

Callum - I've posted a reply, it's pending. Hopefully you get to see it

Thanks greg23 It has cleared now.

My guess that eventually, they will indeed make stated shipping costs mandatory. Personally when there is something I want and the seller hasn't added shipping costs, I ask them to add it. So I can then process the purchase in one go without mucking around with 2 separate payments by 2 separate methods. 

I know and understand there are reasons why it isn't easy in some instances for some sellers. Like combining or larger items. But much more often it's just seller laziness, newbies, or just not knowing how to do it. 

Just for the record there has always been a cost to buyers on top of the hammer price in all traditional auctions. Both online and in person. The fee is far higher than what Trade Me is charging as well. So they certainly aren't the only ones doing that........

Flossy63 — I think bank deposit absolutely should still be allowed, and I say that as someone who even offers free shipping on top.

My reasoning is pretty simple. Over roughly 10 years of selling on Trade Me, I’ve probably received around 2,000 bank deposits, and I’ve never encountered a single case of fraud. That’s not to say it can’t happen, but in practice it seems extremely rare if you follow basic precautions. I never ship anything until the money is actually sitting cleared in my account. Once funds are cleared, the risk is essentially gone.

So I do struggle to understand how fraud is realistically occurring with bank deposits in a way that justifies removing them entirely. The only scenario that really makes sense is sellers sending goods before payment is received or relying on screenshots or “pending” payments — which is more of a process issue than a payment method issue.

There’s always been an element of seller responsibility here. If you choose to accept bank deposit, you understand the need to wait for cleared funds before shipping. That’s no different to managing risk in any other type of transaction. Removing the option altogether feels like overcorrecting for what is, in most cases, avoidable behaviour.

Personally, I’d far rather receive a bank deposit than deal with a stranger turning up at my door with cash. Cash comes with its own risks — safety, no paper trail, potential disputes — whereas a bank transfer is at least recorded and traceable through the banking system. I sell high value items, I dont want to offer pickup, I dont want my address being widely known. Are Trademe accepting the risk of a burglary from someone who has visited my home?

What makes it feel even more illogical is that bank deposit hasn’t really been eliminated in practice. It’s still effectively required in some situations, like covering shipping when Ping doesn’t handle variable freight properly. So on one hand it’s being positioned as unsafe, but on the other hand it’s still being relied on. That inconsistency makes the policy hard to justify from a risk perspective.

At the end of the day, it feels like this should be about choice. If sellers are comfortable accepting bank deposits and managing that risk properly, they should be able to do so. For many of us, it’s been a simple, reliable, and cost-effective way to transact for years.

Everything about the change just feels a bit disconnected from how people actually use the platform in the real world.

Flossy63 - I've posted a reply, it's pending, hopefully you get to see it. 

greg23, your not wrong from a sellers point of view. But look at it from a buyers point of view. Is there more risk making a bank deposit over a PING payment? Maybe, or maybe not. The difference here is the "protection" that trademe provides for these payments.

Yes greg23 you are missing the point. It's about buyers not sellers.

There were a number of recent high profile cases where people had paid into bank accounts and the seller did a runner. Trade Me had to pay out for these from their own pocket after media attention and a Disputes Tribunal case.  With Ping they are able to claw the funds back via the banking chargeback system. Not so easy with bank transfers.

Ping is safer for buyers. That's undeniable. 

Kia Ora All,

One of the prominent cases in which a complex scam took place via a Bank deposit/transfer in the latter half of last year - 2025 - which wasn't able to be covered by TradeMe, the Bank or further investigation from the Police is highlighted in the News report below...

Three people, one payment, no accountability: Inside a sophisticated new online fraud | Stuff

Why does freight repeatedly keep disappearing from listings...I enter it in as routine, when go into the listing again on most occasions the freight cost has disappeared & has to be reentered,....a seriously big time consuming exercise.
Even when I want to edit a listing, I have to repeatedly keep reposting the freight again and again and again and again. Hopefully today I have gone through every listing to put freight on... hopefully it stays on the listing.
Also, one sale went through Ping, person paid, however as the freight had once again disappeared, the buyer had to pay via Internet banking transfer the cost of freight.

Another instance this week, a buyer request I put freight on the listing....I did...yet again.

Very frustrating & time consuming when we are paying for these listings & having to spent hours each week ensuring freight is on our listings as disappear. C'mon TM.

Today I have had to go through every listing to turn "authenticated buyers" on after noticing that had also disappeared from my listings which I ALWAYS ensure is switched on... keep it simple & clean.

One seller wrote to me saying she had had a terrible time with the upgrades disrupting her trades, I hadn't asked, I agreed with her & not alone there.