Hello Harlem. You would have to ask Trade Me yourself. I am just a member like you. However I will say they always differentiate in various ways between casual and in-trade. There are things that casual sellers can do that in-trade can't (Make an offer for example) Likewise in-trade sellers have legal obligations around returns and refunds. In-trade sellers also have a tiered fee structure. For some items it can be cheaper than casual sellers, for some it can be more.  

Hello Bridget. My guess is that by using a VPN anyone in the world can then easily log into Trade Me. This is probably what they are trying to avoid? Scammers / Fake accounts etc would likely increase a lot and cause problems on the website if VPN restrictions were relaxed.

Dejan It's pretty obvious why it is like it is. Are you telling me that if you were the lead bidder on that item and were prepared to go to $600. You might even have had a $600 autobid locked in. Then someone comes along, asks for a buynow of $300 and the seller says yep, I'll sell it to you, too bad about Dejan you would honestly be happy with that? How can that be good for the seller, when they miss out on a much larger sale price, and Trade Me when they miss out on a much larger comission, and you when you  miss out on the item you wanted because someone else come in and stole it?

Tony. Being slightly facetious here, but with Ping activated, and buynow items, you will never have a slow payer again. I notice all your items are buynow. (A few Start=reserve=buynow, it would be better to change those to buynow only)  If you have buynow only and Ping then a buyer has to pay at point of sale. You will never have to chase a payment again.  

Lance. How do you mean worst ever change? It has always been like this on Trade Me. And hopefully, always will be. So you are telling me if you are bidding on a $1 reserve auction that you really really want. Happy to pay upto $500 for it. You put your bid in. Then while you are away someone asks for a $200 buynow. The seller says OK. Adds a $200 buynow. That person grabs it. How do you feel?........

Believe it or not the best advice for these situations is "Refund the buyer, then sort out the delivery issue afterwards." When you think about it should the buyer have to sit there for days or weeks while the courier gets their act together and looks into it? Yes, it sounds like they are being unreasonable and impatient, but they just want the item they paid for after all. I know it's a hard pill to swallow. But that's just how it is these days in a buyer weighted environment. The Buyer Protection policy stipulates that a signature is required for Trade Me to side with the seller that the ...

Hi John. Buyers won't be able to buy (a buynow) item without using Ping or Afterpay. You have to confirm the payment before the item is sold and goes from the website.  I guess technically a buyer could email the seller of an auction they won by bidding and request bank details be sent manually. So perhaps there is a loophole there. I don't know if it would be possible for Trade Me to stop that occurring somehow. There are already sellers that only have Ping. So it would be a risky move to buy something from a seller and request bank details when they don't have it stated as an option. They...

Stephen. The safety is around Buyer Protection. Yes, you might be a good seller. But there are some that aren't. There are many many tales on here of buyers that have been ripped off. If a buyer pays into an unscrupulous sellers bank account Trade Me are generally not able to assist the buyer in recovering the money.  If the buyer pays with Ping, their purchase is protected.   

Kane. TM will no doubt argue that the Ping fee pays for Buyer Protection. After-all the money has to come from somewhere when Trade Me needs to refund a buyer if the seller has vanished after taking the money.  Yes, you could pile the fee on the buyer instead. Trade Me are trialling this. Their 99c trial for purchases made with bank deposits and Buyer Protection has just ended, and they are now doing a $2.99 (variable) service fee trial for buyers.  The question is which way will encourage or discourage sales. Should the buyer pay for protection, or should it be on the seller?

In general I think this is a good move. I would say that most in-trade sellers already offer ping so probably won't affect too many. It will add security for buyers. After many years on here you get used to hearing stories of people who have been ripped off. Then it comes to the age old question "How did you pay? "Oh I deposited money into their bank account......" Trade Me can't claw that back like they can with Ping. My question is how is this going to work with traders who don't have shipping costs? In my opinion all in-trade sellers need to be forced to include shipping costs. I'd even ...