Your account will be migrated to DD+7 on March 12

[TJB]

I’m with VTR on this. Sure, it’s a cash grab but there certainly is risks involved on their end.

I don’t remember the exact percent, but it’s something like 50% of sellers on Amazon are Chinese. Sure, many of them have stock in FBA but many of them are shipping from China. How many scammers that just take a bunch of orders and ship nothing? What recourse does Amazon have without DD+7?

Yes, Amazon does a great job vetting sellers from here. Vetting sellers in the PRC is an entirely different animal. There are entire businesses that do nothing but create Amazon accounts to sell to the highest bidder. How is Amazon going to protect itself from this? DD+7.

I’m not saying I’m happy about the DD+7 but I do understand. At the least, maybe I’ll see some return on it in my 401k when the stock goes up from the increase profits of screwing me…

[VTR]

@TJB

Yes, Amazon does a great job vetting sellers from here.

Our favorite felon using a fake business name, has a whopping 30% negative feedback, felony conviction for fake IDs, and lost lawsuits for counterfeit goods, trademark infringement from the City of New York, and they are still selling.

[bookwormapril]

And I see that is quite recent.

(the feedback – not the felony)

[VTR]

The more recent stuff I cannot link, as the last name is part of the title of all the civil lawsuits in 2019. Not going to dox, even a convicted felon and counterfeiter.

[VTR]

Oh and let us not forget they have multiple entities selling the same things from the exact same address.

[Amasucker]

Their recourse is to not onboard sellers from a region with a high rate of fraud, and certainly not at the rate at which they can’t vet them. Instead, they get rights that domestic sellers do not have, and Amazon is clearly leaning into them. Then, when Amazon’s choice bites them in the backside, they see an opportunity to both cover said backside and make more money off domestic sellers.

There’s some question whether or not Amazon cares about their 3PS. There is no question about which 3PS sellers they care about more: longtime domestic sellers with a well-known track record, or new sellers from a region with different cultural norms about fair/legal/infringing (hint: it’s the latter). Ultimately, the buyers suffer, which isn’t what Amazon is about, but is what ensh*ttification is all about.

[VTR]

@Amasucker

Instead, they get rights that domestic sellers do not have, and Amazon is clearly leaning into them.

Eventually this will come back to bite Amazon on the consumer side after the dog leash seller lawsuit. Amazon simply has not been hit with a large enough lawsuit yet.

[papy]

@VTR

Amazon simply has not been hit with a large enough lawsuit yet.

After reading about https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/01/27/anthropic-ai-scan-destroy-books/ (h/t @selg), I am no longer confident that there is ANY lawsuit big enough to reign in any big tech company from doing literally whatever they want to do and then charge us for the privilege.

To be fair, Amazon was only mentioned once in the Project Panama piece because Facebook/Meta was using AWS servers to intentionally circumvent responsibility for downloading pirated materials.

But still.

Google, Meta, Anthropic, OpenAI, Amazon, etc are all cut from the same cloth.

@VTR

Our favorite felon using a fake business name, has a whopping 30% negative feedback, felony conviction for fake IDs, and lost lawsuits for counterfeit goods, trademark infringement from the City of New York, and they are still selling.

I have no problem with convicted felons, who have actually met all required restitution requirements, earning a living.

I do have a problem when no provisions were made to prevent re-offending and when they continue to crime in the same way with apparent impunity. Like that Seller.

@joebcrafts

The real story is that Billions held in a slush fund generates millions in interest, daily.

@Image

Assuming it is DD+7 and not longer, each day makes another $3.6 Million!

@Picks_by_Nisha

And Amazon’s not even paying interest to us…

Sure, Amazon assumes risk with 3P Sellers. As always. This is not “assuming risk.”

[VTR]

@papy

Sure, Amazon assumes risk with 3P Sellers. As always. This is not “assuming risk.”

It is assuming risk for those small sellers who fall beneath the requirement for liability insurance for the products they are selling which I would assert is a large percentage of sellers based on the percentage of small sellers that make up the marketplace.
The dog leash case is a perfect example. No insurance, and vanished without a trace, just like a foreign drop shipper can do.

@papy

I have no problem with convicted felons, who have actually met all required restitution requirements, earning a living.

I do. If you were convicted of doing fake repairs on cars, you should be barred from fixing cars. If you are touching patients, you should not be able to switch from being a surgeon to being a dentist. If you sell fake law enforcement items, you should be barred from selling items in that category.
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS:A. The XXXXXX Parties, including all subsidiaries, parents, related companies, officers, agents, employees, and all others acting in privity, concert, or participation with them or on their behalf or under their direction and control, are hereby permanently enjoined and restrained from 1. manufacturing, advertising, marketing, offering, trading, bartering, selling or otherwise distributing unlicensed merchandise bearing the City Trademarks, including the NYPD and FDNY Marks, in any manner, directly or indirectly unless first having obtained express written permission or having obtained a written license for such activity by the City; 2. taking any actions inconsistent with the City’s exclusive ownership of the City Trademarks, including the NYPD and FDNY Marks, including without limitation, any actions tending to dilute, disparage, tarnish, or infringe the City’s rights in such trademarks; as further set forth herein. This Stipulated Consent Judgment and the grant of the permanent injunction herein conclusively resolve all claims asserted in this case as to all parties, and accordingly, the Clerk of Court is requested to mark this case closed.” -…
On their Ebay listings today…

“XXXXXXX was indicted on July 11, 2002, on twenty-three criminal counts stemming from his filing of false insurance documents claiming that his wife had been killed in the World Trade Center attacks.”, sent in federal prison in 2005 for fake police badges, sued by City of New York- 2017, Sued by manufacturer in Maine- 2018…

I am all for rehabilitation and doing ones time, but this person is simply a piece of trash IMO and there should only be so many “second chances”.

[papy]

@VTR

If you were convicted of doing fake repairs on cars, you should be barred from fixing cars. If you are touching patients, you should not be able to switch from being a surgeon to being a dentist. If you sell fake law enforcement items, you should be barred from selling items in that category.

Completely agree! I could have linked those thoughts better. I once said similar to a public defender, that if you were a pharmacist convicted of thieving from your pharmacy to feed a prescription painkiller addiction, then you should not be able to work in the photo lab at CVS.

@papy

I do have a problem when no provisions were made to prevent re-offending and when they continue to crime in the same way with apparent impunity. Like that Seller.

I don’t have any problem with any felon earning an honest living after they have fulfilled their obligations to society as determined by judge or jury of peers.

But that’s not the case with that Seller, at all.

[Thelunatick]

@TJB

I’m with VTR on this. Sure, it’s a cash grab but there certainly is risks involved on their end.

Yes there are certain risks, but moving everyone to DD+7 does not mitigate those risks.

When you have sellers on Amazon for 20+ years with proven track records what does DD+7 do to mitigate risks from them?

Again sellers from outside the US have proven to be the biggest risks and scammers. Yet Amazon does nothing to them.
If it were risk mitigation Amazon would go back to only US based sellers can sell on .com

[TJB]

@Thelunatick

If it were risk mitigation Amazon would go back to only US based sellers can sell on .com

Right, but something close to 50% of Amazons sellers are Chinese. Eliminating 50% of your product offerings isn’t exactly a good business decision. I’m not defending that 50% figure, just saying the reality of what it is.

Yes, DD+7 does mitigate a lot of risk from sellers that don’t actually ship what they are offering. If the customer isn’t happy with what they received (let’s say they shipped a box of rocks), they can get a refund and Amazon doesn’t pay the seller stopping the scam while they can still recover something.

Yes, this hurts good sellers. Yes, it’s punishing everyone for the bad deeds of a few (or maybe more than a few). Business never has been and never will be about doing what is right, it’s about making money. I don’t like it, but I do understand it.

[Image]

@TJB

…something close to 50% of Amazons sellers are Chinese…

Do we know for sure that they are subject to DD7+7? Or do they have MFN (Most-Favored-Nation status.) with Amazon?

@TJB

Business never has been and never will be about doing what is right, it’s about making money. I don’t like it, but I do understand it.

Emphasis added.

I agree, I prefered the way it was, but do understand why they must do it. They don’t have time to look for the bad sellers by hand. This eliminates that labor intensive process. I can live with it.

[Image]

Well that did not take long…

Handling time gap

You handed off packages to carriers on average 2.1 calendar days before your promised handling time.

Promised Handling Time:
4.0 calendar days
2.7 business days

Actual Handling Time:
1.9 calendar days
1.4 business days

You have 1 SKUs breaching our handling time policy and at risk of being automated. Review your handling time configuration.

Download SKU report

First time ever, ok Amazon I get it. You do not want us to send items to the customers early.

“I grant you your wish master.” I will be sure NEVER to send items to your customers early.

[Lost_My_Marbles]

@Image

I will be sure NEVER to send items to your customers early.

Just a reminder … don’t print labels the day/night before with tomorrow’s date as the day the label is purchased is the day it is considered as shipped by Amazon. Doing this practice will also make you a day early.

[Image]

Yes, thank you. We always have printed our labels the day of shipment. I hate when amazon sends me a “Your item has shipped!” notice when it has not. The worst offenders, sad to say, are FBM sellers. FBA does it too, just not quite as often.

I have always thought about putting together a list of “When Amazon Says This, They Really Mean This.” Then posting it here in a thread for referance.

[Bird_of_Paradise]

Just to clarify, is the SKU in jeopardy one that you have sold multiples of, or is it a one-off for a single item (I e., a used book)? Or maye there’s not a way you can find out which one they say is at risk?

With this new punishment for imprecise handling time, I am thinking that, if like me, each one of your individual items has a unique SKU, this new policy will have no effect. Amazon appears to intend to monitor SKUs, not overall performance. So if I only ever ship one of a single SKU, there’s nothing to monitor over time.

I also wonder what would happen if a seller shipped, say, 1 day early, then deleted the SKU from inventory, that would result in no monitoring.

OTOH, it is surprising that you have a warning a month before this policy is stated to be in place.

[Image]

@Bird_of_Paradise

Just to clarify, is the SKU in jeopardy one that you have sold multiples of,

They do not point out an individual SKU in the report, they only show all of them. One of the dynamics is we are just coming back online with FBus (FBM) so our numbers are low. It would not take much to throw them off a day or more.

The one we shipped very early, was required and “allowed” to ship Monday, we shipped it Wednesday. A few others we shipped three days early not one day early.

We can manage this, we will just absolutely positively only ship the day it is allowed to ship or the day before. No more early shipments.

@Bird_of_Paradise

Amazon appears to intend to monitor SKUs, not overall performance.

Yes the report listed individual SKU’s and showed the ones that had the “very bad fast” early ship time. It indicated they would put those individual SKU’s on AHT if we did not stop shipping to early.

I am also thinking of a “sinister” workaround. When I do ship early, confirm the order as shipped the day it should have shipped.

My parallel plan is to write a performance plan for when they move me to AHT, indicating, “I understand what I did wrong, I shipped to early, I understand that is wrong, I understand Amazon does not want us to expedite shipments for free. It will never happen again.”

[Lost_My_Marbles]

With the Handle Time Gap … if your gap was over 2 days, then your entire account was put on AHT and you had no way to go back.

This new way of measuring early shipping by SKU with Amazon putting the SKU on AHT sounds like Amazon will be setting individual SKU handle times and then locking the attribute. To our knowledge, there is no way to set up currently that would allow sellers or Amazon to split inventory SKUs so that some are manual handle time and others are AHT.

For those of you who sell one and done (like books) or sell only one per month, it is likely that you would run into an issue as the SKUs will be monitored on a rolling 30 days. So if you sell one and ship early, then that one will trigger the bot at 30 days because that item would be at 100% ship early during that 30 day rolling period.

If Amazon sends a warning first month and takes action the second month, then there may be time to correct on a slow moving item if it is corrected the second month.

If you have items that can ship in one day, set them to 1 day handle time. If you have items that need 3 day handle time, set those to 3 day handle time. During the holidays … if you can only do 5 orders in a day, set your capacity to 5 (or 4) so that Amazon will push out the handle time on orders over your capacity. The new vacation time setting could also be used to off set the handle time during certain periods or when you know there may be an issue.

We had the same sales this May over last year’s May even though we are AHT this year but wasn’t last year and even though Amazon is now DD+7 and last year is wasn’t.

When we first went to AHT and SSA, it had some issues for about 3 to 4 months. But now it is like clock work for us. The customers are still getting the product in 3 to 6 days depending on their location. Carrier issues happen but they have always happened.

The first 6 to 8 weeks of DD+7 were rough but now the dollar flow is stabilized.

We get excited when things change and calm down as we adapt to the change.

We’re too old to let Amazon mess up a good nights sleep … not going to happen.

[Uncle_Leroy]

@Image

My parallel plan is to write a performance plan for when they move me to AHT, indicating, “I understand what I did wrong, I shipped to early, I understand that is wrong, I understand Amazon does not want us to expedite shipments for free. It will never happen again.”