Amazon won't reimburse me - updated sourcing cost
I submitted an update for a sourcing cost on one of my products.
Amazon approved the sourcing cost update.
Amazon reimbursed me for their "estimate" and not my sourcing cost. I opened a case and they refuse to reimburse me the difference even though they approved my updated sourcing cost.
I guarantee mods won't respond to this because they don't respond to 99% of the cases I create.
Case ID: 17557139631
17 replies
Seller_nBUcRErQhJ4JW
We were denied because our sourcing costs are out of their guidelines whateer htat means. How they determine these "sourcing costs " are a big secret - when something is such a secret it says to me they are lying plain and simple.
We are in the jewelry space, Amazon is clueless when it comes to sourcing jewelry and they have proven they are clueless by claiming many of the costs are below the intrinisic value of metal.
Gold is up 300.00 / ounce since the initial costs showed up - if Amazon was using sourcing costs they would increase
Perhaps their AI is just not programmed correctly.
They also state ( and correct me if I am wrong) that they do not included duties / tariffs ? If its a sourcing cost isnt that part of the cost?
So now Amazon has a magic way to source duty free and can buy gold for below spot price of gold ( real gold not their fake chinese gold)
Do they actually believe sellers believe this?
Seller_4HaNDbfs1w2Ft
Surprise, surprise, mods didn't respond to my case.
I've created multiple seller forums over my selling career and mods have not responded ONCE!! Genuinely insane.
@Glenn_Amazon
Seller_olR9xEes2iJMd
We submitted a thread recently in part due to how we're having the hardest time trying to navigate any of this, spending significant hours trying to solely recoup what we pay for an item.. Pretty wild.
We've run into the same issue recently, some items we had refunded the incorrect amount even though our sourcing cost has been approved... We've been, basically, automatically closed out of our cases when trying to do anything about it..
A seller support agent looked into it and basically said, their hands our tied because of their internal policy.. however to just "try again" in a few days... So that's where we're at.. I guess we'll just "try again" next week with a new case, while keeping an excel sheet of all of our incorrectly refunded lost goods... great. lol
Seller_zSWez2Mzpdboa
As long as we 3PL sellers keep on sending merchandise to FBA, they are going to keep taking advantage of us.
After all, our merchandise, is a free source of income to Amazon. That's one way how to get rich!
Seller_Pzr1YbyALST0B
When you let others run your business and send them all your business secrets and pattern what else do you expect .. Amazon recovers all their losses of customer returns and refunds by stealing merchandise from 3p sellers thats not a secret
Seller_h4btKGmOmHFLr
We have checked reimbursements for most of our FBA products and have determined that Amazon is only reimbursing 55 to 60 percent of the actual cost of the product. Some of these Amazon sells, so they know the cost. They have just chosen to screw the third party sellers. We have many high volume products that our supplier contract forbids us revealing our pricing. When you are selling full semi-loads each month, you can't risk losing that business.
And we had shifted a high percentage of our business from FBA to FBM due to the previous placement fee fleecing from Amazon. So maybe we are a little ahead of the game with the latest third party seller fleecing.
Seller_Z5ctyFr3TMayu
I'm on the same boat as @Seller_4HaNDbfs1w2Ft, Amazon keeps directing me to the cost management portal when the portal saying it can't accept our invoice for cost as it's outside of policy, they only wants to reimburse a little over 1/3 the cost. If Amazon knows the cost so well, then instead of reimbursing the amount, they could go purchase the item and put it back into our FBA account instead. Amazon just doesn't care about 3rd part seller anymore and only wants more profits for shareholders.
