I do agree, but unfortunately most sellers just don’t want to use our payment system. We would most likely lose a majority if we forced it, and this was the next best thing.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t say this is the next best thing. You’re still excluding very trustworthy sellers who have been on the platform, in some cases for years, just because they support another shipping company. The way you’re presenting this needs dire change. If it’s a buyer protection guarantee, then make it a buyer protection guarantee - say “purchases through this breeder are backed by MM.” But don’t have the green check mark on the listings, and don’t claim it’s for trustworthy sellers if that’s not actually the requirement to get the badge. The requirement is that you use MM shipping. That needs to be made exceedingly clear to buyers. As the program currently is, there will ABSOLUTELY be a detrimental affect on sellers without the check mark, and that’s not fair at all. I get that MM is a business, but I pay every single year for MM, I do all of my transactions here, I do the vast majority of my purchases here, and I support the site, but now I’m not considered a “trustworthy” seller simply because I choose to honor relationships with other shipping companies. If the green check-mark isn’t a big deal, then waive that requirement and make it for anyone who meets MM policy qualifications. And if it is a big distinction, make it much more clear that it’s a loyalty shipping badge and don’t advertise it as trustworthy sellers.
I see no problem with requiring purchases to be made through MM, but I do absolutely have a problem with the implication that the only trustworthy sellers are those who use MM shipping. If this is a buyer protection guarantee through MM, why are sellers not required to take payment through the platform but ARE required to use MM shipping? Payment options should be a much bigger deal than shipping through the site.
6 Likes
I hear what you’re saying, but this isn’t a ‘trustworthy seller’ badge, it’s a Buyer Protection badge. It doesn’t mean sellers without it are untrustworthy; it just tells buyers which purchases MM will back.
MM shipping is required for the free version because we need to verify shipments and fund the protection itself. If we covered all transactions with no built-in revenue, the program wouldn’t be sustainable. That’s why we’re also offering a paid option for sellers who prefer other shipping methods.
As for payments, forcing MM Payments would be a massive shift, and we’ve prioritized flexibility.
Yes, sellers with the badge may attract more buyers, but that’s how any guarantee works. It’s not about favoritism; it’s about clarity. If you have suggestions on improving how we communicate that, we’re open to feedback, but the structure of the program isn’t changing.
This could be done in a much better way that doesn’t alienate sellers. Rather than having the check mark on advertisement photos, include it only on seller profiles. Re-word the program to make it clearer that it is only for buyer protection. Maybe try a different kind of badge. Right now, whether it’s intentional or not, the implication is 100% that non-green-checked sellers are less trustworthy than those that have the checkmark, and that is simply not reasonable. People WILL get caught up in that and it WILL result in fewer sales for sellers without the green check.
As for “it isn’t a ‘trustworthy seller’ badge,” your messaging up to now contradicts this entirely.
If it isn’t for ‘trusted sellers,’ then don’t say it’s for trusted sellers. It’s simply a protection guarantee on that particular purchase. It’s been clear up to now that MM is willing to back these sellers because it considers them “trusted.” Trusted sellers should be any sellers following MM policies with good reviews. Adding the condition about shipping through MM shipping means it’s no longer about trusted sellers, it’s about loyal sellers. And when loyal sellers are treated better than sellers who use other companies, that’s the problem that I have. If I’m paying for MM and following all of MM’s policies, explain to me why I’m not a trusted seller.
8 Likes
Aha! That’s where I saw the “Trusted Seller” 
badge description! Thank you @inspirationexotics!
@drollinger Darien, I have been buying from trusted sellers here for several years! I didn’t need a from admin to tell me they were trustworthy! I figured it out for myself by reading their (the sellers’s) hard earned reviews written by real, satisfied buyers.
I sincerely believe that you and your staff need to go back to the drawing board and at least get on the same page, So far I have not seen any buyers other than me pipe up here, which is unfortunate, because I represent the other half of the equation. I depend on the reviews of a seller and I can’t believe I am in the minority.
However, if, for instance I found 2 corn snakes that I really liked and I was a brand new buyer, and I had the choice to buy from a seller with a or a seller without a I would go with the seller. Being a brand new buyer and not knowing what I know, I would make my choice on the alone. Totally not fair
7 Likes
This is the problem I see, as well. I say this as a person whose store has a green check mark. I have always done my absolute best to be completely ethical and that won’t change. It’s also why I remain uncomfortable with the likely perception that others are less trustworthy because they lack this very visible thing. Yes, qualifying for this badge entails much more than a shipping choice, but the distinction between myself and so many other ethical, trustworthy breeders here is solely the shipping choice.
I’m not a huge business, I’m a person with a huge passion. I got FedEx Certified back in the days before bulk label buyers came along. I have probably used every company for shipping, and I’m willing to commit to MorphMarket for all domestic shipping because I’ve been pleased with the customer service and with the rates.
I am a huge supporter of MorphMarket, not just for my sales but for so many other good things it has done and is doing for the community. I applaud the concept of Buyer Protection, and requiring shipping through MorphMarket makes complete sense for it.
Agreed. Again, words matter and the words are “trusted sellers.” My choice for shipping is not solely what makes me a person whom a buyer - and MorphMarket too, come to that - can trust.
6 Likes
I appreciate the feedback, and I agree that wording matters. The badge was never meant to imply some sellers are ‘trusted’ and others aren’t, it’s simply a way to show which purchases are backed by MM Buyer Protection. The actual text says: “Enjoy extra peace of mind when you buy from this seller on MorphMarket. You will get up to $500 if they fail to meet our standards.”
That said, I hear the concern that the perception might suggest otherwise, and we’re open to refining the messaging. But the badge itself isn’t going away. Buyer Protection exists to give new buyers confidence, and they need to see which listings are covered, most don’t visit seller profiles.
This isn’t about “loyalty” but about verifying shipments and funding the protection. That’s why MM shipping is required for the free version, with a paid option for others. I get the frustration, and we will look into improving how we communicate it.
2 Likes
I would also like to point out that I was prompted to receive the badge today and opted-out, because at the bottom there was something along the lines of “By opting in you agree to ship all MM transactions through MM shipping. Failure to do this can result in termination of your selling profile.”
Those aren’t the exact words, but nonetheless, it sends a very clear message that I don’t think is fair in the slightest. This is quite literally a punishment. Up to now, MorphMarket has only removed sellers for refusing to follow MM policies or for breaking trust with buyers. Adding this means that once again, there is now a punishment and terminaion of folks who choose to opt in but then perhaps make a one-time decision to ship with another company for a cheaper price or a better guarantee. This just proves to me that it is about “trusted” sellers. If you’re removing people who opt in, that seems like an awfully harsh punishment. At most, if someone opts in and then ships through another company they should have the badge removed, but in no way is it fair to terminate their entire selling account over using a different shipping company. I’m just not seeing any positive here. It seems like nothing but a crackdown on loyalty.
9 Likes
I had plans for an animal to be shipped to me Tuesday. The seller uses MM shipping and Monday I got a notification that MM would not honor insurance for Tuesday shipping because of “Weather”. I was advised to wait another week. It was a rain storm with some wind. Don’t planes fly above storms?
I had been waiting months for this animal so I went ahead with shipping. She got to me just fine……
6 Likes
That my friend is interesting……I am glad I am done buying animals, at least here anyway……
5 Likes
@inspirationexotics Your claim is false. You took what we wrote and misrepresented it. The actual wording states ‘may result in disqualification from the program,’ not ‘termination of your seller profile.’ Those are two entirely different things. You can’t misquote something and then admit, ‘Well, that’s not exactly what it said.’
Opting into MorphMarket Buyer Protection does require sellers to use MorphMarket Shipping for transactions covered by the program, but nowhere does it say that failing to do so will result in a seller’s entire account being shut down. The consequence is removal from the program, not account termination.
The actual consequence for violating this policy is the removal of the Buyer Protection badge, not account termination. If a seller consistently refuses to follow the rules of the program while keeping the badge, they may be removed from it, but their MorphMarket account would not be shut down.
So, while the policy does enforce consistent use of MM Shipping for covered transactions, the claim that sellers will be completely removed from MorphMarket for a single instance of using a different shipper is false.
3 Likes
MorphMarket does not arbitrarily turn off insurance—we follow FedEx’s suggestions and industry best practices. During severe weather events, FedEx warns about delays. That’s why all major reptile shipping providers, not just MorphMarket, suspend insurance during extreme weather conditions.
The alert we posted was a responsible warning based on a major storm affecting large portions of the country. We clearly communicated that insurance would be turned off at the end of the day due to Memphis (FedEx’s main hub) being under a wind advisory and worsening conditions expected through Thursday. This was not a “decision made in MorphMarket’s best interest”; it was a necessary step to protect sellers from shipping in unsafe conditions.
In fact, here is one of many news articles about it, no one knew where the storm was going to hit exactly and Memphis was mentioned as a possible area.
https://apnews.com/article/storms-blizzard-snow-tornado-e661c684a0b0507dce0e327d8340349b
I’d also like to add that last week after the alert there were 56 shipments that were at least 1 day late. This is not including delayed shipments that still delivered the same day, just late.
Our top priority is always animal safety. If severe weather poses any risk, we would rather be safe than sorry. While some shipments may have made it through without issue, it could have just as easily been a disaster. This isn’t just about conditions in Memphis—delays anywhere in the country can create a domino effect that disrupts flights and extends transit times, putting animals at risk. Both FedEx and MorphMarket monitor multiple factors to make informed decisions that prioritize safe, reliable shipping.
I’d also like to add, MorphMarket actually makes significantly less money—sometimes 10x less—on days when we issue these warnings and turn off insurance. This isn’t just ‘not in our interest’; it’s a direct financial loss for us. We’re willing to take that hit because animal safety comes first.
Seeing comments like this only reinforces why we issue these warnings in the first place. Some people are clearly willing to ship even when severe weather makes it risky, which proves we need to be even more strict about these advisories. Our priority is always animal safety, and if there’s a serious weather threat, we will continue to warn sellers—not just for their sake, but for the well-being of the animals being shipped.
The fact that multiple people here are defending the decision to ship during a major storm just gives me even more reason to keep posting these alerts and make sure everyone understands the risks involved.
7 Likes
Not to derail the discussion, but…
I’m only seeing one person defending this. If you’re talking about the likes on a post, I can’t speak for everyone, but I know a like from myself does not necessarily mean “I agree”. I’d ask that you not put words in our metaphorical mouths based on a click. Not to mention after a certain period you can no longer “unlike” something even if it was in error.
4 Likes
Thank you for providing this valuable service to us. You are so appreciated! I would have shipped Tuesday based on my research on temps and would not have caught that there might be delays till it was too late. 
1 Like
I think the Buyer Protection program will help increase confidence in new buyers, and it will also decrease those new buyer sales for the accounts that don’t have the badge.
Once it is possible for anyone who meets the qualification criteria (excluding the exclusive shipping requirement) to get the badge, it is a huge positive to the community, which seems to be in the works by allowing non-MM shippers to pay a monthly fee for the insurance and then they can get the checkmark.
I do think as it currently stands the buyer protection is a bit weak in practice because it requires the seller to do everything right such as keeping all communication in MM, agree to ship exclusively with MM, and if there is a problem MM will only pay out if the seller did everything right and then decided to screw the customer. If the seller took the convo to text or phone call (which is likely to happen if you have a bad actor because they don’t want MM’s oversight) then MM could refuse to pay out of even though the buyer didn’t do anything wrong.
The buyer has little control over what the seller does and by tying the requirements for the buyer protection to the seller’s actions, it makes the program feel like a way to get more sellers to switch to MM shipping (which isn’t a bad thing and often can be cheaper) rather than true buyer protection that protects the buyer regardless if they buy from someone who actually was trying to scam them but happen to have the badge.
4 Likes
I appreciate your perspective, and you’re right—the Buyer Protection program is primarily about increasing confidence for new buyers. We also understand the concern that sellers without the badge may see fewer sales, which is why we’re working on a paid option for those who don’t use MM shipping but still want to participate.
As for the requirements, Buyer Protection is tied to the seller’s actions because that’s the only way we can effectively verify a transaction. If we covered purchases where conversations were taken off-platform or where shipping wasn’t trackable through MM, it would open the door for abuse and make disputes nearly impossible to resolve fairly. This isn’t just about MM shipping—it’s about having verifiable records so we can confidently step in when necessary. It’s a very complex issue.
That said, we’re open to improving how the system works to better serve buyers while still maintaining the necessary safeguards.
3 Likes
Early in this unprecedented stretch of cold weather, I had a properly packed snake stuck an extra night in Indianapolis - and I received a dead snake. It was both shocking and heartbreaking for me and the breeder. And the worst of it was there was no hold on shipping in place and no hurry to receive the snake.
4 Likes
Sorry to hear that. DOAs are very uncommon, especially when properly packed. If you shipped through us, please report the details to our shipping team so we can use the info to help prevent things like this from happening in the future.
2 Likes
I’m not trying to be difficult here, but if that’s what it says now, then the wording has been changed. When it popped up for me three days ago, it specifically stated that failure to ship through MM could result in corrections including disqualification from the program and up to removal of a seller’s account. Oh boy, do I wish I had thought to take a screenshot. Will be doing that with any future issues. Perhaps it wasn’t made clear that removal will be from the program vs. removal from MorphMarket, but it was a very concerning statement.
If what you say is indeed the case that sellers are only removed from the buyer protection program if they violate shipping through MorphMarket, then that is a good policy and I sincerely hope that no one is ever removed from MM for failing to ship through MM.
7 Likes
We definitely would not ban a seller for something like that, but we do have to keep strict standards for the buyer protection to protect everyone involved.
I did double check our code and no changes were made to the text. We save all code and text changes for years, so we can make sure we have a record of everything we do.
4 Likes