Using the information you provided, we are in the process of disputing this chargeback with the buyer's credit card company. Please note that this dispute process can take 75 days or more and that there is no guarantee that we will be successful in our attempt to recover your funds. If we are successful, we will promptly return to your account any recovered funds that we previously debited for this chargeback. We will notify you of any updates about this case by email and in the Resolution Center.
This matter has been resolved and no funds were debited from your account for this chargeback. We were charged a fee for processing this chargeback and have debited your account a Chargeback Settlement Fee.
They never did notify me of any updates and I'm quite sure they didn't take a fee, so I'm skeptical that it's really over and done. I've been keeping a $125 minimum balance just in case. If I've really heard the last of it, this will be the first chargeback dispute I've ever won. I tagged this as a Reason to Hate Banks, but it's really a reason to un-hate PayPal.
Last week I announced the Skeleton Hand Jewelry Holder on Facebook, as I routinely do with new products. A day earlier I had announced the Skull Tidy and gotten the usual 23 views and one Like. For some reason, the Skeleton Hand got three Shares and was seen by 151 people -- almost surely a new record. (On Facebook, Likes are copper pieces and Shares are gold pieces). After a newsletter autoposted to Facebook I got more than 200 views for the week. Only one of those 200 people clicked through to my store and s/he didn't buy anything. I learned long ago that Facebook advertising is useless, but one click from 200 impressions is impressively awful.
Believe it or not, the Google tracking code saga grinds on. It's working right about 75% of the time. My developer, who graciously put in far more hours than I paid him for, is stymied by that other 25%. So am I.
My years as a Quality Assurance tester taught me that reproducing a bug is often the hardest part of fixing it; you can't fix what you can't understand, and you can't understand what you can't see. His code is probably fine -- it should either work or not -- so the fault is most likely either in Sunshop, or in individual customer checkout processes. Are they using smartphones or computers? Apple or Windows or Android? PayPal or credit cards? I started a spreadsheet to look for patterns, but Analytics only gives me aggregate information about users' technology -- I can't see it for each transaction. With a sample size of just four conversions this week, it looks random to me. I might not even be asking the right questions.
He can't work on the script any further without more information; at some point I might just have to accept that half-working is as good as it gets. But I'm going to compile data for a couple of weeks before that happens. I might have fixed it a few days ago by pasting his script into a page called by the long checkout form that my template supposedly doesn't use -- I haven't seen a failure since I did that.