Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit(blog.aboutamazon.com)
blog.aboutamazon.com
Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit
https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/amazon-establishes-new-counterfeit-crime-unit
246 comments
Here is one (plus the story of a defective product lawsuit behind it).
A water slide. The type that bolts down into concrete for use with pools. If the first thing in your mind is...isn’t that something from the 70’s/80’s...yes it is.
So the counterfeiter must have molded the entire slide (complete with the company logo that was embossed into the slide itself) thing is that company was dissolved back in the 80’s.
So purchaser’s kid cuts their leg open on the slide and they sue for defective product. Of course the investigation leads to suing this Dissolved manufacturer. As I recall the dissolved entity actually defended (sort of rare from a dissolved Corp that dissolved so long ago) and it was only during expensive phase of discovery they learned they didn’t manufacture the slide In question, and that it was completely counterfeited.
One day Amazon is going to get smacked with such a lawsuit resulting in billions in punitive damages, then and only then will you see real effort on their part to curb this behavior.
A water slide. The type that bolts down into concrete for use with pools. If the first thing in your mind is...isn’t that something from the 70’s/80’s...yes it is.
So the counterfeiter must have molded the entire slide (complete with the company logo that was embossed into the slide itself) thing is that company was dissolved back in the 80’s.
So purchaser’s kid cuts their leg open on the slide and they sue for defective product. Of course the investigation leads to suing this Dissolved manufacturer. As I recall the dissolved entity actually defended (sort of rare from a dissolved Corp that dissolved so long ago) and it was only during expensive phase of discovery they learned they didn’t manufacture the slide In question, and that it was completely counterfeited.
One day Amazon is going to get smacked with such a lawsuit resulting in billions in punitive damages, then and only then will you see real effort on their part to curb this behavior.
> One day Amazon is going to get smacked with such a lawsuit resulting in billions in punitive damages, then and only then will you see real effort on their part to curb this behavior.
IIRC at least one person (probably more) has died already from counterfeits on Amazon. I read one where I guy died in a motorcycle crash, it was found that his helmet (which he bought off Amazon) was a fraud and wasn't/didn't meet DOT standards, even though it had the DOT sticker.
IIRC at least one person (probably more) has died already from counterfeits on Amazon. I read one where I guy died in a motorcycle crash, it was found that his helmet (which he bought off Amazon) was a fraud and wasn't/didn't meet DOT standards, even though it had the DOT sticker.
There is all sorts of generic rock climbing gear on Amazon that is genuinely dangerous. Climbing forums have plenty of people recommending never to buy gear on Amazon, but I can’t help thinking of the thousands of people buying these things who have no idea.
The negative reviews for some of the cheap climbing harnesses on Amazon are frightening...stitching coming undone, buckles that don’t work, obviously fake safety certification labels, and more. These are critical life safety devices that are impossible for individuals to evaluate for effectiveness on their own. To sell (or to allow to be sold on your platform) these kinds of products to which people trust their lives, with forged safety certifications, is unconscionable.
The negative reviews for some of the cheap climbing harnesses on Amazon are frightening...stitching coming undone, buckles that don’t work, obviously fake safety certification labels, and more. These are critical life safety devices that are impossible for individuals to evaluate for effectiveness on their own. To sell (or to allow to be sold on your platform) these kinds of products to which people trust their lives, with forged safety certifications, is unconscionable.
> These are critical life safety devices that are impossible for individuals to evaluate for effectiveness on their own.
Well, that's not quite true. Just take a big fall where you really need your harness not to break and see what happens. You (or the person who scrapes you off the ground) will quickly find out whether your harness is effective.
This testing procedure is prohibitively expensive and best avoided.
Well, that's not quite true. Just take a big fall where you really need your harness not to break and see what happens. You (or the person who scrapes you off the ground) will quickly find out whether your harness is effective.
This testing procedure is prohibitively expensive and best avoided.
I recall stories of counterfeit child car seats that failed safety standards (don’t think there was a lawsuit) just “undercover purchases” and actual safety testing of the fakes.
As I understand it Amazon isn’t liable which to me makes no sense as it relates to defective products (everyone in the supply chain of a defective product should be jointly and severely liable).
I don’t care if it’s a 3rd party seller, Amazon should be liable as it hosts the product for sale, connects buyer/seller, processes payments, typically stores (and commingled) the products, and probably delivers the product.
The thing about punitive damages is they are a punishment, so eventually there will be a case where The jury hears how Amazon knowingly and willfully continued selling 3rd party items it knew were fake and dangerous (Fake DOT helmets; expired baby formula; fake baby car seats; exploding electronics; etc...)and the jury is going to drop the hammer. Even billions In punitive damages wouldn’t be a surprise, Amazon will appeal and it will come down to 10’s or 100’s of millions, but that’s when they will take real action to stop this. But it’s going to take time for this to happen.
As I understand it Amazon isn’t liable which to me makes no sense as it relates to defective products (everyone in the supply chain of a defective product should be jointly and severely liable).
I don’t care if it’s a 3rd party seller, Amazon should be liable as it hosts the product for sale, connects buyer/seller, processes payments, typically stores (and commingled) the products, and probably delivers the product.
The thing about punitive damages is they are a punishment, so eventually there will be a case where The jury hears how Amazon knowingly and willfully continued selling 3rd party items it knew were fake and dangerous (Fake DOT helmets; expired baby formula; fake baby car seats; exploding electronics; etc...)and the jury is going to drop the hammer. Even billions In punitive damages wouldn’t be a surprise, Amazon will appeal and it will come down to 10’s or 100’s of millions, but that’s when they will take real action to stop this. But it’s going to take time for this to happen.
The alternative is an online marketplace with no accountability. That doesn't sound safe.
The Alternative is going back to eCommerce where individual shops put up their own web site, market their own website and are liable for their own website (and have control over their supply chain)
Today since the build of consumers are on Amazon if you are a retailer you need to be one Amazon, and if you want access to Prime Customer you need to use Fulfillment by amazon, Where now you loose control over your supply chain due to co-mingled inventory
So even if I have a stellar reputation as A+AcmeMerchant, and customers look for my store on amazon they are not guaranteed to get the product that I sent to amazon, no they could get JoeBobScammers Product even though it was sold "by me" and fulfilled by amazon
So I will not go as far as to say amazon should be liable for ALL sales, but I do agree that any Sale that is shipped from an Amazon Warehouse they should be liable for. They choose to comingle all of their inventory they should face the liability
Today since the build of consumers are on Amazon if you are a retailer you need to be one Amazon, and if you want access to Prime Customer you need to use Fulfillment by amazon, Where now you loose control over your supply chain due to co-mingled inventory
So even if I have a stellar reputation as A+AcmeMerchant, and customers look for my store on amazon they are not guaranteed to get the product that I sent to amazon, no they could get JoeBobScammers Product even though it was sold "by me" and fulfilled by amazon
So I will not go as far as to say amazon should be liable for ALL sales, but I do agree that any Sale that is shipped from an Amazon Warehouse they should be liable for. They choose to comingle all of their inventory they should face the liability
The online marketplace have more accountability. You know who you are buying from. Buy from name brand and you get name brand. Buy from nane brand (did you notice the n not M?) and you get from nane brand. This gives name brands lawyers someone to send their lawyers after and traceability if there is fraud. With Amazon cominguled good you don't know where the counterfeit came from so you can't play wack-a-mole with fraud. It just keeps happening.
The issue is Amazon doesn't know. All they have to go on is whatever UPC/SKU you enter to tell them which bin to put something in and that's it. That is the extent of their inventory management. This is why you should not utilize FBA if your major concern is people actually getting the product you are selling.
I believe I've heard of electrical fires from counterfeit electronics that had fake UL and/or CE stickers on it.
Amazon is being promiscuous. They don't appear to care where the product came from, as long as its cheap. There are almost no categories where a 'too good to be true' price doesn't mean something illegal was going on. Either those aren't real products, they were stolen (how is it we never talk about that scenario), or someone made a huge mistake and is reselling them at a loss.
Only one of those is good for news for consumers, and it's still predatory.
Amazon is being promiscuous. They don't appear to care where the product came from, as long as its cheap. There are almost no categories where a 'too good to be true' price doesn't mean something illegal was going on. Either those aren't real products, they were stolen (how is it we never talk about that scenario), or someone made a huge mistake and is reselling them at a loss.
Only one of those is good for news for consumers, and it's still predatory.
I definitely had a ladder I bought on Amazon collapse when I was using it. It’s dumb luck that I didn’t fall off.
Was the ladder counterfeit, or just crappy?
In fairness, I think it was a just crappy. It never occurred to me that anyone would sell a ladder that could catastrophically fail, so I wasn't on the lookout for that.
In any case, how is amazon not responsible for selling a ladder that obviously didn’t meet safety standards??
They aren't, until someone can afford the lawyers necessary to prove their responsibility. Or the class is large enough for group action.
> One day Amazon is going to get smacked with such a lawsuit resulting in billions in punitive damages, then and only then will you see real effort on their part to curb this behavior.
I can’t wait for that day. What they’re doing is criminal in my opinion.
But unwind hold my breath. The story about electric Skateboards burning someone’s house down resulted in amazon being „only a reseller“ with „no responsibility“ wrt the resulting property damage from them selling a battery powered scooter that didn’t meet safety standards.
I can’t wait for that day. What they’re doing is criminal in my opinion.
But unwind hold my breath. The story about electric Skateboards burning someone’s house down resulted in amazon being „only a reseller“ with „no responsibility“ wrt the resulting property damage from them selling a battery powered scooter that didn’t meet safety standards.
I assume this is the same defective water slide case:
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/civil-procedure/civil-pr...
Here, the issue was whether the defendant manufacturer could amend their pleading to deny manufacturing the defective water slide after they had initially admitted it. The court found that they could. Subsequently, a special jury found that the defendant did not manufacture the water slide and the judge granted summary judgment for the defendant.
If I recall correctly, it was the installer that had gone out of business or was otherwise unreachable and the water slide was unmarked as to the true manufacturer, which left the plaintiffs (or their insurers) out of luck.
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/civil-procedure/civil-pr...
Here, the issue was whether the defendant manufacturer could amend their pleading to deny manufacturing the defective water slide after they had initially admitted it. The court found that they could. Subsequently, a special jury found that the defendant did not manufacture the water slide and the judge granted summary judgment for the defendant.
If I recall correctly, it was the installer that had gone out of business or was otherwise unreachable and the water slide was unmarked as to the true manufacturer, which left the plaintiffs (or their insurers) out of luck.
No that I believe is an aquaslide case from the 70’s. I was looking myself for the case I am referencing and kept getting this case too (and some inflatable slide cases).
Very similar factually...someone bought a aquaslide, slide was delivered and installed (but what was delivered wasn’t an aquaslide, but unlike the case I reference the aquaslide and actually delivered slide had no markings/branding. IIRC in that case multiple insurers examined the slide and as you say admitted the slide was an aquaslide, but after being examined by an aquaslide employee they reversed course.
The details are slim, but I have a feeling the slide actually wasn’t theirs as confirmed by testing the plastic (but this I really don’t know).
Very similar factually...someone bought a aquaslide, slide was delivered and installed (but what was delivered wasn’t an aquaslide, but unlike the case I reference the aquaslide and actually delivered slide had no markings/branding. IIRC in that case multiple insurers examined the slide and as you say admitted the slide was an aquaslide, but after being examined by an aquaslide employee they reversed course.
The details are slim, but I have a feeling the slide actually wasn’t theirs as confirmed by testing the plastic (but this I really don’t know).
> One day Amazon is going to get smacked with such a lawsuit resulting in billions in punitive damages, then and only then will you see real effort on their part to curb this behavior.
Amazon has been sued many times over similar things. The precedent is very strong. They win every case because they are not the seller. Unless the law changes, there is little hope of this happening like you expect.
Amazon has been sued many times over similar things. The precedent is very strong. They win every case because they are not the seller. Unless the law changes, there is little hope of this happening like you expect.
> They win every case because they are not the seller.
I don't think that's always the case:
> Such pirated titles are being sold directly by Amazon, not through third-party Marketplace sellers.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/02/amazo...
I don't think that's always the case:
> Such pirated titles are being sold directly by Amazon, not through third-party Marketplace sellers.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/02/amazo...
How is Amazon not obviously guilty of aiding and abetting, willful negligence, or at the very least reckless endangerment? In an individual case I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Yet the bodies keep piling up under Bezos.
Amazon is a direct beneficiary though. I’m not sure why they are not the seller. In that case can’t they just setup shell companies to sell shoddy, fake, or illegal items, take 99% of the profit, and claim they are not the seller?
No. The primary beneficiary is the seller. If you want to sue somebody you have to sue the seller. That’s what precedent says, anyway.
Yes, Amazon could setup shell corporations, but if they got tracked back to Amazon, that would be the end of the company. Why not just setup a bunch of side businesses producing and selling legal things (like their batteries, clothes, etc. brands) and collect all the profit there, while allowing others to setup shell corporations and sell the illegal things? That way they collect some profit from the latter, but without any risk to the company. And, in fact, that’s what they do.
Yes, Amazon could setup shell corporations, but if they got tracked back to Amazon, that would be the end of the company. Why not just setup a bunch of side businesses producing and selling legal things (like their batteries, clothes, etc. brands) and collect all the profit there, while allowing others to setup shell corporations and sell the illegal things? That way they collect some profit from the latter, but without any risk to the company. And, in fact, that’s what they do.
[Hypothetical] If I buy a legitimate product from a legitimate seller, and end up with a counterfeit due to commingling, I don't see any reasonable story for how anyone but Amazon should be liable for that. They substituted the product I ordered with an inferior one.
And then, of course, Amazon should turn around and sue whoever provided them the counterfeit product. But the first level of culpability is still with Amazon.
It's like if I'm driving, waiting at a red light, and someone rear-ends me, causing me to rear-end the car in front of me. The person I hit sues me, wins, and I turn around and sue the person behind me for both the damage to my car and whatever I lost in the first lawsuit (probably all via insurance).
And then, of course, Amazon should turn around and sue whoever provided them the counterfeit product. But the first level of culpability is still with Amazon.
It's like if I'm driving, waiting at a red light, and someone rear-ends me, causing me to rear-end the car in front of me. The person I hit sues me, wins, and I turn around and sue the person behind me for both the damage to my car and whatever I lost in the first lawsuit (probably all via insurance).
I guess that latter situation is my point. Even if they are not the primary beneficiary they are a large beneficiary of all these illicit products. I'd imagine that they are probably not a minor beneficiary either since they probably get a huge chunk of the sale off these mostly commodity products. For each cheap plastic widget they sell probably the majority goes to advertising + Amazon Prime + warehousing + shipping + customer support, and I'd imagine the actual a manufacturer gets the short end of that stick.
>>> No. The primary beneficiary is the seller.
New angle for the next trial: Amazon started taking double digits percentages of every sale and doing FBA in the past few years.
For physical products (consider thin margins after manufacturing costs), that means Amazon earns more money than the seller, thus they are the primary beneficiary of the sale.
New angle for the next trial: Amazon started taking double digits percentages of every sale and doing FBA in the past few years.
For physical products (consider thin margins after manufacturing costs), that means Amazon earns more money than the seller, thus they are the primary beneficiary of the sale.
Edit: theory probably doesn't work, see comments below
> So the counterfeiter must have molded the entire slide (complete with the company logo that was embossed into the slide itself) thing is that company was dissolved back in the 80’s.
I have a simpler explanation for that. Someone bought the tooling (injection moulds?), in an auction maybe, didn't bother to change the brand and is out there manufacturing slides.
It's not "counterfeit" per se they just didn't give a f. (to use the technical term) and are selling it. Maybe outside branding is theirs but not the plastic one.
> So the counterfeiter must have molded the entire slide (complete with the company logo that was embossed into the slide itself) thing is that company was dissolved back in the 80’s.
I have a simpler explanation for that. Someone bought the tooling (injection moulds?), in an auction maybe, didn't bother to change the brand and is out there manufacturing slides.
It's not "counterfeit" per se they just didn't give a f. (to use the technical term) and are selling it. Maybe outside branding is theirs but not the plastic one.
> I have a simpler explanation for that. Someone bought the tooling (injection moulds?), in an auction maybe
But the company never sold them, so even they from the beginning reasonably believed they had in fact manufactured the slide. Had they sold the molds (which I don’t think a company would do bearing their mark without selling the actual mark as well) it would have actually helped their defense and helped them consider/discover they were not the manufacturer of this particular slide.
But the company never sold them, so even they from the beginning reasonably believed they had in fact manufactured the slide. Had they sold the molds (which I don’t think a company would do bearing their mark without selling the actual mark as well) it would have actually helped their defense and helped them consider/discover they were not the manufacturer of this particular slide.
It’s somewhat common for worn out molds to be sold as scrap metal, then someone buys them from the scrap dealer and starts making counterfeits. This is why quite a few places will deface old molds before scrapping so it would be cheaper for the counterfeiter to make a new mold than repair the genuine one.
Ah, those details were not clear from the original story.
They could have assumed (at the start of the process) that it could have been a pre-dissolution built slide.
But if they admit that, during the dissolution process their machinery wasn't sold that definitely goes against my theory.
They could have assumed (at the start of the process) that it could have been a pre-dissolution built slide.
But if they admit that, during the dissolution process their machinery wasn't sold that definitely goes against my theory.
FWIW I think your comment was in good faith and at minimum intellectually curious.
I asked my colleague similar questions when hearing about the case.
I asked my colleague similar questions when hearing about the case.
The slide probably cut someone because it didn't fit together quite right or there was a sharp parting line because the tooling used to make it was worn out (hence why the cost was low enough that the segment of the market that doesn't give a F was able to buy it).
Impossible. Congress has given amazon a get-out-of-jail-free-card in rye form of an arbitration clause with no stare decisis and no public access to the harm or outcome.
Amazon strategically places their offices where most important Senators reside, creating thousands of jobs in process and getting simple leverage - either you do what Mr. Bezos says, or we will move our warehouse to another state. And then good luck during next election cycle, but don't run on "master of job creations" when you just caused your state 25,000 amazon jobs.
welcome to Kleptocracy.
welcome to Kleptocracy.
Aren’t they just going to use the same defence that google, Facebook and others do, that they are just a platform and not responsible for the content users put on there?
I realise this may sound critical, but I’m not American and I’m genuinely interested to know if this defence wouldn’t work for Amazon.
I realise this may sound critical, but I’m not American and I’m genuinely interested to know if this defence wouldn’t work for Amazon.
> Aren’t they just going to use the same defence that google, Facebook and others do, that they are just a platform and not responsible for the content users put on there?
That defense could have worked if counterfeit products were a minority and they tried to fight them off, however as time is passing by, I see more and more Amazon as a marketplace almost primarily dedicated to counterfeit products due to their very high share on the platform... Search for basically everything and there's guaranteed counterfeit on the top (and that's only what you can see, I wonder what's the real share of counterfeit there...)
That defense could have worked if counterfeit products were a minority and they tried to fight them off, however as time is passing by, I see more and more Amazon as a marketplace almost primarily dedicated to counterfeit products due to their very high share on the platform... Search for basically everything and there's guaranteed counterfeit on the top (and that's only what you can see, I wonder what's the real share of counterfeit there...)
That's interesting, how do you sue a company that hasn't been in business for 20 or 30 years?
It’s a jurisdictional question so it really depends (I couldn’t tell you in this case, I didn’t work on it personally).
In my opinion it’s even more odd they defended (in at least some jurisdictions a dissolved entity has no standing to bring or defend lawsuits), but even if you could defend, why, time, costs, no ability to pay/collect. Something I always wondered to myself but literally as I wrote the last sentence it hit me...I’m guessing they were insured At the time they were in business selling the slides, so if the plaintiff sued and got a default then they could in theory move to join the insurer and collect against the insurer, so likely it was the insurer behind the scenes paying to represent the dissolved company.
On the flip side I had another colleague work on the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill case at the time it finally ended, let’s just estimate the litigation being over 10 years. During the litigation many of the damaged businesses were dissolved while the litigation was pending and apparently many of those that were dissolved may not have been able to collect as a result.
In my opinion it’s even more odd they defended (in at least some jurisdictions a dissolved entity has no standing to bring or defend lawsuits), but even if you could defend, why, time, costs, no ability to pay/collect. Something I always wondered to myself but literally as I wrote the last sentence it hit me...I’m guessing they were insured At the time they were in business selling the slides, so if the plaintiff sued and got a default then they could in theory move to join the insurer and collect against the insurer, so likely it was the insurer behind the scenes paying to represent the dissolved company.
On the flip side I had another colleague work on the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill case at the time it finally ended, let’s just estimate the litigation being over 10 years. During the litigation many of the damaged businesses were dissolved while the litigation was pending and apparently many of those that were dissolved may not have been able to collect as a result.
jacobush(1)
I don't order food from Amazon at all because I don't trust them not to send something counterfeit or expired. It's just not worth the risk/hassle, and a lot of the time they're not the best price anyway.
I'm also extremely cautious about electronics, but there are still certain categories (such as memory cards) that I won't even consider. Usually the only benefit from Amazon vs anywhere else is shipping, and saving $shipping is simply not worth the risk of using a fake card.
This is a step in the right direction to fixing the problem, but I'm not sure I'd trust anything -- even stuff sold by Amazon itself -- so long as they co-mingle inventory.
I'm also extremely cautious about electronics, but there are still certain categories (such as memory cards) that I won't even consider. Usually the only benefit from Amazon vs anywhere else is shipping, and saving $shipping is simply not worth the risk of using a fake card.
This is a step in the right direction to fixing the problem, but I'm not sure I'd trust anything -- even stuff sold by Amazon itself -- so long as they co-mingle inventory.
The issue is so simple to solve and they don't have to have a crimes unit to do it. Simply segment reviews and ratings based on seller. All you have to do is have each seller put a scannable sticker on each product based each batch going through intake. You can even still colocate. Then all the returns and bad reviews go to the right person and they can just get banned. This is not rocket surgery.
Amazon has a program for this:
https://brandservices.amazon.com/transparency
https://brandservices.amazon.com/transparency
So if you want Amazon to stop selling counterfeit versions of your product you have to opt in to this program, and start serializing all of your products at your own expense?
yup
[deleted]
counterfeit stickers...
Single-use stickers, sent as a roll to the supplier at their registered address. Like a one-time pad of proofs. Each sticker would just be a QR code containing an HMACed {shipper ID, sequence #} string.
When Amazon receives the stock, it adds the sequence # to the set of sequence #s used/acknowledged for that shipper. If there’s a collision, the shipper gets a strike against it (because it’s their responsibility to protect their sticker roll from copying) and the item itself is returned-to-sender as undeliverable (because it was very likely a counterfeit.)
When Amazon receives the stock, it adds the sequence # to the set of sequence #s used/acknowledged for that shipper. If there’s a collision, the shipper gets a strike against it (because it’s their responsibility to protect their sticker roll from copying) and the item itself is returned-to-sender as undeliverable (because it was very likely a counterfeit.)
A date string and or a string specified by amazon at the time of shipment creation signed with some sort of private key should fix this I think.
You're assuming they want to fix the problem
Not sure that level of snark is appropriate for HN. Not that I explicitly disagree with you, of course. It's just we gotta have a higher bar around here. I'd love to see substantial elaboration on the topic that adds to the discussion.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should be more thoughtful and substantive, not less.
> Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should be more thoughtful and substantive, not less.
> Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
You're assuming snark was implied. I honestly do not believe that Amazon feels that this is a problem that needs to be solved. Before Amazon bans sellers/buyers, it needs to have total control of the market. At that point, it can decide what it wants to do.
I've seen you post this reply several times lately (even today alone). Maybe you should attempt to contribute more to the conversation yourself rather than being a 6 month old account playing hall monitor.
I've seen you post this reply several times lately (even today alone). Maybe you should attempt to contribute more to the conversation yourself rather than being a 6 month old account playing hall monitor.
Including supporting facts in the original comment would make it read more in the spirit of the guidelines, in my humble view as a non-moderator. It's reasonable to say Amazon may have no reason to change problem X due to Y and Z. But seeing the problem alone makes it read in a somewhat emotionally charged manner.
I don't know enough about Amazon's fulfillment to know if this is possible, but maybe the sticker is unique to that seller. Meaning if it isn't their sticker that is scanned during fulfillment, they don't get credit for the sale.
[deleted]
Leads to sellers gaming the review system, such as offering compensation/consideration to buyers leaving reviews and/or providing fraudulent reviews.
I've got a hard rule of not ordering anything from Amazon that goes in/on my body. Too many counterfeits and too much risk. I'll stick with trusted retailers for that (ordering from Target is just about as easy these days, maybe slightly slower shipping but can pick it up in-store if I need it fast).
Even Walmart is getting hard to shop online and filter out products that are sold by "marketplace" sellers.
Even Walmart is getting hard to shop online and filter out products that are sold by "marketplace" sellers.
I started following that rule a while ago too, I wouldn't trust some random off-brand food from amazon, but the brand name food has a fair bit of markup.
If the counterfeiters are willing to produce anything to make a buck, and amazon is willing to sell counterfeit goods as legitimate, it makes sense we'd eventually have counterfeit brand name cereal or canned goods.
A while ago my fiancee was having trouble finding some Eagle Brand Medicated Oil (it's this traditional asian stuff her mom rubbed on her), and I saw it was on amazon. It's possible they have changed their manufacturing processes slightly since her previous bottle, or it was different because it wasn't as old, but it just kept being every so slightly different in subtle ways, such as the feel of the bottle and even cap, the texture of the oil, the smell was a bit different, the box was a bit bigger, etc.
I honestly still am not sure if it's counterfeit or not, but that's just the issue, I don't have the means to check. My only choice is to buy from sources with trusted supply chains.
It's ironic, I was the first of all my friends to start using amazon excessively, and got them into it, but nowadays my fiancee remarks she found her workout supplement on there for a few dollars cheaper and I reflexively reply "Hell no! We don't put things from amazon in our body.
At this point I only trust them with things that can fail on their own without causing damage, or for products so complicated no one has made a knock-off yet (I'm waiting on knock-off brand name monitors). They went from this amazing cheaper alternative to big-box stores, to AliExpress with 2 day shipping.
If the counterfeiters are willing to produce anything to make a buck, and amazon is willing to sell counterfeit goods as legitimate, it makes sense we'd eventually have counterfeit brand name cereal or canned goods.
A while ago my fiancee was having trouble finding some Eagle Brand Medicated Oil (it's this traditional asian stuff her mom rubbed on her), and I saw it was on amazon. It's possible they have changed their manufacturing processes slightly since her previous bottle, or it was different because it wasn't as old, but it just kept being every so slightly different in subtle ways, such as the feel of the bottle and even cap, the texture of the oil, the smell was a bit different, the box was a bit bigger, etc.
I honestly still am not sure if it's counterfeit or not, but that's just the issue, I don't have the means to check. My only choice is to buy from sources with trusted supply chains.
It's ironic, I was the first of all my friends to start using amazon excessively, and got them into it, but nowadays my fiancee remarks she found her workout supplement on there for a few dollars cheaper and I reflexively reply "Hell no! We don't put things from amazon in our body.
At this point I only trust them with things that can fail on their own without causing damage, or for products so complicated no one has made a knock-off yet (I'm waiting on knock-off brand name monitors). They went from this amazing cheaper alternative to big-box stores, to AliExpress with 2 day shipping.
My company got a counterfeit textbook.
On the cover was the book we had ordered, about control theory. The printed pages were a veterinary textbook by a different publisher.
On the cover was the book we had ordered, about control theory. The printed pages were a veterinary textbook by a different publisher.
I'm curious about the incentive that leads to this. If you're going to print and sell counterfeit textbooks, why not use the actual content? Surely nearly every copy with a random other book will be returned. Is it possible that they meant to include the right content, but they counterfeit lots of books and have low quality control? My best guess is that they can easily grab a copy of a book's cover online, but actually acquiring and scanning a copy of each book is cost prohibitive, so they just sell entirely fake ones and hope that they get at least some money out of it.
I was also very confused. If you're going to sell a fake book, why not just fill it with blank pages? Why go to the extra effort? Did they really think I wasn't going to notice when I opened it and it was full of information about hamsters? Were they hoping I'd just put it on my bookshelf and never actually read it?
We concluded that they probably run some kind of big automated print-on-demand counterfeiting operation, and have a database of textbook PDFs from several publishers. They probably had the wrong entry in their database for this title, and linked it up with the wrong contents. Perhaps next time you order a small-animal veterinary handbook from Amazon, you'll find it full of block diagrams and transfer functions.
I imagine that if they had printed the correct PDF, I never would have noticed. The book was printed on high-quality paper and well bound.
For what it's worth, this wasn't a cheap purchase.
We concluded that they probably run some kind of big automated print-on-demand counterfeiting operation, and have a database of textbook PDFs from several publishers. They probably had the wrong entry in their database for this title, and linked it up with the wrong contents. Perhaps next time you order a small-animal veterinary handbook from Amazon, you'll find it full of block diagrams and transfer functions.
I imagine that if they had printed the correct PDF, I never would have noticed. The book was printed on high-quality paper and well bound.
For what it's worth, this wasn't a cheap purchase.
Amazon also prints many books on demand; could it simply have been a fuck-up at the printing facility, swapping covers for two print jobs?
I'm guessing it's because they didn't manufacture the book at all -- they probably took a used book that was worth next to nothing and put a new cover on it, hoping that some people wouldn't open it until their return window closed?
I got a counterfeit book of knots. And I kept it.
As far as I can tell, someone printed and hardbound a PDF of the actual book, which is otherwise I guess out of print. It's about the best I could hope to get under the circumstances. So ... there we are.
As far as I can tell, someone printed and hardbound a PDF of the actual book, which is otherwise I guess out of print. It's about the best I could hope to get under the circumstances. So ... there we are.
What book?
The Ashley Book of Knots.
https://archive.org/details/TheAshleyBookOfKnots/page/n637/m...
nearly 700 pages of knots, nice!
nearly 700 pages of knots, nice!
I bought (and returned) a legit copy of that book. At least in the sense that it wasn't a printed pdf.
Weird.
Weird.
I can't imagine there's a lot of margin in counterfeit textbooks. The publishers themselves already offer lower quality copies with the same content. They just restrict it to the Indian subcontinent, and "used, excellent condition" copies start showing up quickly on Amazon. I have one right in front of me. Paper quality is definitely lower, printing quality much lower, but the content is identical and it cost me 25% of what the same book runs when produced for the US.
There is actually a LOT of margin in counterfeiting textbooks.
Even in the US a textbook costs ~$10 to manufacture. The reason prices are so high is that there's a high fixed cost up front to write/edit/typeset/design/market the book, and a small, capped number of readers over which you can hope to amortize those costs.
If publishers need to sell for $200 to break even, you can sell your counterfeit copy as "used" for $50-100/u, and get a 4-900% gross margin because you don't have to waste money on things like developing or marketing the content or paying royalties.
Even in the US a textbook costs ~$10 to manufacture. The reason prices are so high is that there's a high fixed cost up front to write/edit/typeset/design/market the book, and a small, capped number of readers over which you can hope to amortize those costs.
If publishers need to sell for $200 to break even, you can sell your counterfeit copy as "used" for $50-100/u, and get a 4-900% gross margin because you don't have to waste money on things like developing or marketing the content or paying royalties.
Weird, you could print off Library Genesis and get better results than that.
Was that order fulfilled by Amazon? I have a suspicion that some of the "counterfeiting" is done by substitution of inventory by a bad actor, and FBA silently ignoring that.
VendorA sells a good product with decent margin using FBA as their fulfillment mechanism.
VendorFakeA claims to sell same product with discount and sends seemingly valid inventory to FBA - which co-mingles the inventory and throws away the receipts.
Customer buys something from VendorA but gets VendorFakeA product instead.
It's like a supply-chain joe-job but VendorFakeA profits.
VendorA sells a good product with decent margin using FBA as their fulfillment mechanism.
VendorFakeA claims to sell same product with discount and sends seemingly valid inventory to FBA - which co-mingles the inventory and throws away the receipts.
Customer buys something from VendorA but gets VendorFakeA product instead.
It's like a supply-chain joe-job but VendorFakeA profits.
That, frankly, is downright pleasant compared to counterfeit food.
you say that now but you'll change your tune when future control theory only works on dogs
That must have been a hilarious return.
> I do still buy from Amazon. The ease of returns still gives me confidence that I can decide after receiving an item whether the price:quality ratio is worth it.
The time and labor spent refunding is well worth spending an extra few dollars at a competing vendor where I don’t have to worry about commingling nonsense.
If you told me 12 years ago that I would be choosing to patronize Best Buy over Amazon, I would have told you Best Buy will be out of business. Lo and behold, I now pay Best Buy (or manufacturer website) whatever they want since I can’t trust Amazon to not send me some AliExpress garbage.
The time and labor spent refunding is well worth spending an extra few dollars at a competing vendor where I don’t have to worry about commingling nonsense.
If you told me 12 years ago that I would be choosing to patronize Best Buy over Amazon, I would have told you Best Buy will be out of business. Lo and behold, I now pay Best Buy (or manufacturer website) whatever they want since I can’t trust Amazon to not send me some AliExpress garbage.
They pretend to “fight counterfeit” occasionally but the “rampant” counterfeits on Amazon is structural and strategic. Marketplace seller competition is a race to the bottom against all of global online shopping so genuine examples can’t possibly survive.
My number one rule with Amazon is that I don't buy anything that is supposed to go in my body. I don't trust it enough to get legit safe items.
Anything else I figure if it's counterfeit but still works it's not the end of the world (although I'm pretty cautious about which electronics I get).
Anything else I figure if it's counterfeit but still works it's not the end of the world (although I'm pretty cautious about which electronics I get).
This comment demonstrates just how far Amazon has gone to shift the Overton Window[1] toward accepting counterfeits and outright fraud.
People will actually go out of their way to say things like "I don't mind being defrauded, I don't mind having my time wasted, I don't being fucking GASTLIGHTED, because I can just return the item(s) with ease."
Nothing against you personally.
But fuck that!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
People will actually go out of their way to say things like "I don't mind being defrauded, I don't mind having my time wasted, I don't being fucking GASTLIGHTED, because I can just return the item(s) with ease."
Nothing against you personally.
But fuck that!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
The irony is that eliminating couterfeits would enable product quality for legit goods to actually be different for Amazon stock and brick and mortar grocery stock. It's already normal for brands to have Walmart-specific product releases; often cutting features and quality to meet a cost target (Levis "signature" line, for example).
How long until we see Amazon Edition Fruit Loops, specially engineered to deliver consistent taste and texture under extreme and long term storage conditions, at a price that can't be beat?
How long until we see Amazon Edition Fruit Loops, specially engineered to deliver consistent taste and texture under extreme and long term storage conditions, at a price that can't be beat?
Really interested to hear how you figured out the breakfast was fake
Yeah, great question. Basically wrong flavor and texture. Visually looked quite similar but just had a cardboard consistency. Repeatedly compared vs. grocery store bought over a few months span of alternating purchases to confirm.
It was somehow both immediately obvious and also subtle. My girlfriend eventually confirmed that something didn't seem right with it, so we started buying back-to-back orders alternating from grocery stores vs. amazon. Every once in awhile we'd get non-counterfeit cereal from Amazon but mostly it was "fake". Or at least diverted from another global region where the recipe/ingredients are somewhat different.
I always wanted to do some quantitative analysis like density or fill size or precise box dimensions or spectrometry of the ink on the boxes. But at the time I was just trying to convince myself that I wasn't crazy, and eventually I was 100% sure so I stopped experimenting before bothering to collect quantitative data.
It was somehow both immediately obvious and also subtle. My girlfriend eventually confirmed that something didn't seem right with it, so we started buying back-to-back orders alternating from grocery stores vs. amazon. Every once in awhile we'd get non-counterfeit cereal from Amazon but mostly it was "fake". Or at least diverted from another global region where the recipe/ingredients are somewhat different.
I always wanted to do some quantitative analysis like density or fill size or precise box dimensions or spectrometry of the ink on the boxes. But at the time I was just trying to convince myself that I wasn't crazy, and eventually I was 100% sure so I stopped experimenting before bothering to collect quantitative data.
You're sure it was not a storage condition or age issue?
I think you might be right in your theory that it was made by the correct company but intended for a different market and was made with a different formulation. Perhaps there's some arbitrage opportunity there.
I guess I don't understand why someone would try to counterfeit something like cereal. Seems like it would be hard to get enough scale to make it worth the effort, given the low per-unit profit.
I think you might be right in your theory that it was made by the correct company but intended for a different market and was made with a different formulation. Perhaps there's some arbitrage opportunity there.
I guess I don't understand why someone would try to counterfeit something like cereal. Seems like it would be hard to get enough scale to make it worth the effort, given the low per-unit profit.
Checked expiration dates, they were comparable to store-bought. I store my cereal in pretty abhorrent conditions sometimes (like leaving it in the back of my car during Texas summer for a few days) and never noticed degradation leading to flavor/texure like this, but storage issues are still a possible cause. Maybe I'll do a real experiment sometime involving storing grocery cereal outdoors in the Houston summer and see what happens.
I completely agree with all your sentiments and part of why it took me so long to come to my conclusion.
I completely agree with all your sentiments and part of why it took me so long to come to my conclusion.
Yeah, fair, not sure what conditions could cause that kind of degradation if your experiments haven't yielded it. Maybe counterfeiting cereal is just more lucrative than I would've guessed.
> I guess I don't understand why someone would try to counterfeit something like cereal. Seems like it would be hard to get enough scale to make it worth the effort, given the low per-unit profit.
Cereal is cheap, like really cheap, and name brand cereals like Raisin Bran go for nearly $9 a box.
If you've ever been in a discount store, or a liquidator with a consumer facing outlet, tons of counterfeit food, toiletries, etc flood their shelves.
Both the counterfeiter and the retailer benefit from selling counterfeit goods, and sometimes consumers either don't care or don't have enough information to tell the difference.
Cereal is cheap, like really cheap, and name brand cereals like Raisin Bran go for nearly $9 a box.
If you've ever been in a discount store, or a liquidator with a consumer facing outlet, tons of counterfeit food, toiletries, etc flood their shelves.
Both the counterfeiter and the retailer benefit from selling counterfeit goods, and sometimes consumers either don't care or don't have enough information to tell the difference.
In what area do they go for $9/box? I've never seen them for more than $5, and you can frequently get them on sale for $2...
I misread a 2-for-1 listing as being the price for a single box. Still, when you look at the cost of cereal and the mark up, there's a significant margin. Grains, sugar, etc are practically free in bulk.
When I was living in Manhattan boxes of cereal were regularly north of $7, but I know that doesn't reflect most of the market.
When I was living in Manhattan boxes of cereal were regularly north of $7, but I know that doesn't reflect most of the market.
[deleted]
Malt-o-meal makes excellent imitations of name-brand cereals. For example, Golden Puffs = Kellogg's Honey Smacks -- completely indistinguishable, but much cheaper. They make about 30 different kinds of cereal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOM_Brands
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOM_Brands
I wouldn't say Malt-o-meal is indistinguishable from the name brand because in many cases I like it better. The same? No, but they are for sure worth a try.
Anyone in my family can tell the difference between Kellogg's raisin bran and M-o-m, so I think it is safe say some people would notice a counterfeit cereal.
Now I'm hungry...
Anyone in my family can tell the difference between Kellogg's raisin bran and M-o-m, so I think it is safe say some people would notice a counterfeit cereal.
Now I'm hungry...
I wonder if the cereals customer support would have been interested enough to try to help you confirm it wasn't legitimate
> Or at least diverted from another global region where the recipe/ingredients are somewhat different.
Did you happen to check for differences in the packaging?
Did you happen to check for differences in the packaging?
I did. They weren't identical but the "counterfeit" wasn't flawed enough to say it was definitely made by a different company as opposed to a different printing facility or box vendor.
I bet those were real cereal that baked in the heat for a few days.
Did you check the expiration dates by any chance?
I'd be highly suspicious that this was, in fact, food counterfeiting in any way. I've never heard of a food brand being counterfeited on Amazon (with actual evidence). Food "counterfeiting" is generally a "legitimate" manufacturer themselves falsely representing their ingredients (e.g. diluting their olive oil with canola oil).
Amazon used to be known for keeping boxed foods for much longer than a grocery store -- so if cereal takes 2 years to expire, at the grocery store you're always buying cereal that was made last month, while from Amazon it might have been made a year and a half ago.
If it wasn't the expiration date, then it was probably kept in a very hot environment for an extended time, which also breaks down flavor and texture. If kept on pallets under plastic in the blazing sun for days, it could cook them like an oven, flavor goodbye. (Might not have even been Amazon, but a wholesaler or similar.)
Everything you've said is far more consistent with time/heat than the notion that you were getting "counterfeit" cereal.
I'd be highly suspicious that this was, in fact, food counterfeiting in any way. I've never heard of a food brand being counterfeited on Amazon (with actual evidence). Food "counterfeiting" is generally a "legitimate" manufacturer themselves falsely representing their ingredients (e.g. diluting their olive oil with canola oil).
Amazon used to be known for keeping boxed foods for much longer than a grocery store -- so if cereal takes 2 years to expire, at the grocery store you're always buying cereal that was made last month, while from Amazon it might have been made a year and a half ago.
If it wasn't the expiration date, then it was probably kept in a very hot environment for an extended time, which also breaks down flavor and texture. If kept on pallets under plastic in the blazing sun for days, it could cook them like an oven, flavor goodbye. (Might not have even been Amazon, but a wholesaler or similar.)
Everything you've said is far more consistent with time/heat than the notion that you were getting "counterfeit" cereal.
I got a cannisters of preworkout supplement on Amazon that was a very obvious fraud when put next to the cannister it was replacing. I even mixed up a glass of it and it tasted absolutely putrid and make me feel sick for a day.
It doesn't help that Amazon doesn't give you a clear option to report fraud in your return of a purchase.
It doesn't help that Amazon doesn't give you a clear option to report fraud in your return of a purchase.
There's fraud in clothing too.
They reuse product photos from higher quality products to sell you a lower quality product.
They reuse product photos from higher quality products to sell you a lower quality product.
Can anyone confirm if this happens in countries with functioning consumer protection? Or is it just an Amazon.us thing?
Even with strong consumer protections, the bad actors are often based overseas. There is little to no incentive for the Chinese government to inhibit fraud taking place in the US or Europe.
> Even with strong consumer protections, the bad actors are often based overseas.
Nope. There aren't many countries that allow foreigners who've never set foot in their country to sell product there without local representation.
Nope. There aren't many countries that allow foreigners who've never set foot in their country to sell product there without local representation.
Alibaba etc work just fine through the postal system without a local presence.
(Mind you, using them is pretty much explicitly waiving your protection in exchange for much lower prices)
(Mind you, using them is pretty much explicitly waiving your protection in exchange for much lower prices)
Amazon seller here, we sell in grocery and have seen a buncha things in this space:
There's a nontrivial possibility this is a transportation and/or storage issue. Most food items have some sort of temperature threshhold during transit and storage. We've had food products incorrectly commingled during shipment and storage over the years which ruined thousands of saleable products. Amazon's gotten a lot better about this by placing better ship/store standards from a subcategory level but it's a known issue.
There's a nontrivial possibility this is a transportation and/or storage issue. Most food items have some sort of temperature threshhold during transit and storage. We've had food products incorrectly commingled during shipment and storage over the years which ruined thousands of saleable products. Amazon's gotten a lot better about this by placing better ship/store standards from a subcategory level but it's a known issue.
This is one of the reasons I don't buy a lot of stuff from amazon anymore. I don't have a printer to make return labels and easy returns are cold comfort. At the end of the day I just prefer to go in person to a store or order from a big box store. As long as you stay away from their weird 3rd party sellers, I feel pretty sure I'm getting real cereal or whatever.
Where I’m at you can return products “as-is” to a Kohl’s Department Store and they will handle packaging and shipping back to Amazon. The refund starts processing sooner, too. I’m not sure how widespread this option is, though.
Recently you can just bring items to your choice of businesses near you like UPS Store or Whole Foods, they handle the packing and shipping for you.
That's great! And if I order a defective product then I'm happy to do that. But I can't always tell the difference between real and fake items. It took me a long time to realize I was using likely fake shaving soap.
This just seems like a problem I can sidestep entirely by just going to Target or Walmart or whatever.
This just seems like a problem I can sidestep entirely by just going to Target or Walmart or whatever.
Can anyone clarify how they found out their purchases were counterfeit (e.g. if I buy a Bose product "Sold By" Bose, it could be a counterfeit?)?
As someone who purchases things from Amazon and only care about if they work or not, I haven't had much an issue. If I've been loading up on counterfeits, it doesn't seem to have been a problem.
As someone who purchases things from Amazon and only care about if they work or not, I haven't had much an issue. If I've been loading up on counterfeits, it doesn't seem to have been a problem.
I bought a Bose headset from a third-party seller on Amazon in 2017-12. The sound quality was poor. The computerized voice had a non-native English accent. The Bose iOS app would not connect to it.
I emailed Bose. They asked for the serial number and photos. They said "Yep, it's fake." That was all. They didn't even want to know who sold it to me. Amazon support also did not seem to care. They just told me to send it back.
I emailed Bose. They asked for the serial number and photos. They said "Yep, it's fake." That was all. They didn't even want to know who sold it to me. Amazon support also did not seem to care. They just told me to send it back.
A few years ago I bought a $15 audio amplifier on Amazon. It failed a little while later and after a bit of googling I found a page from the manufacturer about identifying counterfeits which were apparently rampant. Different PCB layout etc.
Amazon does have a brand registry which manufacturers can opt into and then actual proactive counterfeit enforcement will happen specifically for that brand. Some but not all items in the program have unique per-unit barcodes that Amazon verifies and customers can too through an app called Transparency. But as a customer you have no way to tell which brands are enrolled in the program unless you receive the item and see the Transparency barcode on it.
Amazon does have a brand registry which manufacturers can opt into and then actual proactive counterfeit enforcement will happen specifically for that brand. Some but not all items in the program have unique per-unit barcodes that Amazon verifies and customers can too through an app called Transparency. But as a customer you have no way to tell which brands are enrolled in the program unless you receive the item and see the Transparency barcode on it.
> if I buy a Bose product "Sold By" Bose, it could be a counterfeit?
Yes, because Amazon co-mingles item of the same SKU. A legit item could be shipped to someone who buys from a scammer, and a counterfeit could be shipped to someone who buys from a legit seller.
Yes, because Amazon co-mingles item of the same SKU. A legit item could be shipped to someone who buys from a scammer, and a counterfeit could be shipped to someone who buys from a legit seller.
I don’t get it. So when you see a listing on amazon it’s not as though one seller created it?
My understanding:
* Seller A creates Listing Q with Sku U (real)
* Seller B creates Listing W with Sku U (counterfeit)
* Amazon organizes stock by Sku
* Ordering from Listing Q or W will pay to the appropriate Seller A or B, but get a random product with Sku U
* Seller A creates Listing Q with Sku U (real)
* Seller B creates Listing W with Sku U (counterfeit)
* Amazon organizes stock by Sku
* Ordering from Listing Q or W will pay to the appropriate Seller A or B, but get a random product with Sku U
Someone should counterfeit the Amazon website.
If Azamon.com promises to be more diligent in monitoring for counterfeit items I would happily become a Preme subscriber.
Rocket Internet
Reading these comments, it feels a bit strange that I have never gotten a counterfeit product from Amazon, and I bought a dozen items from Amazon within last two months: RAM, electric kettle, wall clock, books, phone case, humidifier, ramen and fresh groceries (like fruits and cheese). The only problem I had was a few books were dented in corner of spines a bit. Is this phenomenon country specific? Or is it because I order only amazon prime items? Perhaps my luck will run out one day :)
You probably can't tell. A friend bought a Samsung Bluetooth headset from Amazon several years ago, it looked genuine and worked well until it died. He sent it in for warranty service and Samsung sent it back with a note saying that it was counterfeit.
Honestly reading all this, I'd treat Amazon like AliExpress - use it to buy cheap low quality shit you don't really need, go to the shops for everything else. Shops have actual quality control in place, and shops can be held liable if their products are defective or counterfeit.
Our family's rule of thumb has been "nothing that goes on your body or in your body" can come from amazon, but after hearing about the counterfit bolts and ladder, think I'm gonna just not buy anything from there anymore. Have moved to ebay, Sephora, getting things direct from the hardware store and Target in person, and purchasing from other merchant shops that have their own websites.
I would never buy online food or anything similar from Amazon, only directly from the manufacturer.
Oh my god you ordered food in the mail. Did you put it inside your body? Are you okay?
In times pandemic I’ve been ordering from Target, CVS, and Costco. Do is this a bad idea?
i am as surprised as OP that GP ordered cereals by mail too!
first of all, transportation is not the same. food transportation to grocery stores is most of the time if not always different. in fact, some brands insist on having their own trucks.
i feel like with amazon, even with the prime trucks, everything is thrown together with everything else.
first of all, transportation is not the same. food transportation to grocery stores is most of the time if not always different. in fact, some brands insist on having their own trucks.
i feel like with amazon, even with the prime trucks, everything is thrown together with everything else.
[deleted]
I thought this was hilarious personally but in general, this kind of comment doesn't really add to the discussion and feels not very appropriate for HN.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should be more thoughtful and substantive, not less.
However, I will absolutely take the opportunity to plug a food-by-mail company that is very near and dear to my heart:
https://www.zingermans.com/OnlineCatalog.aspx
Prices are obviously a bit high, but the quality is amazing. They treat staff incredibly well. They do lots of employee training so people really can work their way up from Janitor to whatever they want. Pay has always been above average. All finances are essentially open-book to employees and they go through each businesses (it's a conglomerate now) monthly/quarterly finances on a whiteboard with the team members so that everyone understands where they're at.
Sometimes ordering food by mail is awesome.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should be more thoughtful and substantive, not less.
However, I will absolutely take the opportunity to plug a food-by-mail company that is very near and dear to my heart:
https://www.zingermans.com/OnlineCatalog.aspx
Prices are obviously a bit high, but the quality is amazing. They treat staff incredibly well. They do lots of employee training so people really can work their way up from Janitor to whatever they want. Pay has always been above average. All finances are essentially open-book to employees and they go through each businesses (it's a conglomerate now) monthly/quarterly finances on a whiteboard with the team members so that everyone understands where they're at.
Sometimes ordering food by mail is awesome.
I know you’re getting downvoted because of product placement not adding to a discussion, but I have to say that having food items that are all represented by a drawing doesn’t inspire confidence in me. I’m looking at bread and all I see is a cartoon — I have no way of evaluating it from that page. A photo of bread can tell me a ton about the quality of the bake, and if this is more generic grocery store or is something properly done by an artisan.
In person this becomes even more obvious. I don’t see this being a good way to shop for food by mail.
In person this becomes even more obvious. I don’t see this being a good way to shop for food by mail.
It's an old timey classic catalog aesthetic. A lot of NYC food vendors had this design theme as well as the infamous (Seinfeld) J Peterman catalog. http://www.designscouting.com/2010/06/01/memory-lane-j-peter...
Thanks for the link and suggestion- just stocked up on fun stuff for our upcoming July Yosemite trip. Road snacks and sunset violet mustard, white asparagus, cured ham and comte cheese, with a coffee cake for pre-hike and mid-hike noms.
Anything on there you particularly enjoy/suggest?
Anything on there you particularly enjoy/suggest?
> Who counterfeits breakfast cereal??? I've had this issue with both Quaker Oats and Raisin Bran. The scale of fraud is magnificent. And it really gaslights consumers; it took me forever to actually accept that I was eating an off-brand imitation of my favorite cereals.
Take a look on what is going in China for a fast forward look into the future.
What you see in China now is exactly that. Pro counterfeiters mostly make money on rarely contested, or completely uncontested, hard to trace, abandoned, or obscure niches. Nobody nowadays buys into Abibas, but quite a few seekers of highly hyped boutique stuff often buy into exotic goods fakes.
And on the other end of the spectrum, there are fake foods, and fake daily use goods, things few people would even mind being fake, or bothering to check for that.
Take a look on what is going in China for a fast forward look into the future.
What you see in China now is exactly that. Pro counterfeiters mostly make money on rarely contested, or completely uncontested, hard to trace, abandoned, or obscure niches. Nobody nowadays buys into Abibas, but quite a few seekers of highly hyped boutique stuff often buy into exotic goods fakes.
And on the other end of the spectrum, there are fake foods, and fake daily use goods, things few people would even mind being fake, or bothering to check for that.
[deleted]
I’ve received counterfeit preworkout, counterfeit razor blades, and more recently counterfeit Optimum Nutrition Whey protein.
If people can make a quick buck counterfeiting it then they will.
For me it doesn't work to say "who would do that??", I'd rather focus on "Why has Amazon let the problem get this insanely bad?"
For me it doesn't work to say "who would do that??", I'd rather focus on "Why has Amazon let the problem get this insanely bad?"
Are fake listings a problem? Absolutely. But is it the primary issue? I'm not so sure. It seems like Amazon is doing all sorts of things but not actually addressing the root -- inventory co-mingling + sketchy 3rd party sellers that can come back overnight.
Simply ending inventory co-mingling would likely handle a substantial portion of counterfeits since Amazon is sourcing their stock through standard channels.
Amazon knows this. There's probably cost models somewhere in HQ. But ending this would mean: slower delivery times, and Amazon would have to carry the inventory on their books. I'd gladly wait an extra day or two if I know the item I get is legit (just like pre FBA/3rd party days). Instead, Amazon is burning goodwill and cash on efforts like this one.
If anything, Covid-19 has forced other retailers to up their online game. Its accelerated my spending shift away from Amazon as I'm tired of fraud. Fraudulent items can injure, poison, or even kill people. Thanks, but no thanks. I'll wait another day for that delivery.
Simply ending inventory co-mingling would likely handle a substantial portion of counterfeits since Amazon is sourcing their stock through standard channels.
Amazon knows this. There's probably cost models somewhere in HQ. But ending this would mean: slower delivery times, and Amazon would have to carry the inventory on their books. I'd gladly wait an extra day or two if I know the item I get is legit (just like pre FBA/3rd party days). Instead, Amazon is burning goodwill and cash on efforts like this one.
If anything, Covid-19 has forced other retailers to up their online game. Its accelerated my spending shift away from Amazon as I'm tired of fraud. Fraudulent items can injure, poison, or even kill people. Thanks, but no thanks. I'll wait another day for that delivery.
>Amazon is sourcing their stock through standard channels.
This just isn't true. There's been plenty of lawsuits alleging that Amazon themselves sourced counterfeit product. Their supply chain for many products is not necessarily better than third party sellers.
This just isn't true. There's been plenty of lawsuits alleging that Amazon themselves sourced counterfeit product. Their supply chain for many products is not necessarily better than third party sellers.
About 6 years ago I ordered a $150 graphing calculator from Amazon, 'Shipped and sold by Amazon' or whatever the actual phrase was, and iirc there were no 3rd-party sellers for the item. The calculator came in two versions with software differences as well as a different accent color on the hardware to differentiate. I ordered the one with the extra software but instead got the one with the cheaper color and firmware. I returned it for a replacement from Amazon and got the right one that time.
It wasn't counterfeit (I don't think anyone is ripping off high-end TI calculators, and it also came with a license key for the computer software), but I believe it was intentionally incorrectly sold. It came in a blister pack and the paper insert inside plastic indicated it was the CAS model, but the calculator itself was the non-CAS model - in other words, aside from having the non-CAS calculator in the box, it was exactly identical to the CAS model as you would buy from a store.
Maybe TI mixed up their stuff but I doubt that; by that time I had already heard of Amazon selling counterfeit items and as you said there have apparently been lawsuits for this.
About a year later I had the exact same issue occur with another item - sold by Amazon, but fake, but got the right one after a return. Can't remember what it was though.
It wasn't counterfeit (I don't think anyone is ripping off high-end TI calculators, and it also came with a license key for the computer software), but I believe it was intentionally incorrectly sold. It came in a blister pack and the paper insert inside plastic indicated it was the CAS model, but the calculator itself was the non-CAS model - in other words, aside from having the non-CAS calculator in the box, it was exactly identical to the CAS model as you would buy from a store.
Maybe TI mixed up their stuff but I doubt that; by that time I had already heard of Amazon selling counterfeit items and as you said there have apparently been lawsuits for this.
About a year later I had the exact same issue occur with another item - sold by Amazon, but fake, but got the right one after a return. Can't remember what it was though.
I can suggest another likely culprit for your wrong calculator: its barcode got broken/lost.
Everything is tracked by barcode. If it doesn't have a barcode matching what's expected, it doesn't exist anymore. Scratch a barcode the wrong way or mark it wrong, it loses it's ability to be scanned. It gets found, but what is it, inventory-wise?
The folks solving these problems, they're trained but some are better than others and it's not easy. There's 100s of millions of different ASINs. So they search by name and brand and say "looks like that's it" and voila, you have virtual inventory tracking this item as ASIN X, while it's actually ASIN Y.
No maliciousness needed. Just a complex system failing on the edge cases.
(Bias note: I work for another branch of Amazon. I do not speak for the company in any way. These are my own opinions.)
Everything is tracked by barcode. If it doesn't have a barcode matching what's expected, it doesn't exist anymore. Scratch a barcode the wrong way or mark it wrong, it loses it's ability to be scanned. It gets found, but what is it, inventory-wise?
The folks solving these problems, they're trained but some are better than others and it's not easy. There's 100s of millions of different ASINs. So they search by name and brand and say "looks like that's it" and voila, you have virtual inventory tracking this item as ASIN X, while it's actually ASIN Y.
No maliciousness needed. Just a complex system failing on the edge cases.
(Bias note: I work for another branch of Amazon. I do not speak for the company in any way. These are my own opinions.)
That doesn't explain the cheap calculator in the packaging of the expensive one. I mean the branded plastic blister pack that the calculators are directly packaged inside, not some box that is used during the shipment to/from Amazon.
Buy real calculator online, buy cheap knockoff in shady store, get a refund from Amz. Tracing is hard with commingled inventory. Something i heard about on the internet...
>It seems like Amazon is doing all sorts of things but not actually addressing the root -- inventory co-mingling + sketchy 3rd party sellers that can come back overnight.
Right, and for the reasons you listed, they simple do not care. They care only about appearing to care.
As someone else linked in this thread, they announce some bullshit "investigative team" like this every 6 months or so.
Right, and for the reasons you listed, they simple do not care. They care only about appearing to care.
As someone else linked in this thread, they announce some bullshit "investigative team" like this every 6 months or so.
I don't think they don't care -- this is a huge source of negative press & goes against company culture of putting the Customer above ALL else (including employees & their well being lol)
The problem is just that even a tiny percentage of bad-actors still make up millions of sales at Amazon's scale.
The problem is just that even a tiny percentage of bad-actors still make up millions of sales at Amazon's scale.
If they cared, they would let customers filter to only search items shipped and sold by Amazon.com, and they would come out and publicly announce they do NOT commingle inventory. They specifically removed the ability to filter by "shipped and sold by Amazon.com" (ignoring the fact that with commingling, it doesn't matter anyway).
Since they do not do the above, they obviously do not care. Retail profit margins are tiny, and they make far more on a third party sale while shouldering none of the risk. Therefore, Amazon's best strategy is to appear to care, as long as people continue to shop. And the more third party sellers people use, the better for Amazon, as they simply skim some percentage off of total sales.
Since they do not do the above, they obviously do not care. Retail profit margins are tiny, and they make far more on a third party sale while shouldering none of the risk. Therefore, Amazon's best strategy is to appear to care, as long as people continue to shop. And the more third party sellers people use, the better for Amazon, as they simply skim some percentage off of total sales.
Of course they don't put their customer above all else. They are a business: They put money above all else. "We put customers above all else" is just another way to put money above all else.
Amazon seller here - cominging is typically a long tail problem these days, as manufacturers with brand registry basically get their own special inventory/storage treatment. I know it doesn't seem like it from a consumer side, but we as 1P vendors have to jump through a buncha hoops to sell our own products using Brand Registry, and even more hoops in 3P items and extra labeling of barcoded items just to note that the items came from and are trackable to us.
*1P = first-party manufacturer, 3P = third-party (not original manufacturer) seller
*1P = first-party manufacturer, 3P = third-party (not original manufacturer) seller
I’m not sure commingling is as big a problem as you imply. Amazon’s inventory system is random so every item can essentially be tracked by location. Even with commingling, if there is a counterfeit all the inventory from the original sourcer can be tracked and pulled. It’s not like they are randomly tossing all of the same item into a random bin and doesn’t know whose is whose.
Also Amazon buys from many distributors just like every other retailer. Even their own inventory for the same item could come from many different suppliers. Many of those distributors/suppliers are now sellers themselves and all that’s changed is who sets the price and who decides when to send in more inventory (and who takes on the working capital risk.)
As for sellers coming back overnignt, one of the largest complaints on the seller forums is how onorous the KYC process is for new sellers. (Bank documents, passports, business license, etc).
Also you a manufacturer can become a brand owner which prevents commingling and other sellers from listing on their items. Notice that Ankara highest volume power banks pretty much only have offers from Anker and amazon warehouse / woot (an amazon subsidiary).
Also Amazon buys from many distributors just like every other retailer. Even their own inventory for the same item could come from many different suppliers. Many of those distributors/suppliers are now sellers themselves and all that’s changed is who sets the price and who decides when to send in more inventory (and who takes on the working capital risk.)
As for sellers coming back overnignt, one of the largest complaints on the seller forums is how onorous the KYC process is for new sellers. (Bank documents, passports, business license, etc).
Also you a manufacturer can become a brand owner which prevents commingling and other sellers from listing on their items. Notice that Ankara highest volume power banks pretty much only have offers from Anker and amazon warehouse / woot (an amazon subsidiary).
> It’s not like they are randomly tossing all of the same item into a random bin and doesn’t know whose is whose.
Tell this to my buddy who had his card game counterfeited about 3 years ago.
He was getting a lot of complaints about counterfeit products, so he ordered a few and got a few duds.
He ended up having to recall all of his inventory from Amazon, and he found out that a fairly sizable percentage was counterfeit (~20%... can't remember the exact number). According to him, Amazon was literally "tossing all of the same item into a random bin and [didn't] know whose [was] whose".
The solution he ended up going with was paying Amazon extra to separate his items from other potential sellers of his own product. IIRC, he also set up (paid for?) the right to be the sole distributor for new items. I can't remember if he took those actions concurrently or sequentially, but he decided it was cheaper to do both rather than deal with counterfeits.
Tell this to my buddy who had his card game counterfeited about 3 years ago.
He was getting a lot of complaints about counterfeit products, so he ordered a few and got a few duds.
He ended up having to recall all of his inventory from Amazon, and he found out that a fairly sizable percentage was counterfeit (~20%... can't remember the exact number). According to him, Amazon was literally "tossing all of the same item into a random bin and [didn't] know whose [was] whose".
The solution he ended up going with was paying Amazon extra to separate his items from other potential sellers of his own product. IIRC, he also set up (paid for?) the right to be the sole distributor for new items. I can't remember if he took those actions concurrently or sequentially, but he decided it was cheaper to do both rather than deal with counterfeits.
Hard to say since only Amazon knows. As you've mentioned, there are many ways for counterfeits to enter the supply chain.
I think the main difference is who shoulders greater risk/impact of a counterfeit. Under normal models, the store (Amazon) is hit harder (returns, supply chain management). Under Amazon's model, the customer and potentially manufacturer bears a heavier burden.
As a customer, why should I care about the brand owner feature? Additionally, Amazon does not clearly mark products as such. These things just look like any other FBA product.
As a product creator, why should I have to register myself with Amazon? Should I have to police Amazon listings (which seems likely based on the brand ownership service feature list)? Or can I just work with my trusted distributors like the standard model?
I don't have an answer to these questions especially on the sell side. However, this all seems more like Amazon's way of shifting risk and cost to external parties.
I think the main difference is who shoulders greater risk/impact of a counterfeit. Under normal models, the store (Amazon) is hit harder (returns, supply chain management). Under Amazon's model, the customer and potentially manufacturer bears a heavier burden.
As a customer, why should I care about the brand owner feature? Additionally, Amazon does not clearly mark products as such. These things just look like any other FBA product.
As a product creator, why should I have to register myself with Amazon? Should I have to police Amazon listings (which seems likely based on the brand ownership service feature list)? Or can I just work with my trusted distributors like the standard model?
I don't have an answer to these questions especially on the sell side. However, this all seems more like Amazon's way of shifting risk and cost to external parties.
> I’m not sure commingling is as big a problem as you imply.
Commingling is the sole reason I canceled Amazon prime and don’t shop there.
I am spending my money to receive a certain product, and in order to do that I have to trust the vendor. If I can’t trust the vendor, why should I buy from them?
Commingling is the sole reason I canceled Amazon prime and don’t shop there.
I am spending my money to receive a certain product, and in order to do that I have to trust the vendor. If I can’t trust the vendor, why should I buy from them?
This is a hard problem to fix. The last statistic I read was that 52% of all items sold on Amazon were 3rd party sellers. Imagine even if 1% of the items by 3rd sellers were counterfeit, that's still millions of items.
I don't envy Amazon's position right now. They should have thought about this issue before opening 3rd party sellers but now they're dealing with the consequence in a huge scale
I don't envy Amazon's position right now. They should have thought about this issue before opening 3rd party sellers but now they're dealing with the consequence in a huge scale
All Amazon had to do was make it possible for people to filter for only items shipped and sold by Amazon.com and publicly announce they don't commingle inventory. If they did that, they would be a viable competitor to Costco, Best Buy, Target, Bed Bath and Beyond, etc.
It's not a hard problem to fix. It's an unprofitable problem to fix. See the tiny profit margins at the above listed actual retail companies. The juicy profit margins lie in being a platform and taking a cut of all sales.
It's not a hard problem to fix. It's an unprofitable problem to fix. See the tiny profit margins at the above listed actual retail companies. The juicy profit margins lie in being a platform and taking a cut of all sales.
At the very least, whoever ships the product should be considered the retailer. If I visit Amazon.com, buy a product that's stocked in an Amazon warehouse, pay Amazon, and Amazon ships it to me, it's insane that Amazon can turn around and claim someone else is the retailer when things go bad.
Politicians are tough on crime unless it's corporate crime I guess.
Politicians are tough on crime unless it's corporate crime I guess.
They do this every six to twelve months:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22106305
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19091852
It’s just platitudes so long as their interests are served by pretending the problem doesn’t exist.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22106305
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19091852
It’s just platitudes so long as their interests are served by pretending the problem doesn’t exist.
I thought it was a study committee to see how they can get a bigger cut.
I ordered a well-known baby-bottom cream. The product gave her never-expanding rashes for a few days. Then I realized the color slightly differs from the same cream bought at the local pharmacy, and that many 1 star reviews also report knockoffs version of the cream. In some cases review pictures show that the packaging itself is clearly fake.
I write a 1-star review explaining the above, and saying that the anxious parents are now in an unbearable situation after applied a fake, potentially harmful and untraceable product to their newborn bottom.
The review does not respect community guidelines and won't be published.
I write a 1-star review explaining the above, and saying that the anxious parents are now in an unbearable situation after applied a fake, potentially harmful and untraceable product to their newborn bottom.
The review does not respect community guidelines and won't be published.
I wrote a detailed, solid, accurate 1 star review of a child's digital camera which clearly didn't contravene their guidelines. Didn't meet their guidelines, wouldn't publish it.
Amazon used to be great. Nowadays it's full of fake reviews and dodgy secondhand stuff being sold as new.
Amazon used to be great. Nowadays it's full of fake reviews and dodgy secondhand stuff being sold as new.
Of my past 10 orders with Amazon, 4 of the items I've received have been either non-functional, the wrong item entirely (a knock-off of an APC replacement battery), or clearly used.
Amazon has refused to publish every one of my reviews, which, as you said in your situation, clearly met their guidelines.
My experiences indicate to me that they have no interest in improving. They're far more interested in protecting shady sellers from buyers than they are in protecting buyers from shady sellers, counterfeit products, etc.
Amazon has refused to publish every one of my reviews, which, as you said in your situation, clearly met their guidelines.
My experiences indicate to me that they have no interest in improving. They're far more interested in protecting shady sellers from buyers than they are in protecting buyers from shady sellers, counterfeit products, etc.
Do you still have the counterfeit tube? It might be worthwhile to get in touch with your Attorney General’s Office. Doubly so if your AG is up for re-election.
I imagine a lot of Attorneys General would jump at the chance to stand up to Amazon in defense of poor little baby bottoms and a media-friendly fact pattern like this could help bring about much-needed change at Amazon across all product categories.
I imagine a lot of Attorneys General would jump at the chance to stand up to Amazon in defense of poor little baby bottoms and a media-friendly fact pattern like this could help bring about much-needed change at Amazon across all product categories.
Before calling the AG on this, how do you make sure that fake is fake in the first place?
The major hurdle is that you do not even know and cannot know. Maybe the product is actually legit and the visual difference comes from temperature or whatever, and the rash appeared for a different reason. One avenue may be to contact the manufacturer with the lot number.
If you try a new product and baby develops rashes or allergies, you know not to buy this product again. With Amazon you can't even conclude anything about the official product because you might have used a knockoff.
You can just conclude to stay away from Amazon for baby care products.
The major hurdle is that you do not even know and cannot know. Maybe the product is actually legit and the visual difference comes from temperature or whatever, and the rash appeared for a different reason. One avenue may be to contact the manufacturer with the lot number.
If you try a new product and baby develops rashes or allergies, you know not to buy this product again. With Amazon you can't even conclude anything about the official product because you might have used a knockoff.
You can just conclude to stay away from Amazon for baby care products.
I don’t think you need to conclude it’s a fake product in order to contact the AG so long as you have a reasonable suspicion. The AG, if they decide to pursue the case, will contact the manufacturer and/or have the contents of the tube tested by a lab.
> Before calling the AG on this, how do you make sure that fake is fake in the first place?
You have enough evidence to form a reasonable suspicion that you were sold a counterfeit item, and that it harmed your child. At this point, it would be the AG's job to figure out whether or not the product is fake, and whether or not follow up on your report.
You have enough evidence to form a reasonable suspicion that you were sold a counterfeit item, and that it harmed your child. At this point, it would be the AG's job to figure out whether or not the product is fake, and whether or not follow up on your report.
> Before calling the AG on this, how do you make sure that fake is fake in the first place?
Contact the manufacturers consumer helpline.
Contact the manufacturers consumer helpline.
To add some context, the "critical" reviews of the product [1] describes multiple instances of the problem.
[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Aquaphor-Healing-Ointment-Advanced-Pr...
Edit: Searching with "yellow" or "fake" brings more reviews with the same issue. In the mean time parents keep receiving it and applying it on their newborn.
[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Aquaphor-Healing-Ointment-Advanced-Pr...
Edit: Searching with "yellow" or "fake" brings more reviews with the same issue. In the mean time parents keep receiving it and applying it on their newborn.
This sounds litigation ready!
Second this - this needs to be litigated.
How many hours a week would a person need to dedicate to starting a lawsuit about something like this?
Anyone have experience? Even if a law firm would do 100% of the work & charge on contingency, I bet it still takes 100+ hours for the average joe to research and find the firm to do that.
Anyone have experience? Even if a law firm would do 100% of the work & charge on contingency, I bet it still takes 100+ hours for the average joe to research and find the firm to do that.
Ask a lawyer friend to refer you. They're pretty good at that. I imagine an initial 1/2 hour conversation will clarify a lot and cost nothing.
If you don't have a lawyer friend, find a friend who does.
If you don't have a lawyer friend, find a friend who does.
The copied brand owner would likely be very interested. That's direct harm to the brand.
Yes, Amazon has what seems to be a paid program for brand owners to monitor and respond to Amazon reviews. It's been around for years now.
I'll never order something I put on or in my body from Amazon again.
Same thing happened to me with a FBA product which I was not happy with. It didn't ship for two weeks until I left a bad review and reported the seller, and it arrived in not-great condition. Originally got offered $20 ($100 product) to take down a one star review, then they got it taken down anyway.
I've said this before: they should look at how the finance industry deals / has been dealing with bad actors for decades before they engage in a business relationship with a client.
Assign every vendor some risk category based on their profile, for example: projected annual revenue, country of incorporation, products sold.
A mom-and-pop store located somewhere in Iowa selling pillow cases would probably be low-risk, there's not much you need to do.
A vendor selling USB cables out of China is probably very-high-risk. These need deep vetting. As in: show up in an office, bring along your lawyer, show us documentation on the working conditions in your factory, sign an agreement to let us audit your factory, etc.
Now, banks don't do this (at least, as far as I'm aware), but to play the devil's advocate: just imagine if Amazon asked very-high-risk vendors to post collateral before selling. If they get caught, the collateral is used to compensate victims.
That would take out the incentive to sell counterfeits in the first place.
Assign every vendor some risk category based on their profile, for example: projected annual revenue, country of incorporation, products sold.
A mom-and-pop store located somewhere in Iowa selling pillow cases would probably be low-risk, there's not much you need to do.
A vendor selling USB cables out of China is probably very-high-risk. These need deep vetting. As in: show up in an office, bring along your lawyer, show us documentation on the working conditions in your factory, sign an agreement to let us audit your factory, etc.
Now, banks don't do this (at least, as far as I'm aware), but to play the devil's advocate: just imagine if Amazon asked very-high-risk vendors to post collateral before selling. If they get caught, the collateral is used to compensate victims.
That would take out the incentive to sell counterfeits in the first place.
> Now, banks don't do this (at least, as far as I'm aware), but to play the devil's advocate: just imagine if Amazon asked very-high-risk vendors to post collateral before selling. If they get caught, the collateral is used to compensate victims.
Requiring merchants to be bonded for entry into high-risk categories sounds like a great idea! I know they already have hurdles for entry into protected categories like vitamins but adding a financial hurdle seems sensible for certain categories or volume.
Requiring merchants to be bonded for entry into high-risk categories sounds like a great idea! I know they already have hurdles for entry into protected categories like vitamins but adding a financial hurdle seems sensible for certain categories or volume.
In theory I think requiring a cash bond could improve many distribution systems, but the reality is that these big tech companies are so terrible at moderation and curation that we'd end up with tons of people having their bonds seized for no reason. Then, since there's actual money involved, those people might actually have some recourse, so it'll never happen IMO.
> A mom-and-pop store located somewhere in Iowa
> A vendor selling USB cables out of China
Funny thing is, these two stereotypes tend to be less and less representative in my opinion.
Mom and pop store perhaps care less about what they sell on the internet ? Amazon was blocked in France during shelter in place and we had to go through other vendors. We got a surprising amount of mislabelled, slightly unfit (ex: wrong size, wrong color) or completely different stuff sent from small european vendors.
In comparison AliExpress is relatively accurate on descriptions, if color is random you know it at purchase, packaging was piss poor but we always got exactly what we ordered, and we had one issue for 40+ orders.
I would have better faith in a chinese vendor to send me the right USB cable than a Mom and Pop store to send the right size and color of pillow cases.
> A vendor selling USB cables out of China
Funny thing is, these two stereotypes tend to be less and less representative in my opinion.
Mom and pop store perhaps care less about what they sell on the internet ? Amazon was blocked in France during shelter in place and we had to go through other vendors. We got a surprising amount of mislabelled, slightly unfit (ex: wrong size, wrong color) or completely different stuff sent from small european vendors.
In comparison AliExpress is relatively accurate on descriptions, if color is random you know it at purchase, packaging was piss poor but we always got exactly what we ordered, and we had one issue for 40+ orders.
I would have better faith in a chinese vendor to send me the right USB cable than a Mom and Pop store to send the right size and color of pillow cases.
Speaking of incentives, why would Amazon want to place such onerous restrictions on their suppliers? Are consumers supposed to demand this? Would regulation require it?
Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.
Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.
> why would Amazon want to place such onerous restrictions on their suppliers?
Because they have a massive counterfeiting problem, as evident by this submission.
To reiterate, what I suggested would only be onerous for the highest-risk suppliers.
> Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.
Certainly, Amazon is also fundamentally opposed to customers becoming victims of counterfeiters on a platform they provide them with.
Because they have a massive counterfeiting problem, as evident by this submission.
To reiterate, what I suggested would only be onerous for the highest-risk suppliers.
> Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.
Certainly, Amazon is also fundamentally opposed to customers becoming victims of counterfeiters on a platform they provide them with.
> Certainly, Amazon is also fundamentally opposed to customers becoming victims of counterfeiters on a platform they provide them with.
You can't even select "This item is a counterfeit/I suspect this item is a counterfeit" when filing for a return.
Surely if they cared about their customers becoming victims of counterfeiters, they'd give the customers who did become victims of counterfeiters on Amazon's marketplace the ability to return and report such items accordingly.
During my last return of a counterfeit item, I had to lie about the reason for the return during the return process. I had to choose between the vaguely related, but Amazon-approved, platitudes of "Wrong item was sent", "Inaccurate website description" or "Item defective or doesn't work".
You can't even select "This item is a counterfeit/I suspect this item is a counterfeit" when filing for a return.
Surely if they cared about their customers becoming victims of counterfeiters, they'd give the customers who did become victims of counterfeiters on Amazon's marketplace the ability to return and report such items accordingly.
During my last return of a counterfeit item, I had to lie about the reason for the return during the return process. I had to choose between the vaguely related, but Amazon-approved, platitudes of "Wrong item was sent", "Inaccurate website description" or "Item defective or doesn't work".
Just to be clear, my argument was rhetorical.
I fully agree that in practice, we're seeing something completely different.
I fully agree that in practice, we're seeing something completely different.
I agree. Because of Amazon's scale selling counterfeit items is good for business. Only a minority of customers will notice the fake and return it, which they've streamlined so that it's no big deal.
Counterfeit items likely get Amazon more customers than it loses. The cheapness of counterfeit is attractive to new customers, and the ease of returns retains customers. Besides, everybody can't be a conesieur in everything they buy, so it's feasible to still be successful at high rates of counterfeit goods on the site. Some econ student could probably share some good studies on this kind of economy for us.
Maybe Amazon can try the pirate Bay argument that they just host the content they're not responsible for it respecting copyright?
Counterfeit items likely get Amazon more customers than it loses. The cheapness of counterfeit is attractive to new customers, and the ease of returns retains customers. Besides, everybody can't be a conesieur in everything they buy, so it's feasible to still be successful at high rates of counterfeit goods on the site. Some econ student could probably share some good studies on this kind of economy for us.
Maybe Amazon can try the pirate Bay argument that they just host the content they're not responsible for it respecting copyright?
I'd really like them to establish a "counterfeit reviews" unit too.
Many years ago their review system was one of their businesses advantages. Many users and fairly honest reviews.
Now it's rife with fake and bought reviews, rendering it useless.
Many years ago their review system was one of their businesses advantages. Many users and fairly honest reviews.
Now it's rife with fake and bought reviews, rendering it useless.
I recently took a look at the top 20 reviewers, and based on some personal knowledge of what the items that buy 5-star reviews are in the current market, at least 3 of the top 20 people are doing it. These are people with thousands of reviews. It's rotten all the way to the top.
I have yet to have an issue with a counterfeit - my main problem are the pages and pages of crappy listings. I was trying to find a child's bike helmet the other day, and it's hundreds of brands I have never heard of, with no safety information, and all look virtually indistinguishable from each other except for weird logos plastered on them. (Kamugo? Galf? LERUJIFL? Turboske? OUWOER? LANOVAGEAR?)
I ended up driving to Wal-Mart for a Bell helmet that cost the same.
I ended up driving to Wal-Mart for a Bell helmet that cost the same.
When are they going to start suing those who file false claims of counterfeiting?
Google started something similar last year when they sued someone who was abusing YouTube's DMCA system. https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyrig...
But despite widespread abuse of Amazon's IP reporting system, to date Amazon has not sued anyone for that as far as I know.
Google started something similar last year when they sued someone who was abusing YouTube's DMCA system. https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyrig...
But despite widespread abuse of Amazon's IP reporting system, to date Amazon has not sued anyone for that as far as I know.
Foxes announce plan to investigate threats to henhouse. Film at 11.
I have never had counterfeit issues on amazon and always find these threads bewildering. I buy almost everything I can't get from my local grocery store from them. I can't tell whether I'm improbably lucky or if I'm part of a silent majority. Claims of things like counterfeit cereal (come on, really want to see some actual proof here) tilt me towards the latter, though.
I bought a "Lenovo" USB hub that was a shitty knockoff, the manufacturer claimed they had licensed the Lenovo brand. The listing never mentioned that it wasn't an authentic Lenovo device, but the packaging did. The device was poorly made and just flat out didn't work.
I think electronics and luxury items have a higher chance of being counterfeit. Obviously most people are getting legitimate goods, otherwise Amazon wouldn't exist.
I read reviews before I purchase anything expensive though, if I see several people claiming the same product from the same vendor is a counterfeit, I find another vendor or another item.
I think electronics and luxury items have a higher chance of being counterfeit. Obviously most people are getting legitimate goods, otherwise Amazon wouldn't exist.
I read reviews before I purchase anything expensive though, if I see several people claiming the same product from the same vendor is a counterfeit, I find another vendor or another item.
I was reselling Monster energy drinks in my office. I tried ordering some from Amazon, since the bigger packs are more readily available, and for lower prices, allowing me to sell cans for a cheaper per-unit price.
The very first pack I got was clearly counterfeit. The cans were subtly different both in appearance and etching. A brave volunteer who tried some also reported it tasted off.
If they're counterfeiting energy drinks, I fully believe they're doing cereal too.
The very first pack I got was clearly counterfeit. The cans were subtly different both in appearance and etching. A brave volunteer who tried some also reported it tasted off.
If they're counterfeiting energy drinks, I fully believe they're doing cereal too.
I wonder if the "silent majority" is just all the people sufficiently fooled by the counterfeiting?
I think there's probably three factors:
- the majority of brand name items on Amazon aren't counterfeits. It's a big problem, but it's also a big platform, with plenty of real stock and genuine sellers.
- not all items have counterfeits. Some brands and types of products are under enough control or aren't popular/visible/profitable enough to be counterfeited. And some are just just brands anyway - nobody is counterfeiting the no-name junk brand USB cables that Amazon sells from fly-by-night operations. Plenty of people actually buy this stuff and while they might or might not get a poor quality product that might or might not adhere to environmental or consumer protection laws, it isn't a counterfeit and they might be happy.
- some counterfeits are good enough. For exampel, you're unlikely to ever notice you got a counterfeit book unless they do a bad job (apparently pretty common - I've only gotten a couple I was suspicious of, but I am very careful about buying books, but there are really low-effort garbage counterfeits produced out there that are clearly fake, up to Wikipedia printouts.) Even when they make the book out of cheaper paper or the book is badly printed, you may not have the familiarity with the publisher to know that it's a counterfeit and not just that the publisher doesn't suck.
- the majority of brand name items on Amazon aren't counterfeits. It's a big problem, but it's also a big platform, with plenty of real stock and genuine sellers.
- not all items have counterfeits. Some brands and types of products are under enough control or aren't popular/visible/profitable enough to be counterfeited. And some are just just brands anyway - nobody is counterfeiting the no-name junk brand USB cables that Amazon sells from fly-by-night operations. Plenty of people actually buy this stuff and while they might or might not get a poor quality product that might or might not adhere to environmental or consumer protection laws, it isn't a counterfeit and they might be happy.
- some counterfeits are good enough. For exampel, you're unlikely to ever notice you got a counterfeit book unless they do a bad job (apparently pretty common - I've only gotten a couple I was suspicious of, but I am very careful about buying books, but there are really low-effort garbage counterfeits produced out there that are clearly fake, up to Wikipedia printouts.) Even when they make the book out of cheaper paper or the book is badly printed, you may not have the familiarity with the publisher to know that it's a counterfeit and not just that the publisher doesn't suck.
China counterfeited infant formula (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal); why are you surprised about cereal?
I wonder if they will solve the mystery of how executives either didn't know, or didn't do anything about it, for so many years even as it was widely reported. It might have been more appropriate to use a federal investigative body and start with whatever misconduct, or deficit of attention, has been enabling the counterfeiters to thrive on Amazon for years.
Having a chain of ownership list would be a great help with this. Track and report which company owned the item back to it's manufacture and who 'owned' the IP of the run. Even more ideally also the production time, etc.
This goes against everything that makes Fulfilled by Amazon successful/dominant. Not expecting anything to change.
Good shout. If only there were a technology to support this kind of usecase....
Good news, there is! It's called a database. When an item comes in, tag it with a unique barcode and add a row to the database saying "Item X came from company Y in shipment Z" and then sue/penalize/whatever company Y when it's counterfeit.
This assumes it is really that simple. You are adding a manual, human process. Humans make mistakes. Humans can intentionally make mistakes. Barcodes fall off, get defaced, etc. Those barcodes, hardware and software require money and up-keep. The humans receiving the products also can make mistakes and return the "wrong" item that happens to look the same (this is a source of counterfeits, even at Walmart/Target). And then we get into the shipment chain. Counterfeit swaps happen during the transit of packages to the warehouse and to the receiver's home. This is a really, really hard problem. And to be able to do it in a way that doesn't substantially raise the prices of the products only complicates that more.
I started buying clothing from the brand itself (eg shoes directly from adidas, etc). Some appliances also direct. I sometimes buy food from Walmart but only if they are the retailer (they don't seem to commingle inventories). I bought some ssd directly from Samsung site. Another problem with amazon is the sheer quantity of not-counterfeit but cheap unknown knockoffs. It seems more like an expensive AliExpress.
I haven’t bought from Amazon in years. A few weeks ago my toddler left a rubber ball in our waffle maker and we didn’t realize it before turning it on and melting the thing. It ruined the non-stick coating.
After a bit of research I found a new waffle maker to buy. The place I found it had an Amazon affiliate link so I clicked through to price check — $94. Then I checked the manufacturer’s site — $69.99. Ordered it on Monday and it’ll get here tomorrow, free shipping.
This is a pretty common story for me. I almost always check Amazon out of curiosity and most of the time it’s more expensive then other options even when factoring in free shipping. I really don’t get what the upside is supposed to be.
After a bit of research I found a new waffle maker to buy. The place I found it had an Amazon affiliate link so I clicked through to price check — $94. Then I checked the manufacturer’s site — $69.99. Ordered it on Monday and it’ll get here tomorrow, free shipping.
This is a pretty common story for me. I almost always check Amazon out of curiosity and most of the time it’s more expensive then other options even when factoring in free shipping. I really don’t get what the upside is supposed to be.
Amazon becomes an expensive AliExpress but it also has stock on near warehouse rather than Shenzen. Sometimes useful.
Is it safe to assume "Amazon Basics" products are not counterfeit? Obvious clones of products from other brands, but quality-controlled by Amazon?
I was thinking that too. Unless someone claimed they are just reselling their AmazonBasics items that were previously purchased from Amazon.
Maybe it's all a cunning plan?
I just bought some gym shorts from Target for $20. Amazon had some for the same price, but numerous reviews with photos showed people were getting fakes. Fuck that. Target of all places seems more curated than Amazon.
> Target of all places seems more curated than Amazon.
Isn’t this going to be true of any “pure” retailer? The nature of FBA and third-party sellers just means there will always be at least some percentage of fraud and so on that’s higher than “trick various people in the retailer to sell fake goods”.
Particularly as it’s much easier for insiders at a retailer to steal from their employer (and then resell via whatever means), I think the utility for “put fake goods on the shelf” at a retail shop is basically zero. I dunno, maybe you can trick/bribe the person near the start of the supply chain, but it wouldn’t take long for returns to pile up and an investigation to find “Jim and Sally colluded to sell fake gym shorts”.
Isn’t this going to be true of any “pure” retailer? The nature of FBA and third-party sellers just means there will always be at least some percentage of fraud and so on that’s higher than “trick various people in the retailer to sell fake goods”.
Particularly as it’s much easier for insiders at a retailer to steal from their employer (and then resell via whatever means), I think the utility for “put fake goods on the shelf” at a retail shop is basically zero. I dunno, maybe you can trick/bribe the person near the start of the supply chain, but it wouldn’t take long for returns to pile up and an investigation to find “Jim and Sally colluded to sell fake gym shorts”.
> Isn’t this going to be true of any “pure” retailer?
No. First-party retailers don't generally commingle stock with other third-party retailers. They typically have few suppliers, often one supplier, for each good. That's for many reasons, but it also makes it easy for them to identify who sent them counterfeits.
Amazon is discovering what old-fashioned retailers learned long ago: customers do not give a fuck who, ultimately, has injected the counterfeit. They will blame the retailer.
If I was Wal-Mart I would be absolutely hammering this point to customers. I'd be running ads about "Shamazon". Tearful mothers whose child got sick. Teens who saved up for a game system or phone and got a block of wood. Grandparents who bought medical equipment and got a faulty knockoff. Everything dangerous, disgusting, outrageous or even just annoying. I'd be carpet-bombing every channel with ads amplifying the message that Amazon can't guarantee what you get. Wal-Mart aren't saints, but their historical success has rested heavily on an incredibly tight grip of their supply chain and logistics. They do actually know what they have on the shelf.
No. First-party retailers don't generally commingle stock with other third-party retailers. They typically have few suppliers, often one supplier, for each good. That's for many reasons, but it also makes it easy for them to identify who sent them counterfeits.
Amazon is discovering what old-fashioned retailers learned long ago: customers do not give a fuck who, ultimately, has injected the counterfeit. They will blame the retailer.
If I was Wal-Mart I would be absolutely hammering this point to customers. I'd be running ads about "Shamazon". Tearful mothers whose child got sick. Teens who saved up for a game system or phone and got a block of wood. Grandparents who bought medical equipment and got a faulty knockoff. Everything dangerous, disgusting, outrageous or even just annoying. I'd be carpet-bombing every channel with ads amplifying the message that Amazon can't guarantee what you get. Wal-Mart aren't saints, but their historical success has rested heavily on an incredibly tight grip of their supply chain and logistics. They do actually know what they have on the shelf.
Walmart's online store is a mess of 3rd party options now too. I went looking for hair clippers at the start of the pandemic and all I could find were no-name brands offered by third party vendors on their website.
Well then. From my comfortable seat outside the arena, this seems like a squandered opportunity for Wal-Mart.
(Also: is it Walmart or Wal-Mart?)
(Also: is it Walmart or Wal-Mart?)
Yes, unfortunately even Target is getting into the 3rd party seller game. Which I wouldn't care about as long as I have an option to filter for only items sold by Target (or Walmart or whoever) and them stating they don't commingle on their website.
I just go to the brand's official website nowadays and pay whatever they ask so I don't have to research what channel it's coming from.
I just go to the brand's official website nowadays and pay whatever they ask so I don't have to research what channel it's coming from.
What’s left? Target and Best Buy?
I've had good luck ordering directly from companies. For me it was Nike, a yoga mat company, and some local toy retailers and a frame company.
I still buy stuff from amazon, but not critical stuff.
I knew things were going bad, when rock climbing gear was being counterfeited. (2011).
https://www.petzl.com/US/en/Sport/recalls/2011-2-21/Informat...
https://www.reddit.com/r/climbing/comments/b685vi/new_climbe...
I knew things were going bad, when rock climbing gear was being counterfeited. (2011).
https://www.petzl.com/US/en/Sport/recalls/2011-2-21/Informat...
https://www.reddit.com/r/climbing/comments/b685vi/new_climbe...
Yeah I've had good luck with Best Buy.
Oh, that comment wasn’t clear: I mean, any pure retailer is going to be better at this than Amazon (and so why single out Target) because unlike Amazon they know their vendors.
yes! and have you thought about working in politics?
I did and eventually ran against my former boss (and came second last).
I wasn't very good at it. But I learned a lot.
I wasn't very good at it. But I learned a lot.
The more you focus and the more you curate, the more you can trust you're getting what you think you're getting and the more confidence you can have in the overall supply chain.
The tradeoff is selection and probably price--although for some large specialist retailers like B&H Photo you largely do get both price and a pretty good selection of products.
Amazon should at least better separate the products it largely has control over the provenance of and everything else. But a third party marketplace is always to be hit or miss in terms of what you get.
The tradeoff is selection and probably price--although for some large specialist retailers like B&H Photo you largely do get both price and a pretty good selection of products.
Amazon should at least better separate the products it largely has control over the provenance of and everything else. But a third party marketplace is always to be hit or miss in terms of what you get.
Is it really "selection" though anymore, when it comes down to a throw of the dice what you actually get home when you order?
A wide random selection is still wide I guess.
A wide random selection is still wide I guess.
"Throw of the dice" is an exaggeration. Personally, I haven't (knowingly) had an issue with counterfeit. And I have found things on Amazon or eBay that were super-obscure and I'd have had difficulty tracking down elsewhere. And it's not like various obscure websites can't be dodgy themselves.
Yes, I initially thought so as well, and shifted my buying accordingly. However, I bought an HDMI dongle from one of Target's supposedly vetted partners and when I got it it was clearly open-box. When I tried to get Target to replace or refund they weren't able to help me via normal channels and told me I had to call some other number. Given the time cost was non-trivial, and the item was, I just decided to never order electronics from Target again. I'm down to BH at this point.
Amazon traded their quality for being a market platform and taking a cut of a much larger pie with more selection
Unfortunately they also completely ignored counterfeit issues which has sabotaged their reputation. I think this is just damage control because I'd they're selling coungerfeit goods with some knowledge of the issue they mm at have some Liabity.
Unfortunately they also completely ignored counterfeit issues which has sabotaged their reputation. I think this is just damage control because I'd they're selling coungerfeit goods with some knowledge of the issue they mm at have some Liabity.
Windows dressing.
It's not in Amazon's interests to reduce business by eliminating counterfeit products, fake reviews, etc..
Real solution is for government to hold platform responsible for peddling fakes and fraud to customers.
It's not in Amazon's interests to reduce business by eliminating counterfeit products, fake reviews, etc..
Real solution is for government to hold platform responsible for peddling fakes and fraud to customers.
I mentally added the word time in the middle of the domain name and chuckled. It would be great if they did that, show that they still have a bit of humanity left over there
I don't really get the attitude of 'I don't care about counterfeits because it's easy to make returns.' I mean, you know what's even easier than that? Ordering from a more trustworthy vendor and not having to make returns. Getting the right thing the first time! If I have to go to the post office to send a thing back, I might as well just go to an actual store and buy the thing myself.
You can’t just add anti-fraud sprinkles on top. The rampant fraud is built into Amazon.com’s business model. Monitoring product quality is hard. All the little shopkeepers and buying managers were actually doing work, work that isn’t easily automated. Amazon’s recreating the problems of central planning that the USSR had in product quality.
And absolutely nothing will change. In fact the volume of counterfeit goods, fake reviews and scams on Amazon and other marketplaces will only increase. Its honestly not even really Amazon's problem at this point, its more that there is an entire Chinese industry devoted to counterfeiting and scamming, with literally hundreds of thousands of intelligent, capable people spending their lives looking for ways to make a dishonest buck. Amazon is essentially putting a band-aid on a leaking damn at this point. Until China actually puts strong IP protections in place (They never will) there's really not much western companies can do about it beyond paying lip service to a problem they know they can't actually solve.
Forgive me if I think this is both not enough and a little too late.
Too many incentives are aligned within Amazon to continue to ignore counterfeits sold on their marketplace, and the only way I'll believe that such a unit is effective against such incentives is with independent audits.
If this was an honest attempt to clean house, surely Amazon would welcome audits with open arms.
Too many incentives are aligned within Amazon to continue to ignore counterfeits sold on their marketplace, and the only way I'll believe that such a unit is effective against such incentives is with independent audits.
If this was an honest attempt to clean house, surely Amazon would welcome audits with open arms.
No joke, if I need food items from online, I try to go with ebay before amazon. I trust old/nearly expired or half opened boxes from some obscure ebay user before getting anything editable from amazon. If people are counterfeiting oral-b toothbrushes, I'm sure they are counterfeiting vanilla extract and gourmet chocolate.
I highly doubt that Amazon's 'counterfeit crimes unit' will be anything more than just an advertising stunt and a token to use in court if accused of not trying to stop counterfeits.
Last two items I ordered online I skipped Amazon and ordered from the manufacturer to avoid getting stuck with a counterfeit. I'm considering dropping my Prime membership if this keeps up.
Is there a way to contact this new unit? I have a bunch of links to clearly counterfeit products on Amazon. But something tells me that they might not be particularly interested.
considering they make money either way, i feel like this could be kind of dubious and just lip service. i would have more faith if an uninvolved party was doing the work.
The cynic in me assumes they are doing this so they can make Amazon Basics versions of popular counterfeited money and remove the angle that counterfeiters are using...
How will they be able to police this - won't it be like fake accounts on Facebook or Twitter? Very easy to setup a new account?
Are they going to tackle the surge in poor quality face masks claiming to meet FDA or European standards?
At least five years too late, but I'll take it.
they should start by investigating the "Amazon Basics" brand
They should start by investigating themselves for antitrust violations.
Amazon is just a digital flea market, with all that the epithet entails. Shit-quality Chinesium stuff, counterfeit everything, fake customers, fake everything except the price. All amzn cares about is dominance, and they are winning unfortunately.
nos custodimus quod lingus
Who counterfeits breakfast cereal??? I've had this issue with both Quaker Oats and Raisin Bran. The scale of fraud is magnificent. And it really gaslights consumers; it took me forever to actually accept that I was eating an off-brand imitation of my favorite cereals.
I do still buy from Amazon. The ease of returns still gives me confidence that I can decide after receiving an item whether the price:quality ratio is worth it.
But not if I absolutely need it to conform to certain standards and I don't have the skills/tools to validate the performance myself (like HEPA filters). Then I tend to buy from somewhere with a more curated supply chain (Home Depot, direct from manufacturers website, etc).