Well. I think I get the gist from that. Let's see if it's the one intended :) "Imagine ordering from a Sears catalog and not knowing if what you ordered is gen

Well. I think I get the gist from that. Let's see if it's the one intended :) "Imagine ordering from a Sears catalog and not knowing if what you ordered is genuine or not." There's the thing. That would mean they'd failed, and someone in their buying department may get yelled at. They'd feel it was their reputation hurt even if it was someone else's fake. On the high street it's the same unless you go to markets or "sub-prime" independents. Amazon seem to feel their brand is entirely separate from the people selling crap on their platform. I think they're very mistaken, and are in for a rude awakening if they keep it up. Amazon could have taken marketplace in a different direction when they started it and kept much of their early reputation. Simply by doing enough of the buying checks the traditional sector did to ensure legitimate sellers and baseline quality. It'd cost a little more in staff and time, but would probably pay for itself in fewer returns, refunds and complaints. Marketplace could have been for products that meet Amazon's standards, rather than Amazon, the store with no standards, but fast refunds. Limit it to "enough" choice, lose the counterfeiters friend of co-mingling etc. I'm disappointed someone else hasn't tried to do this, even if at a smaller scale than Amazon. Etsy, ebay etc leaves it all to the sellers and ratings. Price isn't everything. No one benefits except the garbage sellers from 30 copy "brands" of every product, and crap promoted in every search. Most with fake reviews, terrible quality, short life, and no chance of warranty service. Someone should disrupt them, but given how large and pervasive Amazon are, they'd better have deep pockets.