8 ms·

The problem is not that counterfeiting is not being reported to law enforcement. The problem is that Amazon is doing far too little to allow them to enter Amazo

The problem is not that counterfeiting is not being reported to law enforcement. The problem is that Amazon is doing far too little to allow them to enter Amazon's marketplace in the first place. Amazon is making it far too easy for fraudsters to sell their crap, and (from what I hear) repeatedly: products removed because of counterfeit issues get re-added the next day under some other (or new) product code, or seller ID. I work in the banking industry. It's not very unusual to discover that a client might be doing something that is suspicious enough to notify law enforcement of it (these notices are mandatory). But that's the last line of defense. You're supposed to attempt to prevent these situations from happening in the first place, hence there are strict AML/KYC procedures. If a bank were to open a new account for a client they had banned in the past for other reasons, financial supervisory authorities would bring down the hammer on them so fast and so hard, they'd regret it a thousand times more than whatever business they expected to make with that client. Amazon's claim that they can't do more against counterfeits than they are already doing now is bullshit. There's an entire industry with decades of experience in that matter that they could turn to. But why would they.

snarf21 7y ago
Agreed. The only thing they need to change to fix this is to stop co-mingling. I know that makes their logistics harder but then people stop buying products from bad vendors as they have low reviews and the vendors lose money because of all the returns of the crap. In this kind of marketplace, it is deceitful to say you are buying a product from company A but really you are buying from a random company. It would be like DoorDash delivering a Wendy's cheeseburger in a Burger King wrapper.
- nugget 7y ago
  A better analogy would be delivering an odd-looking home made cheeseburger wrapped in a Burger King wrapper. A couple of my recent Amazon purchases have felt like this.
  - AJ007 7y ago
    Or they are both from Burger King, but two different restaurants, one that repeatedly is closed for rat infestations. Then there is the not new, new items issue, which is like you got a cheeseburger, but someone else got it first, licked the bun, decided they didn’t want it and returned it to the counter. For all of the billions of dollars Walmart is spending trying to be like Amazon, this is the one area they can nail Amazon directly in the gut. Amazon’s entire cashflow positive low margin growth model falls apart if Amazon was the one that had to try to be like Walmart. Once consumers think of Amazon like eBay or Craigslist, the cost to reverse that view will be massive or impossible. Ironically, I get electronics that are in great shape and undamaged from eBay, not the same experience from Amazon. Right now Amazon is a giant flea market. It’s on par with Craigslist, and a little worse than eBay. When you buy something on eBay you know who it came from. Amazon, you know nothing. Try ordering 5x of the same thing from Amazon and see the wild variations in quality and condition they are in.
    - saghm 7y ago
      > Ironically, I get electronics that are in great shape and undamaged from eBay, not the same experience from Amazon. I've had the same experience as you. I'm not sure what the cause is (maybe there's lower volume, so scammers don't use eBay as much), but I've bought things like top-of-the-line noise cancelling headphones refurbished at huge markdowns on eBay and had zero issues, but I've not had great experiences buying similar things from Amazon.
    - randycupertino 7y ago
      > Right now Amazon is a giant flea market. It’s on par with Craigslist, and a little worse than eBay. I'd argue eBay is actually safer than Amazon now, because at least the reviews are less sketchy and easier to trust and also buyers can self-select from more legit products by going for higher prices. And can guarantee you're buying from the same seller every time who will ship direct to you. Whereas for things like makeup on amazon even if you choose higher priced you're still at risk of getting knockoffs due to comingling.
- ikeboy 7y ago
  As I've pointed out numerous times previously, commingling doesn't significantly add to the counterfeit problem. Amazon internally tracks which product was sold by which seller, so if a customer leaves a bad review or complains about counterfeit, Amazon will know which seller it was and will punish them. Even if there are no complaints but simply a higher than average return rate, Amazon will shut down a listing, and this is done based on the actual supplier of the stock, not the commingled seller. Source: have gotten such emails from Amazon when I was selling that specifically said "you may not have actually sold the orders these complaints are for but it's your inventory".
  - snarf21 7y ago
    The issue is that the review is now co-mingled too. You weren't the seller but it was your inventory. That review needs to go against you and your inventory, not the other seller. That is another area with reviews that is bad. You should only see reviews for this product and seller combination.
    - ikeboy 7y ago
      Amazon sees the review and knows which seller to punish. Reviews shouldn't be used for describing problems with the seller, anyway. Use seller feedback for that.
      - alistairSH 7y ago
        Are you saying that if I buy a widget from vendorX, but due to co-mingling, the seller is actually vendorZ, Amazon correctly files my review against vendorZ? So, they co-mingle but still know exactly which seller put a specific instance of the widget into circulation?
        ikeboy 7y ago
        Yes. See https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/external/200141480 https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/external/200141480 "For inventory tracked with the manufacturer barcode, each seller’s sourced inventory of the same ASIN is stored separately in our fulfillment centers. We can also track the original seller of each unit."
CaptainZapp 7y ago
Amazon's claim that they can't do more against counterfeits than they are already doing now is bullshit. Especially considering how effective they can ban customers for any ol' reason and make damn sure that said customer can't reopen the account, or open an account under a different name. Amazon will do exactly shit, unless either the hammer of the law crashes down on them, unless it costs real money, or unless the publicity is so damning and visible that it hurts.
- alok-g 7y ago
  >> Especially considering how effective they can ban customers for any ol' reason and make damn sure that said customer can't reopen the account, or open an account under a different name. Any references or data you have on this? :-)
ikeboy 7y ago
Amazon currently requires ID for signup. Any bank that allows online signup would have the same issues. They do take significant measures to block repeat offenders, but bad actors are sophisticated. I've heard, for example, that if a new account is selling inventory that's too similar to a banned account, it will get flagged. If accounts ramp up sales too quickly, if too many details match existing accounts (name, address, IP, credit card, etc) it's gone.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ckastner 7y ago
  Even if these measures exist, their performance is evidently too poor to be acceptable. Online signups work when risk is low to the point of being non-existent. Regulators aren't worried about students buying Ramen noodles. Online signups don't work when there are credible risks of malfeasance. When you're a merchant making more than X in revenue, vetting becomes necessary. If banks can do this, then so can Amazon. If a bank were to say "we're trying our best but people are still heavily abusing our online signup", then I'm all but certain that the regulatory response would be "too bad, then you can no longer offer online signup".
  - modoc 7y ago
    What do you recommend they do? I'm genuinely curious what reasonable (commercially viable for Amazon and that wouldn't have a chilling effect on legitimate small sellers) steps could be taken to drastically reduce counterfeit goods.
    - ckastner 7y ago
      Profile new clients, and assign to them a risk score based on that assessment. The client is a small wood-working shop somewhere in Ohio, has been registered as business for 30 years, and has a projected volume of 5-10 items sold per day? -> low risk, can be approved online. The client is some LLC or similar that sells USB cables and USB flash drives, and that has been registered as a business only days or months ago, and the client is somewhere in a jurisdiction associated with exceptionally high reports of counterfeiting? -> high risk, no online approval. Visit some office. Again: banks have been doing this for decades.
cletus 7y ago
100% this. Buying counterfeit items unintentionally can create huge problems for the consumer (eg [1]). Why is the onus on the consumer to look at a listing and decide if it's counterfeit or not? Amazon is probably taking the stand they're no different to a search engine and Google isn't (mostly) responsible for search results. But that analogy is not apt. The comparison to banking is far better. Banks can be held responsible is they fail due diligence with customers. Amazon should be held to the same standard. Like how drop shipping fraud can even exist on Amazon is amazing. This should be so easy to detect (ie lots of shipments to one address or cluster of addresses). No one should be able to sell branded products on Amazon without being verified. Period. And Amazon should be wholly responsible for any counterfeit that occurs as a result. [1]: https://www.racked.com/2018/1/8/16849298/amazon-counterfeits-global-entry-customs https://www.racked.com/2018/1/8/16849298/amazon-counterfeits...
- theturtletalks 7y ago
  Hope you’re talking about new products since their are thousands of sellers selling their used items that are branded. Should those people be banned for trying to make money from items they don’t use anymore? Next, you’ll be saying only verified users can sell branded items on eBay and all marketplaces.
  - inetknght 7y ago
    No, users should be selling used items on a different marketplace specifically for used items.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 7y ago
      Amazon has such differentiation in their system. Pretty much the only place to sell used stuff these days is Facebook. Craigslist has gone downhill in my area. Now everything happens in fb groups run by awful people with no accountability. I'd much rather have Amazon fill this role than whatever scammer is gaming Facebook the best.
- criddell 7y ago
atarian 7y ago
Amazon also has its own brand of products so people may be incentivized to buy Amazon-branded products over a sea of look-alikes.
- munk-a 7y ago
  Those products are often just white labeled items purchased from various suppliers - there is no guarantee of quality. And, while I think they're probably policing these a bit closer, I'm sure you could find a counterfeit or two.
  - r00fus 7y ago
    Yes but the perception is that the Amazon brand is "better" somehow - and it creates a perverse incentive for Amazon to NGAF about counterfeiters. Every time I buy on Amazon I have to use Fakespot to get something decent. For some things that's the best way to go, but it's a huge PITA, and I'm to the point where going to the local mall/outlet is actually less work now.
    - munk-a 7y ago
      Absolutely - I didn't mean to indicate that these products were of a high quality, more to disabuse the OP of that perception. Something being the Amazon brand is absolutely no guarantee. I wonder if we might actually take some insight from white-labeling in how to handle this... how is President's Choice held to account when a can contains contaminated food? Do they get to defer any liability on the original manufacturer or by white labeling have they accepted all the liability where the customer is concerned?
andrewla 7y ago
> I work in the banking industry. It's not very unusual to discover that a client might be doing something that is suspicious enough to notify law enforcement of it (these notices are mandatory). You work in the banking industry. This is not the banking industry. Money laundering laws as they are written make bankers (and other financial service industry workers) criminally liable for criminal acts even if there was no criminal intent on the part of the bankers. That is not the case in retail, and I shudder even at the thought. > You're supposed to attempt to prevent these situations from happening in the first place You're not "supposed" to -- you are legally required to play police officer, and can be criminally liable if your organization allows this activity if there is any sort of way to detect it, even if that detection is not part of the legal mandate. Filing too many SARs can get you in as much trouble as actively money laundering. These AML laws are horrific, and create a ton of bureaucratic burden on companies and force them to deliberately cut off customers who are using their facilities for totally legitimate reasons because they match a pattern also used by criminals. This, of course, it part of the reason for these laws; to starve sectors (for example, legal marijuana dispensaries) that can't be explicitly made illegal and have to be made "uncomfortable" instead. Amazon shouldn't play cop; they should let law enforcement prosecute real cases of fraud, rather than trying to preemptively prevent fraud and in the process add burdensome requirements that restrict access to their marketplace and allow well-capitalized rent-seeking incumbents to further consolidate their market power over small shops that rely on equal access to the marketplace.
- vkou 7y ago
  > This, of course, it part of the reason for these laws; to starve sectors (for example, legal marijuana dispensaries) that can't be explicitly made illegal and have to be made "uncomfortable" instead. No, it's not, because: 1. These laws were in place long before half the country legalized marijuana. 2. The dispensaries just pass the costs of being shut out of the banking sector to the customer, and if we know anything about drugs, cost and a bit of inconvenience are not going to stop people from using them.
- beart 7y ago
  I really don't understand how a law enforcement agency is supposed to prevent fraud on Amazon, especially one constrained by national borders, when Amazon is a global platform. In what way do you propose a third party (not Amazon) reduce fraud on Amazon?
munk-a 7y ago
Amazon needs to vet the products sold on it better - it can use ML if it can prove that ML is sufficient, but in the meantime it should just be forced back into using manual labour for vetting and being held accountable for that vetting. The issue, IMO, is that Amazon isn't getting more than a slap on the wrists so there is no motivation for them to fix the issue.
ljm 7y ago
That the richest company in the world can’t do this—the one that also runs cloud infrastructure for too much of the net—yet smaller businesses figure out how to operate in the regulatory framework, suggests that they just don’t give a fuck. Bezos can buy his way out of literally any scrutiny. This is the true injustice of our system. Bezos can just play the Amazon Exceptionalism card.
kevindong 7y ago
> Amazon is making it far too easy for fraudsters to sell their crap, and (from what I hear) repeatedly: products removed because of counterfeit issues get re-added the next day under some other (or new) product code, or seller ID. I stumbled upon the latest Amazon scam this past week. I was searching through my Amazon order history to find a wallet I had ordered years ago in the past. Imagine my surprise when my query for "wallet" returned an order with the wallet's name as the title, an image of a 5 pack of Lightning cables as the picture, and a 3 pack of Lightning cables when I actually clicked through. The reviews [0] were clearly for a bunch of different items: the wallet I had purchased in the past, a laser pointer/clicker for pets, socks, etc. But the current item being sold was a set of generic Lightning cables. It amazes me that Amazon would let sellers so blatantly apply reviews from a bunch of older and wholly unrelated items to a completely new (and also unrelated) item. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07XGBGZXR https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07XGBGZXR
- cstrat 7y ago
  The photo of the wallet falling apart with the Indian cough syrup packaging is hilarious... wow what a shambles having the same product code recycled by a vendor for multiple "crappy" products.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- astura 7y ago
  Wow, one of the recent (almost certainly fake) five star reviews looks auto generated. >They are really durable because they have just arrived, they are good price, they are exactly the length I want, they arrive very quickly and they look good quality.What else do I want?I can only think that the product is really good! Also looks like the non-charger reviews are hidden on the mobile site?
Fnoord 7y ago
I could say the same about Kickstarter and IndieGoGo.

snarf21 7y ago

Agreed. The only thing they need to change to fix this is to stop co-mingling. I know that makes their logistics harder but then people stop buying products from bad vendors as they have low reviews and the vendors lose money because of all the returns of the crap. In this kind of marketplace, it is deceitful to say you are buying a product from company A but really you are buying from a random company. It would be like DoorDash delivering a Wendy's cheeseburger in a Burger King wrapper.

nugget 7y ago
A better analogy would be delivering an odd-looking home made cheeseburger wrapped in a Burger King wrapper. A couple of my recent Amazon purchases have felt like this.
- AJ007 7y ago
  Or they are both from Burger King, but two different restaurants, one that repeatedly is closed for rat infestations. Then there is the not new, new items issue, which is like you got a cheeseburger, but someone else got it first, licked the bun, decided they didn’t want it and returned it to the counter. For all of the billions of dollars Walmart is spending trying to be like Amazon, this is the one area they can nail Amazon directly in the gut. Amazon’s entire cashflow positive low margin growth model falls apart if Amazon was the one that had to try to be like Walmart. Once consumers think of Amazon like eBay or Craigslist, the cost to reverse that view will be massive or impossible. Ironically, I get electronics that are in great shape and undamaged from eBay, not the same experience from Amazon. Right now Amazon is a giant flea market. It’s on par with Craigslist, and a little worse than eBay. When you buy something on eBay you know who it came from. Amazon, you know nothing. Try ordering 5x of the same thing from Amazon and see the wild variations in quality and condition they are in.
  - saghm 7y ago
    > Ironically, I get electronics that are in great shape and undamaged from eBay, not the same experience from Amazon. I've had the same experience as you. I'm not sure what the cause is (maybe there's lower volume, so scammers don't use eBay as much), but I've bought things like top-of-the-line noise cancelling headphones refurbished at huge markdowns on eBay and had zero issues, but I've not had great experiences buying similar things from Amazon.
  - randycupertino 7y ago
    > Right now Amazon is a giant flea market. It’s on par with Craigslist, and a little worse than eBay. I'd argue eBay is actually safer than Amazon now, because at least the reviews are less sketchy and easier to trust and also buyers can self-select from more legit products by going for higher prices. And can guarantee you're buying from the same seller every time who will ship direct to you. Whereas for things like makeup on amazon even if you choose higher priced you're still at risk of getting knockoffs due to comingling.
ikeboy 7y ago
As I've pointed out numerous times previously, commingling doesn't significantly add to the counterfeit problem. Amazon internally tracks which product was sold by which seller, so if a customer leaves a bad review or complains about counterfeit, Amazon will know which seller it was and will punish them. Even if there are no complaints but simply a higher than average return rate, Amazon will shut down a listing, and this is done based on the actual supplier of the stock, not the commingled seller. Source: have gotten such emails from Amazon when I was selling that specifically said "you may not have actually sold the orders these complaints are for but it's your inventory".
- snarf21 7y ago
  The issue is that the review is now co-mingled too. You weren't the seller but it was your inventory. That review needs to go against you and your inventory, not the other seller. That is another area with reviews that is bad. You should only see reviews for this product and seller combination.
  - ikeboy 7y ago
    Amazon sees the review and knows which seller to punish. Reviews shouldn't be used for describing problems with the seller, anyway. Use seller feedback for that.
    - alistairSH 7y ago
      Are you saying that if I buy a widget from vendorX, but due to co-mingling, the seller is actually vendorZ, Amazon correctly files my review against vendorZ? So, they co-mingle but still know exactly which seller put a specific instance of the widget into circulation?
      - ikeboy 7y ago
        Yes. See https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/external/200141480 https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/external/200141480 "For inventory tracked with the manufacturer barcode, each seller’s sourced inventory of the same ASIN is stored separately in our fulfillment centers. We can also track the original seller of each unit."

CaptainZapp 7y ago

Amazon's claim that they can't do more against counterfeits than they are already doing now is bullshit. Especially considering how effective they can ban customers for any ol' reason and make damn sure that said customer can't reopen the account, or open an account under a different name. Amazon will do exactly shit, unless either the hammer of the law crashes down on them, unless it costs real money, or unless the publicity is so damning and visible that it hurts.

alok-g 7y ago
>> Especially considering how effective they can ban customers for any ol' reason and make damn sure that said customer can't reopen the account, or open an account under a different name. Any references or data you have on this? :-)

ikeboy 7y ago

Amazon currently requires ID for signup. Any bank that allows online signup would have the same issues. They do take significant measures to block repeat offenders, but bad actors are sophisticated. I've heard, for example, that if a new account is selling inventory that's too similar to a banned account, it will get flagged. If accounts ramp up sales too quickly, if too many details match existing accounts (name, address, IP, credit card, etc) it's gone.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ckastner 7y ago
Even if these measures exist, their performance is evidently too poor to be acceptable. Online signups work when risk is low to the point of being non-existent. Regulators aren't worried about students buying Ramen noodles. Online signups don't work when there are credible risks of malfeasance. When you're a merchant making more than X in revenue, vetting becomes necessary. If banks can do this, then so can Amazon. If a bank were to say "we're trying our best but people are still heavily abusing our online signup", then I'm all but certain that the regulatory response would be "too bad, then you can no longer offer online signup".
- modoc 7y ago
  What do you recommend they do? I'm genuinely curious what reasonable (commercially viable for Amazon and that wouldn't have a chilling effect on legitimate small sellers) steps could be taken to drastically reduce counterfeit goods.
  - ckastner 7y ago
    Profile new clients, and assign to them a risk score based on that assessment. The client is a small wood-working shop somewhere in Ohio, has been registered as business for 30 years, and has a projected volume of 5-10 items sold per day? -> low risk, can be approved online. The client is some LLC or similar that sells USB cables and USB flash drives, and that has been registered as a business only days or months ago, and the client is somewhere in a jurisdiction associated with exceptionally high reports of counterfeiting? -> high risk, no online approval. Visit some office. Again: banks have been doing this for decades.

cletus 7y ago

100% this. Buying counterfeit items unintentionally can create huge problems for the consumer (eg [1]). Why is the onus on the consumer to look at a listing and decide if it's counterfeit or not? Amazon is probably taking the stand they're no different to a search engine and Google isn't (mostly) responsible for search results. But that analogy is not apt. The comparison to banking is far better. Banks can be held responsible is they fail due diligence with customers. Amazon should be held to the same standard. Like how drop shipping fraud can even exist on Amazon is amazing. This should be so easy to detect (ie lots of shipments to one address or cluster of addresses). No one should be able to sell branded products on Amazon without being verified. Period. And Amazon should be wholly responsible for any counterfeit that occurs as a result. [1]: https://www.racked.com/2018/1/8/16849298/amazon-counterfeits-global-entry-customs https://www.racked.com/2018/1/8/16849298/amazon-counterfeits...

theturtletalks 7y ago
Hope you’re talking about new products since their are thousands of sellers selling their used items that are branded. Should those people be banned for trying to make money from items they don’t use anymore? Next, you’ll be saying only verified users can sell branded items on eBay and all marketplaces.
- inetknght 7y ago
  No, users should be selling used items on a different marketplace specifically for used items.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 7y ago
    Amazon has such differentiation in their system. Pretty much the only place to sell used stuff these days is Facebook. Craigslist has gone downhill in my area. Now everything happens in fb groups run by awful people with no accountability. I'd much rather have Amazon fill this role than whatever scammer is gaming Facebook the best.
criddell 7y ago

atarian 7y ago

Amazon also has its own brand of products so people may be incentivized to buy Amazon-branded products over a sea of look-alikes.

munk-a 7y ago
Those products are often just white labeled items purchased from various suppliers - there is no guarantee of quality. And, while I think they're probably policing these a bit closer, I'm sure you could find a counterfeit or two.
- r00fus 7y ago
  Yes but the perception is that the Amazon brand is "better" somehow - and it creates a perverse incentive for Amazon to NGAF about counterfeiters. Every time I buy on Amazon I have to use Fakespot to get something decent. For some things that's the best way to go, but it's a huge PITA, and I'm to the point where going to the local mall/outlet is actually less work now.
  - munk-a 7y ago
    Absolutely - I didn't mean to indicate that these products were of a high quality, more to disabuse the OP of that perception. Something being the Amazon brand is absolutely no guarantee. I wonder if we might actually take some insight from white-labeling in how to handle this... how is President's Choice held to account when a can contains contaminated food? Do they get to defer any liability on the original manufacturer or by white labeling have they accepted all the liability where the customer is concerned?

andrewla 7y ago

> I work in the banking industry. It's not very unusual to discover that a client might be doing something that is suspicious enough to notify law enforcement of it (these notices are mandatory). You work in the banking industry. This is not the banking industry. Money laundering laws as they are written make bankers (and other financial service industry workers) criminally liable for criminal acts even if there was no criminal intent on the part of the bankers. That is not the case in retail, and I shudder even at the thought. > You're supposed to attempt to prevent these situations from happening in the first place You're not "supposed" to -- you are legally required to play police officer, and can be criminally liable if your organization allows this activity if there is any sort of way to detect it, even if that detection is not part of the legal mandate. Filing too many SARs can get you in as much trouble as actively money laundering. These AML laws are horrific, and create a ton of bureaucratic burden on companies and force them to deliberately cut off customers who are using their facilities for totally legitimate reasons because they match a pattern also used by criminals. This, of course, it part of the reason for these laws; to starve sectors (for example, legal marijuana dispensaries) that can't be explicitly made illegal and have to be made "uncomfortable" instead. Amazon shouldn't play cop; they should let law enforcement prosecute real cases of fraud, rather than trying to preemptively prevent fraud and in the process add burdensome requirements that restrict access to their marketplace and allow well-capitalized rent-seeking incumbents to further consolidate their market power over small shops that rely on equal access to the marketplace.

vkou 7y ago
> This, of course, it part of the reason for these laws; to starve sectors (for example, legal marijuana dispensaries) that can't be explicitly made illegal and have to be made "uncomfortable" instead. No, it's not, because: 1. These laws were in place long before half the country legalized marijuana. 2. The dispensaries just pass the costs of being shut out of the banking sector to the customer, and if we know anything about drugs, cost and a bit of inconvenience are not going to stop people from using them.
beart 7y ago
I really don't understand how a law enforcement agency is supposed to prevent fraud on Amazon, especially one constrained by national borders, when Amazon is a global platform. In what way do you propose a third party (not Amazon) reduce fraud on Amazon?

munk-a 7y ago

Amazon needs to vet the products sold on it better - it can use ML if it can prove that ML is sufficient, but in the meantime it should just be forced back into using manual labour for vetting and being held accountable for that vetting. The issue, IMO, is that Amazon isn't getting more than a slap on the wrists so there is no motivation for them to fix the issue.

ljm 7y ago

That the richest company in the world can’t do this—the one that also runs cloud infrastructure for too much of the net—yet smaller businesses figure out how to operate in the regulatory framework, suggests that they just don’t give a fuck. Bezos can buy his way out of literally any scrutiny. This is the true injustice of our system. Bezos can just play the Amazon Exceptionalism card.

kevindong 7y ago

> Amazon is making it far too easy for fraudsters to sell their crap, and (from what I hear) repeatedly: products removed because of counterfeit issues get re-added the next day under some other (or new) product code, or seller ID. I stumbled upon the latest Amazon scam this past week. I was searching through my Amazon order history to find a wallet I had ordered years ago in the past. Imagine my surprise when my query for "wallet" returned an order with the wallet's name as the title, an image of a 5 pack of Lightning cables as the picture, and a 3 pack of Lightning cables when I actually clicked through. The reviews [0] were clearly for a bunch of different items: the wallet I had purchased in the past, a laser pointer/clicker for pets, socks, etc. But the current item being sold was a set of generic Lightning cables. It amazes me that Amazon would let sellers so blatantly apply reviews from a bunch of older and wholly unrelated items to a completely new (and also unrelated) item. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07XGBGZXR https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07XGBGZXR

cstrat 7y ago
The photo of the wallet falling apart with the Indian cough syrup packaging is hilarious... wow what a shambles having the same product code recycled by a vendor for multiple "crappy" products.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
astura 7y ago
Wow, one of the recent (almost certainly fake) five star reviews looks auto generated. >They are really durable because they have just arrived, they are good price, they are exactly the length I want, they arrive very quickly and they look good quality.What else do I want?I can only think that the product is really good! Also looks like the non-charger reviews are hidden on the mobile site?

Fnoord 7y ago

I could say the same about Kickstarter and IndieGoGo.