It's not an all or nothing situation. There are many items that do not need to be determined by experts and many ways to measure it.
I never said it was an all or nothing situation but ebay needs some way to determine whether an item is truly counterfeit, they can't do it because the buyer says it is.
The exact (well according to my memory) statement was that if ebay had a 1000 ebayers not paying their fees, they would act quickly but do nothing for fraud.
The comparison makes no sense to me.Ebay KNOWS if someone owes them money. They often do no know for sure if fraud is being committed so they cannot act on it until it has been proven.
I'm sorry but none of your suggestions are workable imo. As I mentioned earlier, often a buyer is not qualified to determine in an item is counterfeit and/or if a buyer is just trying to get something for free or cause a hassle.
I don't think that it is reasonable to give warnings just in case something may be counterfeit or reasonable to have sellers run around to get permission to sell a pair of sunglasses, a purse or a dvd.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the fact that some items are being misrepresented and that people are being ripped off, I'm just saying that the solution isn't as easy as some might think. Although ebay definitely has some responsibility to prevent fakes being sold, I think that the responsibility has to shared by the companies whose products are being sold, by the sellers who are selling them and in some cases, by the buyers too.
|
you kind of did say that it was all or nothing. Just like neg FB can be extorted without ever saying the word extortion, you can imply that you meant all items when you say:
They would need to have experts on anything that is counterfeit in order to truly "know" that an item isn't authentic.
This implies that you are saying that in order to enforce any kind of counterfeit issues that they would need experts on ALL items that could be counterfeit.
As for the rest, to say the comparison makes no sense to you, I can't help. Simple statistics says you don't have to KNOW something to know it's true.
Then to say they cannot act on it until it is proven is just false.
Ebay can act on anything they want. They are not beholden to allow anyone to sell. If there are known fake items, they can just refuse to allow any and all items to be sold by all. It's possilbe. Would they do it? Probably not,because the cost to them would be prohibitive. So it's not a matter of CANNOT, but choose not, based on income and profit
The suggestions I made were off the top of my head and not the be all and end all. Obviously there would be details to be worked out.
Your example again, is patently false. To say you can't do something because someone may take advantage, well then no one would sell on ebay because there are scammers, but even you believe that buyer input would be acceptable (if you are honest enough to answer). For example, what if 1% said the item was fake, 10%, 90% 99%. What if there is a ton of backup proving that the items sold in general are fake, but not necessarily from that particular seller.
Memory cards and flash drives are widely known and proven to be counterfeit. Resetting the drive to read 16GB,or 32 or 64GB and then sending a 2GB. This is proven. Further many are items that failed testing and may be the large capacity but will fail prematurely or not write consistently
If there was a seller selling for under %50 of the sale price of others, and 75% of the feedback said they were fake, and it's a well known they are faked all the time, you think that is not reasonable enough for ebay to limit? Are you really saying that the only way to really determine it is if ebay has specific experts and proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the seller is selling fraudulent items.
You can argue the details about the price and FB and warning, but the fact is, it can be done.
The amount of fraudulent cards and sticks is still rampant (not just ebay) and I don't see a reason why warnings can't be put out.
I agree with the OP, that ebay would rather let it slide than have it hamper profits.
But the cost of these can be huge. Imagine going on vacation with a 32GB card and taking all your pictures. You get home to find out all you have is the last 2GB as all the previous pictures are overwritten.
Finally, you say,
I don't think that it is reasonable to give warnings just in case something may be counterfeit or reasonable to have sellers run around to get permission to sell a pair of sunglasses, a purse or a dvd
Again you imply an all or nothing thought process, whereas my suggestion was for items that are known to have a very high rate fo fraud.
As for sellers 'running around', that's what they do. You don't get to sell Raybans in a store without being an AUTHORIZED seller. Apple has AUTHORIZED sellers as well. This means when you buy from them you know it's genuine. To all others, the guy at the flea market, it's fake. If the seller only has 1 item make them say it's 'unverified' or make them state they are not an authorized seller. There's a reason why people pay $100's for Rayban glasses ( although I wouldn't). In fact, many items that have very high rates of fraud have independant methods of verification such as sports memorabilia with verifiable docs, and watches with registered serial numbers.
If would not be hard to have sellers be authorized sellers of items or not.
Finally, nobody said the solution was easy.That's a strawman you put up to help your argument. The rest is just a generalization, when the point of the OP was that ebay should be doing more than they are.
w~~_7.JPG "pjcdn2005"){kind=avatar}
zW2Ig~~60_7.JPG "brandeentertainment"){kind=avatar}
