[Lasher]

I purchased Quickbooks Pro 2017 (PC) on Amazon last week, said it was "sold by Intuit" so wasn't even supposed to be an FBA (fulfilled by Amazon). Figured if it costs no more I might as well get the physical disk.

What showed up was a DVD case with a very clearly photocopied cover for a Mac version with a Verbatim CDR inside and a hacked version of the software.

Amazon processed the refund just fine but didn't seem particularly interested or concerned that they had just sold me pirated software. Not a big deal for Quickbooks, I can just buy the download version. I also want to buy a new Ipod Touch and, for the first time ever, don't feel like I can buy it on Amazon.

Long term Amazon customer since 1999, Prime since the first year, this counterfeit issue is a real problem that's going to cost them seriously if they don't get a handle on it.

[bonestamp2]

Amazon isn't going to take this seriously until a major company gets burned and the FBI gets involved. Then Amazon will experience what every other company does that gets burned for selling counterfeit goods... the FBI will raid their warehouse and hold all the inventory as evidence until they complete their investigation. Like you said, Amazon doesn't seem concerned that they're selling counterfeit goods -- probably because they don't understand that's a serious crime.

[ninv]

8 out of 10 people cannot spot counterfeit goods. I bought a major brand perfume, Sold and fulfilled by Amazon. When i used it after 2 months i was suspicious a. One day i was in Macy's, saw the same perfume (on same price). I tried the tester and i realized that perfume at home is a cheap knock off.

Initially i though that Amazon did not store it properly and warehouse heat must have destroyed the smell. Then i saw one star reviews. For last 6 months people were complaining and getting refund for this perfume. My refund windows was already closed. Anyway, lesson learned. Amazon is a hit or miss these days like eBay.

Here is one example, 84$ Magpul sights. If you have never seen the original product, you cannot spot the difference.

https://www.amazon.com/Magpul-MBUS-Front-Backup-Sight/produc...

edit: Added "Sold and fulfilled by Amazon"

[tyingq]

That Magpul sights link is a great one. Many negative reviews that call out fakes, and name the sellers.

The reviews are from fall of last year, so plenty of time for Amazon to address the issue.

The sellers mentioned are still selling the sights. So, either they were selling fakes, and Amazon doesn't care. Or, they weren't, and it was a commingling issue, but Amazon hasn't fixed the reviews....Innocent parties are being blamed.

Has to be one or the other. Either way, Amazon isn't doing the right thing.

[IAmGraydon]

Never buy perfume from Amazon. It's one of the most commonly counterfeited items out there. Go only to the site of the manufacturer or an authorized retailer.

[nextos]

Not to mention grey market items, which are a commonplace in Amazon UK.

If you buy many items from Korea or Japan, expect to get some plain plastic bag without instructions or traces of original packaging.

[zyxzkz]

When I followed your link it says:

Sold by MSP Sales LLC and Fulfilled by Amazon.

[cookiecaper]

Amazon does not allow one to create a permanent link to a specific seller. You can only link to the ASIN, which will determines the seller to display on-demand.

Unless the product category or brand is "gated" (and to be fair, many are), meaning it requires pre-approval to list on Amazon, anyone can hitch onto any ASIN by telling Amazon they have that product in stock (if FBA, by sending in "that product").

[nommm-nommm]

I don't know about that particular product but Amazon's inventory can go in and out of stock. Also they do not give themselves the buy box all the time, they do share it with third party sellers.

[ninv]

It changes frequently. I tried the link this morning and it is "Sold by HandAProduct and Fulfilled by Amazon."

[nommm-nommm]

Amazon seems to be untouchable. They didn't even get in any trouble for selling illegal and prescription drugs but Bodybuilding.com did.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/amazon-prescription-drug-proble...

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_exa...

https://www.fda.gov/iceci/criminalinvestigations/ucm305494.h...

[tajen]

I hope Amazon doesn't become another HSBC case. Given the extent of the fraud, I'm already disappointed that the FBI doesn't seize a warehouse for investigation.

[emodendroket]

There is probably a calculation that the feds will be reticent to do that to an Amazon warehouse as they're generally major employers in the areas they're built in.

[amsilprotag]

There was a great Bloomberg Decrypted podcast a couple weeks ago weighing the costs and benefits for a small town in offering a multi-million dollar subsidy for thousands of low-skill Amazon warehouse jobs. Is it really worth subsidizing at all when the government will have to fund various welfare programs to cover the difference between the ~$10.00/hr paid and a livable wage? But since towns compete and prestige is awarded to politicians who win deals, towns race each other to near zero expected value.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-14/your-tax-...

[closeparen]

But they already have to pay welfare for those people, right? Or is Amazon bringing new low income residents?

[koolba]

Exactly. It's $10/hr less that has to be covered than before. Plus the ware house drives local commercial traffic, workers have to eat, etc.

[nommm-nommm]

So they weren't eating before?

[emodendroket]

The New York Times also did a big piece showing that these deals were almost always bad ones. The thing is that politicians have a simply ideological commitment to not intervene more directly.

[Buge]

The politicians do intervene directly

>cities compete to offer the biggest tax

So it would be actually better if they did less intervening, by not offering tax breaks to Amazon.

[emodendroket]

When I say "intervene directly" I mean more like directly employing people.

[Apocryphon]

Makes me wonder if political deals to bring in military-industrial complex jobs at military bases and arms manufacturing plants and the like are any better. They at least provide better compensation to the workers, right?

[dogma1138]

Towns like to attract military bases because they bring in a large population that is employed requires no loca services (since it's handled by the armed forces), usually well behaved which spends its income locally. Bases also bring 100s of civilian jobs and support local businesses.

[emodendroket]

It's certainly not the most efficient way to generate employment but these guys know where their bread is buttered.

[jcurbo]

Mother Jones did a major piece on this several years ago.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-f...

[tw04]

I guess I'm curious how you came to the conclusion they're major employers where their warehouses are. As far as I can tell each warehouse is about 1,000 full-time jobs. If I look at a list of warehouse locations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Amazon.com_locations

They're pretty much universally a rounding error for total population and jobs in their respective metro areas.

[binarymax]

That's tens of millions of dollars in salaries injected into the local economy from one employer, not to mention the other additions like local taxes and utility spending. 1000 jobs is significant.

[tw04]

Wait, WHAT? The average Amazon warehouse worker makes $13/hr. That's ~$27,000/yr BEFORE taxes. In other words: any employee making that salary and actually trying to raise a family is collecting more from the government than they're paying in. They aren't contributing anything to the local economy, they're draining it just like Walmart.

[ribosometronome]

How does an Amazon warehouse drain money from a local economy? Purchases at Wal-mart export your money outside of a local economy, but the presence of an Amazon warehouse doesn't really change the number of purchases you'll be making at Amazon in your town.

[backtoyoujim]

So we wait until 990 of those jobs are lost to automation ... then we order pitchforks from Amazon ?

[closeparen]

Then Amazon can locate its facilities even farther from population centers where there is no municipal or even county government to speak of.

[Zigurd]

1,000 full time employees is pretty big these days. The highly touted Carrier deal amounted to maybe 700 jobs. Elizabeth Warren made an announcement about the big new Amazon distribution center in Fall River. It's supposedly Amazon's biggest, and I recall it was about 1,000 jobs. So they are doing more with the same headcount.

[mikeash]

1,000 jobs is about what the American economy creates every two hours. Politicians tout these deals because they know that most voters are clueless about the magnitudes involved.

[mynameisvlad]

You can't​ directly compare 1000 jobs in the entirety of the US and 1000 jobs in a small town with nothing else going on.

[Zigurd]

That's true but my point was that jobs are no longer created in fleets of tens of thousands at one throw. Even the largest distribution facility of the world's eighth largest retailer has 1,000 jobs in a facility that probably operates two or three shifts weekdays and weekends. That's a very lean crew on each shift.

[cookiecaper]

It's about name recognition, not job count. Amazon is seen as a cutting edge, high-tech employer. It looks goods when politicians say "Welcoming $COOL_COMPANY_X into our area!", it helps people feel important. It doesn't really matter whether they're bring 50 jobs or 5000; what matters is people can say "Yeah, Amazon is just up the street".

[emodendroket]

Fall River is also extremely economically depressed. I thought that was a typical case but the list of locations suggests maybe that's not entirely true.

[ams6110]

Pretty smart on Amazon's part. Locate in depressed areas: the work doesn't require any real skills, the wages, working hours and conditions can be poor because there's no other real competition for employment, and dispite all that the local politicans love you for being an improvement on what they had before.

[Zigurd]

Massachusetts isn't as big a boomtown as some areas, but population grew about 4% in a region better known for losing population. Fall River isn't as much a backwater as it used to be.

[bonestamp2]

Hopefully you're right (for the employee's sake). But given the Bezos/Trump feud, if I were Bezos I'd be very cautious about giving the feds any valid reason (with lots of precedence) to shut down any warehouses for an investigation.

[Symmetry]

That's why this is done by the Feds rather than local cops. They don't have to care about local employment.

[twhb]

I am sure that other significant business losses will also cause Amazon to take action, like understanding how many sales they're losing for lack of trust. So I ask everybody reading this: next time you get ripped off, make sure your contact understands that you aren't just returning the product, you are re-purchasing it elsewhere because you can no longer trust Amazon with this.

[akinalci]

As someone else here pointed out, most people don't realize they're getting counterfeit items.

Anecdotally, most of the people I've spoken to regarding this haven't even considered that something they get from Amazon might be counterfeit. Many don't really understand the 3rd-party seller system, Fulfilled by Amazon, etc.

You think Amazon is clueless? They're not. They know they're shipping counterfeits. They've done the math, and it's making them money.

I don't think we'll see a significant change unless there's a lot more bad publicity, or the government gets involved.

[unclebucknasty]

>until a major company gets burned and the FBI gets involved.

Or until consumers start to become unsure enough about whether they are getting legit goods on Amazon that they become wary of shopping there.

>they don't understand that's a serious crime.

Oh, they understand this well. They are a multi-billion dollar company with teams of lawyers.

But, as long as they can get away with a passive response--like processing refunds when requested--without taking too much of a reputational or legal hit, they will continue to do so. Effectively, it's cheaper to outsource the policing to customers vs. trying to vet vendors at scale.

[AdamJacobMuller]

> hold all the inventory as evidence

With the FBA situation, why would amazon even care?

Amazon will just tell the seller, "X from your inventory was just sized by the FBI, talk to them if you want it back"

The seller has no leverage against Amazon, Amazon is out no money, Amazon will just get another shipment of counterfeit widgets the next day.

[cnst]

> Amazon will just tell the seller, "X from your inventory was just sized by the FBI, talk to them if you want it back"

No, if you have FBA, once your item enters their system, it's their item. If it's seized by the FBI, AMZ will pay you fair market price for your item they've lost the possession of, or will replace it with a likewise item.

I mean, if they had any actual idea/proof that you're the one who supplied them with the counterfeit, they'd not put it into their space in the first place; once it's on the shelves, it's all shared property, and sellers don't own any individual stock.

[sjwright]

What is the fair market price of perfume that has been identified as counterfeit by the FBI?

[nommm-nommm]

Yeah, just because they pay you for inventory they lose doesn't mean they pay you for inventory that was seized for being counterfeit.

[sk5t]

Amazon might care when entire warehouses are locked down for investigation. It's systemic after all.

[AdamJacobMuller]

I find it unlikely to believe that they would lock down entire warehouses for any significant period. I think this is the equivalent of shutting down an entire port because of a (or a few) containers of cargo are counterfit.

[M_Grey]

...That sounds like the FBI we know and "love". They do so love to make a point.

[intrasight]

Amazon is a powerful company with friends in high places.

[bonestamp2]

Don't forget about enemies in even higher places.

[mynameisvlad]

I believe FBA stock is comingled with other FBA and Amazon.com stock for the same SKU in the warehouse.

[chimeracoder]

Then how would they know when to credit a seller for a sale? I believe the seller doesn't receive the money until someone actually buys it.

[AdamJacobMuller]

Amazon credits you when someone buys your item, but the item Amazon ships the buyer might not be yours, but an equal equivalent.

And, before you ask: Yes, this results in situations where 100% legitimate sellers on Amazon can sometimes ship (via Amazon/FBA) their buyers counterfeit goods. Shitty situation to be in as a seller.

[cookiecaper]

Sellers can opt-out of commingling, but many don't because a) they don't understand the implications, as Amazon doesn't really make it clear; and b) because it requires them to individually add a separate sticker/identifier to each unit of their product, adding significantly to preparation and packaging costs.

[throwawaylalala]

Not true; depends on whether or not you use comingled inventory. It's easy to make it not comingled. That's what we do.

[coldtea]

>Then Amazon will experience what every other company does that gets burned for selling counterfeit goods... the FBI will raid their warehouse and hold all the inventory as evidence until they complete their investigation

You'd be surprised what being a big company can do to protect you from such actions by the FBI.

[joniT]

From my experience working at Amazon, they do take it very seriously. They've got multiple teams working on automated detection of counterfeit using rules, machine learning, etc., and hundreds of investigators looking into cases.

They allow return of counterfeit and will reimburse you fully, and they'll have the item return to them for inspection.

If they know you've frauded before, they try and block you from the platform by fingerprinting you and your accounts.

The issue is that there's too many sellers and too many product, it's a really hard problem to solve. Counterfeit has improved considerably too, sometimes it even comes from the same factory, they call it the "night shift".

And while we try to prevent it, we also have to balance out false positive rates, not to hurt the seller's buisness without real cause.

I'm afraid most websites will suffer from this, if you want to be sure, try to buy straight from the manufacturer, but even then, make sure you double check the website, not all manufacturers sell directly and online, so that could also be fraud.

[breakingcups]

It's not hard to solve.

It's hard to solve under Amazons business model whilst retaining Amazons profit margins.

It's a problem they chose to ignore for a long time because they could.

[mcphage]

I think Apple sued them recently about counterfeit chargers. Let's see if that will do anything.

[LoSboccacc]

interestingly I almost got a counterfeit yesterday. I bailed at the last second when I saw there were many sellers shadowing the manufacturer and reading the comments that one guy got an unbranded version of the good, so I went to the manufacturer website itself and bought from there.

while amazon will not see the individual user receiving counterfeits, it will feel the bottom line slowing down, rest assured.

edit to add: if I wanted counterfeit goods, I'd go to aliexpress and at least save a buck.

[dba7dba]

"the FBI will raid their warehouse and hold all the inventory as evidence until they complete their investigation"

Considering the strained relationship between Bezos and Trump, I can actually see that happening.

[mdp]

Try buying any Apple accessories. I wanted to buy the genuine Apple headphones, but it's absolutely impossible to on Amazon. "Sold by Apple" product shows up from a seller in Boston, clearly counterfeit. Report it to Amazon and they suggest mailing it back for a refund. Zero concern that the seller is labeling their goods as genuine Apple and then sending knock-offs.

Prior to this I got a set of grey market Gillette blades that were fulfilled by Amazon.

Like you, I've been with Amazon for nearly 20 years, but I've recently started being more selective about what I order from them. I'm surprised that they aren't tackling this more.

[cookiecaper]

Amazon gets those reports all the time, and they have very low-skill people reviewing them. FBA sellers have many horror stories in the opposite direction: they're falsely reported as counterfeit and they don't commingle, but some Amazon lackey is just clicking through the cases and assuming that suspensions are justified, probably without even reading them.

The long and short is that Amazon is not popular with anyone these days. They're not responsive to complaints about products from either buyers or sellers. You have to learn how to play their game. They're acting very monopolistically despite the fact that there are many well-qualified and well-capitalized wolves looking to poach their marketshare.

FBA is just so obscenely profitable for Amazon (the fees alone are huge, usually ending up to be 35-50% of the sale price, depending on the product). I think they are trying to straddle and put off anything that will cut into that margin as long as they can.

Sellers are punished for returns, buyers are stuck with an inferior product and either never notice or send in a return, which hurts the seller, not Amazon. They obviously don't need to carefully tend their reputation as they're already the default for a huge number of people, as long as they do enough to prevent a mass exodus. There's not a lot of incentive for them to aggressively pursue counterfeit sellers or put an overnight stop to it, because they're profiting handsomely in the meantime.

[bambax]

I think the problem is, Amazon is still growing like crazy, so any attrition due to bad products is drowned in the sea of new customers.

Eventually that will change, but it could take a long time.

[tiglionabbit]

Apple does not sell any products through Amazon. All Apple products listed on Amazon are through third parties.

[mdp]

This isn't very clear when you see pages like this - https://www.amazon.com/Apple/b/ref=w_bl_hsx_s_wi_web_2528944...

Also, some Apple products are shipped and sold by Amazon, not third parties - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00W5Q06VU/ref=s9_dcacsd_b...

I'm surprised Apple hasn't taken any action against them for this.

[kalleboo]

Apple is certainly aware of it at least, they've sued one of the sellers on Amazon http://www.computerworld.com/article/3133627/technology-law-...

[notgood]

Apple taking action against one of its biggest merchants in the US? you must be joking right?

[chimeracoder]

> Apple taking action against one of its biggest merchants in the US? you must be joking right?

Apple is pretty aggressive about how it combats counterfeit products, so it's not unreasonable to think that they'd pressure Amazon into to eliminating counterfeit Apple products.

[wbl]

Apple sells directly online and through its own stores. They can afford to lose Amazon as an outlet.

[3pt14159]

Report it to Apple, not Amazon.

[nommm-nommm]

How do you know the razor you got was grey market?

[eeeeeeeeeeeee]

I don't even buy from any third party sellers, including fulfilled by Amazon, for this reason.

Amazons response has been wholly inadequate thus far. Brands are destroyed because people get counterfeit crap and review the entire product/brand.

Why can't Amazon show the merchant used for every review and let people aggregate the reviews of each product by the merchant and product? Right now you have to check the overall merchant and hope you can trust it. This would be a good data point to watch too (if reviews for one merchant are significantly different than others for the same product). That should trigger a review of the merchant by Amazon.

Instead, Amazon conflates all product reviews as if they all came from the same place. Which is another reason reviews are hit or miss -- people reviewing how the seller got it to them, how fast, or in what condition.

[JangoSteve]

> I don't even buy from any third party sellers, including fulfilled by Amazon, for this reason.

Except, according from the information in the article, this doesn't matter:

> Shipped and sold by Amazon.com means that the product is shipped and sold by Amazon Retail (via Vendor Central or Vendor Express) directly. Basically, the manufacturer sends product to Amazon.com at a set price through a traditional PO process. This inventory is commingled with all other FBA inventory.

Even if you buy only items that are shipped and sold by Amazon, if those items are also _available_ from other retailers on Amazon via FBA, then the product you get as the consumer, could have come from one of those retailers, because they're all mixed together at the Amazon warehouse. In other words, you could still be getting counterfeit items when you purchase products that are shipped and sold by Amazon.

This is the same reason that, as far as I can tell, with their current logistics, tying reviews to merchant wouldn't work. They'd actually have to keep each merchant's products separate in the warehouse and _they'd_ have to know which merchant's product they sent you (which they don't currently unless the merchant opts out of commingled inventory, which costs the merchant extra).

This is all assuming I'm interpreting the info in the article correctly. One thing I don't understand is why Amazon would not keep all of their own "shipped and sold by Amazon" inventory from the manufacturers separate from ones that come from 3rd-party merchants. I.e. why wouldn't Amazon opt all of their own direct-from-manufacturer inventory out of commingling? That's the part I'm wondering if I'm understanding incorrectly.

EDIT: To further clarify my last question, it seems unwise to willingly mix products sent to you by a 3rd-party in with your own trusted inventory, such that you don't know what's trusted and what isn't. This seems analogous to allowing a SQL injection or XHR attack by not sanitizing user data on input, and then displaying it in the site, trusted as your own content without any sort of escaping.

[bambax]

You're right, but that would be easy to fix for Amazon: don't let new vendors commingle.

New vendors should have a probation period of, say, a year, where they can only sell their own inventory (through FBA if they so choose, of course); then the reviews would reflect their real quality.

Amazon is extremely strict on vendor identity: you can't have multiple accounts tied to the same business or bank account or credit card -- but they don't mind if you sell utter crap or counterfeit goods. That's strange.

[erichurkman]

You still run into vendors selling a legit product (or high quality product) during the initial period, only to drop to crap quality after they've gotten plenty of reviews.

I bought a set of wire cooking racks that were highly rated, and the product used by America's Test Kitchen (highly rated there, too). I should have sorted reviews by 'recent', as every recent review was 1 star. The racks completely rusted over after a single use. The manufacturer had changed the metal or stopped coating the racks, presumably to make a cheaper product, and coast by on a 4+ star review from the 100s of prior, but old, ratings.

[emodendroket]

I don't think that means that buying direct from Amazon can get you third party inventory.

[BeetleB]

>I don't think that means that buying direct from Amazon can get you third party inventory.

I've sold on Amazon via FBA. Yes, it does. If you are selling a new item, you ship it to Amazon warehouses. Amazon informs you, the seller, that your item is not distinct from that of Amazon's or other sellers' FBA items. Inside their warehouse, it is just an item with no seller attached to it. If someone buys it, they just find any that match the SKU (or whatever it is called) and ship it.

[grandalf]

Wow! I do a lot of shopping on amazon but this gives me pause.

[zyxzkz]

Same here. I always assumed buying direct from Amazon I was buying products sourced directly by them.

[lozaning]

That's why you specify that you don't want your inventory comingled.

[emodendroket]

"You" the consumer don't seem to be able to do that.

[emodendroket]

Oh. Well then I was misled by the wording of the article.

[JohnTHaller]

Buying direct from Amazon can get you third party inventory. Amazon mixes their inventory for many product verticals with third party vendors and will ship out counterfeit goods "sold by Amazon" according to numerous product reviews on their own site.

[Spooky23]

It does. Many commodities are comingled. That's a big reason why DVD and Software piracy is a huge issue.

[emodendroket]

It sounded like they were saying that "fulfilled by Amazon" inventory is mingled with other inventory in the same category, rather than that it is mingled with "sold and shipped by Amazon" stock.

[tlrobinson]

"This inventory is commingled with all other FBA inventory"

[rincebrain]

Yes, I think the person's assertion was that FBA inventory != "Shipped and sold by Amazon" inventory.

[emodendroket]

That how I understood what the article was saying, yes.

[Lasher]

Right, I make a point of avoiding 'FBA' sellers on Amazon, this one was listed 'Sold by Intuit' but what I received was (I hope) a co-mingled inventory item that was counterfeit and, in the case of software, possibly downright dangerous had I tried to install it.

[robotjosh]

I bought a phone battery on amazon. Looked legit, was the top result for my phone. It was counterfeit and wouldn't work. I don't even know how to get a battery because the phone stores didn't have it anymore. Can't trust amazon.

[jlarocco]

That's scary. Yesterday the building across the street from us nearly burned down due to a lithium ion battery catching fire. Fortunately, it looks like the damage was limited to a couple rooms of a single office, and the firefighters put it out quick.

It was a good reminder that lithium ion batteries are dangerous. Not sure I'd trust buying them on Amazon.

[ArtDev]

Same thing happened to me.

The funny thing is that the Samsung website sends you an Amazon seller.

I noticed this the second time I needed a battery. The batteries look identical. The only difference was that the counterfeit battery only lasted a couple months.

[rwmj]

While I agree that buying phone batteries is a lottery on Amazon, in this case you might have got a genuine battery which had simply been in storage for a long time (which applies to batteries for any phone that's out of production).

Li-Ion batteries won't necessarily work after being stored unless they were charged to a specific level and stored in a very specific way. And you have to go back and check the charge and maybe recharge them regularly. More in this article:

http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_store_batt...

Needless to say none of this would have happened if it was sitting on a shelf in some warehouse for 3 years.

[mschuster91]

Now here's some piece of legislation that could e.g. be made part of "right to repair" bills:

When a product with batteries gets EOL'd and uses non-standard (e.g. AA/AAA, CRxxxx coin cells, 18650 Li-Ion) cells and/or proprietary controller chips, the specifications (mechanical, electrical and EC firmware source) must be made public.

To ensure that this gets followed and e.g. devices from insolvent manufacturers don't end up without reasonable possibility of new batteries, any manufacturer / importer of any device into the country must deposit said information at a public library/archive, similar to FCC/CE certification records.

[robotjosh]

Mine actually was counterfeit. I could tell because the phone comes up with the message "please replace your unauthorized battery with a genuine battery" and the phone wouldn't work. My phone is at that point where it starts working slow for no reason despite all the free memory. I've been using samsung phones since 2005 but now I'm never getting another samsung.

[OneOneOneOne]

Try ebay. They seem to take negative feedback more seriously.

[Arizhel]

I've bought several batteries for Samsung phones from Ebay. Look for "Samsung OEM" and find a seller in the US. Check the feedback. I can't guarantee it won't be counterfeit, but it's a better bet than Amazon.

[greenyoda]

I've bought cell phone batteries from batteries.com. I haven't gotten anything from them in years, so my experience isn't current, but they had the batteries I needed and they worked OK.

[uptownfunk]

This entire phenomenon is very very worrying. I've been a buyer on Amazon for a while and bought quite a few things from there, my life is so hectic that I don't get time to do due dilligence on everything I buy so it's even possible that I probably own some counterfeit products and don't even know it.

This will come back to them one day, and hopefully soon. Obviously not all disruption is clean, in fact, it rarely is, but this is one area where they cannot afford to be lax and let things like this slide. I for one will be much more vigilant in the future about what I chose to buy on amazon and where specifically I get it.

[Spooky23]

You should report these incidents to your state attorney general as a fraud.

Eventually they'll raid an Amazon DC. Losing a day of revenue will get their attention.

[monksy]

I've been a long term customer as well. From what I've seen they just really don't give a toss about their customer. They make a lot of money and don't have to do anything via their market.

Only solution... stop using Amazon. Go elsewhere for everything.

[Hnrobert42]

I was a bit confused by the article, but it sounded like unless the seller opts out and pays extra fees, it is always FBA.

[jrs235]

Correct to not comingle your stuff with others costs extra.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13932231

[dsr_]

And that's where I think Amazon open themselves up to fraud charges. They should never comingle goods under any circumstances, and they certainly shouldn't be deriving revenue from doing so.

Amazon seems to be acting as a counterfeit goods launderer.

[nommm-nommm]

They like commingling because it allows them to ship goods faster. Your product ships from the closest wearhouse.

[jrs235]

Very pertinent: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13931474

[rsync]

"I also want to buy a new Ipod Touch and, for the first time ever, don't feel like I can buy it on Amazon."

I have, twice, had to return "new" phones that were obviously repackaged/rebuilt ... dust specs under the screen protector ... awkwardly applied hologram stickers on the packaging.

I have visited the shenzhen mobile phone markets several times and see what people are doing in those stalls ... I have no intention of ever buying a phone from amazon or ebay.

[dmix]

Can't the review system help deal with this problem? I always check reviews of the product and vendor to make sure it's legit.

Only a few could get burned before the vendor is flagged as a counterfeiter which would stop further purchases. That should reduce the amount of money you could make scamming people and make it a less viable criminal business. Amazon also seems diligent in refunding people as well.

So the solution might be that Amazon should invest more in shutting these accounts down faster but I'm curious if reviews are an immediate stop gap solution here until they get around to regulating each bad seller.

[phil21]

The problem is that it can say "Sold by Amazon" and still be co-mingled stock some third party seller tossed the same SKU on.

So there is no way to even know who the actual seller is. Amazon could end this particular fraud literally overnight by no longer co-mingling, but I suspect that would be wildly expensive for them to do.

Your method is fine for actual accounts selling scammy things - the problem is when those accounts send in product to Amazon and Amazon decides to mix it in with the legit stuff.

[jghn]

Right. My bet has been that they've done the math and handling returns works out to be cheaper for them than stopping the comingling issue.

Another aspect is that it's not always obvious that you wound up with a counterfeit. I've had products where the longevity was not what I expected and when I look more closely it was in fact a fake. However by that point it isn't worth returning.

[greenyoda]

"they've done the math and handling returns works out to be cheaper for them than stopping the comingling issue..."

It may be cheaper in terms of short-term profits (which is what they can measure), but in the long run, it could be doing irreparable damage to the Amazon brand (which is much harder to measure).

I've been an Amazon customer since they first started out as an on-line bookstore, but at this point, I'm hesitant about every item I buy (even though I haven't personally been the victim of a counterfeiting scam). At this point, I'm ready to start exploring their competitors.

[jghn]

To your point I backed off of a purchase on Amazon today specifically because I was afraid of counterfeit. I wanted to purchase a bag in a particular color which no longer seemed to be available on the company's site nor their Amazon store. Another vendor had the bag I wanted in that color for half the price.

Perhaps it's legit. Perhaps I could have gotten what I wanted and saved $50. We'll never know.

[usrusr]

My bet is that they do it for speed. "Hey, an identical item exists in a warehouse much closer, fast delivery means happy customer, what could possibly go wrong." That does not have to the explanation, but the commingling could be the logical outcome of tying the bonus of a really successful person to a single metric.

[jrs235]

If they co-mingle they need to adjust there process and slap a custom tracking barcode or rfid sticker on the items when they arrive to track specifically what seller sent the item in. Then when they ship a co-mingled item, they need to scan the barcode or read the rfid chip to know who's item actually got sent. This won't address fraud by buyers claiming an illegit item though.

[malandrew]

They could comingle and still solve the problems whenever they get stock from a seller they slap on an Amazon barcode that identifies both the UPC and the Amazon seller. That information gets included in the purchase details and when problems are identified with a product they pull those products and identify people who got the bad product. To cover the cost of that problem they can require sellers to insure their product or put down a deposit to cover the cost of a recall.

[jon-wood]

They effectively do require a deposit in case of returns in the way they pay. When you ship a product sold on Amazon they take the money immediately, but they don't pass on your cut until a few weeks later, allowing them to issue refunds if neccesary without losing anything themselves.

[cookiecaper]

FBA sellers can opt-out of commingled stock. If you know an FBA seller sells authentic goods, you're better off buying from them than from Amazon.com or an unknown FBA seller. There is no way to know before buying whether an FBA seller uses commingled stock or not; it would just be a matter of recognizing the merchant from past authentic purchases or credible word of mouth.

[jrs235]

Amazon needs to signal co-mingled and non-co-mingled stock so buyers can purchase with more certainty. The problem is Amazon doesn't want to admit to their co-mingled mess yet. It will hurt their brand admitting that there is a material difference between co-mingled and non-co-mingled stock.

[nkrisc]

If they clearly label commingled stock, they might as well call it "genuine" vs. "counterfeit." There'd be no reason to buy the commingled stock since odds are it'll be fake.

[jrs235]

Touche. Which is also why they won't do it. And as a sibling comment says, they need to fix and get rid of co-mingling items.

[cookiecaper]

Yes, I think they're going to have to disable commingling all together in the next 12 months or so. It will greatly simplify enforcement and help stop the bleeding on their reputation as a reliable marketplace.

Right now, the only option would be a third-party service which verifies and track this, but I'm sure Amazon would shut them down ASAP. It would have to be decentralized and anonymous.

[tracker1]

Or, upon receiving goods from a seller, they could add an additional label-sticker number indicating the real provider of the goods so they could be readily tracked down, and singled out.

[Lasher]

You get to review the product but when the sourcing is all thrown together all you're really doing is dragging down the rating for the overall product (Quickbooks 2017 in this case) and not the source of the specific item you were shipped.

My issue had nothing to do with the product itself although I suppose if enough 1 star reviews start to build up then Intuit and other larger publishers that might actually have some leverage with Amazon will start to take notice.

[ajmurmann]

I find the lack of granularity that Amazon allows to define what you are reviewing in general a problem. Good luck trying to give the Kindle or paperback version of a book a bad rating while recommending the book as a piece of writing.

[justinpombrio]

> My issue had nothing to do with the product itself

You sound hesitant, but I don't think you should be. Your issue has to do with the product you received after clicking "buy" on an amazon product page. That page may say Quickbooks 2017 from Intuit, but there's no necessary relationship between what the page says and what you're buying, and when they're different you should rate what you were sold.

[Lasher]

I totally get your point, my concern is someone deciding that Quickbooks Pro (or whatever product) is not a good product because I was shipped something that doesn't even resemble the product. No love lost for Intuit here for other reasons but still doesn't seem right.

With no way to differentiate between product and product supplier then you're right, the review page really the only outlet I have.

[cookiecaper]

Agreed that this is a good practice to inform other buyers that there are counterfeit sellers on the product, but do be aware that it impacts the overall rating of the product, meaning that when you're shopping for something, a 3-star product may actually be the thing you're looking for, since the real rating is drug down by counterfeiters (Amazon eventually kicks the counterfeiters off the listing (usually after a few returns), but afaik, the rating damage for the ASIN lingers).

[billpollock]

That's correct. One issue we've faced is that people will give the counterfeits one-star although most people reviewing the book give it four or five stars. That just ends up hurting us unfortunately. It took Amazon over three months to remove those one star reviews from one of our counterfeited books.

[rkeene2]

Wait... So Amazon removed legitimate reviews from people who bought the product being sold on the page being reviewed because the product being sold is sometimes counterfeit ? How are other people attempting to purchase that item from that page supposed to learn that the item may sometimes be counterfeit and act in a rational way or with a correct risk assessment when valid data is being expunged without any other changes ? The valid 1 Star reviews should stay !

[dec0dedab0de]

The valid 1 Star reviews should stay !

but those should be reviews of amazon, not reviews of the book.

[billpollock]

One star reviews damning our book should stay, lowering the overall book review? How is that not blaming the victim? We're not the counterfeiters.

[rkeene2]

They are reviews of the purchase, which includes both the product, the mechanism of purchase, and everything else involved in the purchase.

[simcop2387]

The problem is that the counterfeit products are being mixed into the legit ones too. It's nearly impossible to determine ahead of times if you're going to get a real one or a fake.

[jinushaun]

No, because the reviews are comingled. The review is tied to the SKU, not the specific seller.

You can check for yourself. If you find two listings for the same product, you'll find that they share the same reviews. Learned this the hard hard way when attempting to buy an e-book on Amazon. I was confused with the reviews until I figured out that half the people bought the wrong version.

[nommm-nommm]

It's done. Reviews for both products and sellers already exist.

Commingling inventory entirely muddles things.

It's not always possible to tell you received a counterfeit, especially if you were not expecting it as a possibility.