[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]

I never indicated that anyone should be "blamed" here. People purchased something, then reviewed that purchase after it was completed. They are not just reviewing the book, the book's contents, or your work in publishing it. They are reviewing the entire purchase, which includes the transaction where they bought something, and got something.

[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.