The Morals when selling Lego

[Peppermint_M]

Hello fellow forumites. If this should be moved elsewhere, please feel free to place it in the correct sub forum (I just didn't think it'd fit in the Trades forum)

I have recently been spending some time trailing through the auction site eBay, searching for those lucky finds where someone is selling a big mixed bag of Lego, or older sets I would like (without knowing the name, so regular searches miss them) when I have come across a disturbing (to me anyway) trend.

I will not mention seller’s names, handles or even the lot numbers as I am sure you have also come across such things. I am talking about false labelling/tagging of an item or series of items.

As we all know, some themes are more popular than others and the best way to sell older themes, or unpopular themes is to find some way to relate it to a popular theme. Star Wars seems to be the most common false tag. Although it annoys me, I am not talking of the selling of minifigs with theme name and "good for Star Wars customs" in the lot name or description, this isn't false labelling (but I don't like judging Lego in relation to the Star Wars stuff). I mean selling things that have absolutely nothing to do with Star Wars as Star Wars Lego. I have seen "A Rancour and Keeper" which is really a Rock Raiders rock monster and an alien head on an Adventurers body. I'm not sure if this lot would sell, but the description sings that it is Star Wars, it is official Lego but not that it is entirely custom made from older Lego parts. I have seen some aliens, Insectiods, UFO, Life on Mars etc sold at Star Wars minifig prices and I have seen a mish mash of elements and themes sold as other characters at a similar price. I have seen Stingrays and Hydronauts advertised as Star Wars.

This is a sad thought, but I only know that they aren't real Star Wars because I am a huge Lego nerd, I can look at these minifigs and identify the source theme of each element, sometimes even naming the character. However a lot of people using eBay for Lego won't know this. They might be duped into paying too much to get a not Star Wars thing just because they think they are getting a rare or exclusive character for their collection. They don't know about bricklink, about price guides, they certainly don't have my level of Lego knowledge or anyone else on this forums level. So they are being ripped off.

Is this fair? Do the deserve to be ripped off because they should know more/better? Is it a clever ploy for sellers? Or is it meanly taking advantage of the unknowledgeable?

For those of a less philosophical frame of mind, can you post anecdotes of your own experiences of wrong descriptions/tags?

[Shadows]

A similar example is the Adventurer's Yeti sold as a Wampa.

Misleading? Definitely.

Dishonest? Yeah, pretty much, unless the person doing the listing actually thinks that's what it is. I've seen plenty of "pirates" that were really other themes, but the person seemed to believe it.

On the same note, however, I find lots of things that are poorly labeled in the opposite direction and have picked up absolute steals accordingly. I bought castle figures once for the jedi torsos and white ninja princess mixed in.

It's just one of those things.

If someone doesn't know what they are looking at, they shouldn't be buying. If someone doesn't know what they are listing, they shouldn't be selling. People do both. I look for the missed bargains and swoop in. Is that any more honest or dishonest than the person who mistakenly lists something poorly? I hope not, I'm not planning to stop.

[diabloiij]

Well, in the long run these kind of selling will not last, as they will get very low scores on their item description category. Over time their search standing will be lowered or even get a couple negatives as well. Search standing is the most important thing for sellers on Ebay, some seller's auction with bad reputation will not show up within the first 3 pages therefore, no matter what they name their "starwar" lego, they won't get any clicks. Just my opinion. thanks.

[CP5670]

I buy Lego from there frequently and don't mind things like this. A knowledgeable fan (the type actually interested in rare minifigs) won't be fooled by wrong descriptions, and a casual buyer probably won't care in the first place whether something is Star Wars or Space.

When it comes to used items, I think it's much more important to have good (large and sharp) pictures of the item available, which is something many sellers neglect to do. You can tell a lot about the condition of used Lego from good pictures, and I hardly ever bid on anything used unless such pictures are available.

Dishonest? Yeah, pretty much, unless the person doing the listing actually thinks that's what it is.

That may well be the case. Unlike Bricklink sellers, ebay Lego sellers often know very little about the stuff they are selling.

Edited May 22, 2009 by CP5670

[DarthSion]

If your dumb enough to buy with out researching you deserve to get got, 2 seconds is all it takes to find something out on google.

[mikey]

I don't think it matters to much, e-Bay tends to be full of people trying to rip of buyers (mainly star wars characters) anyway, so it all comes down to 'buyer beware', some of these instances could be genuine mistakes, others are as pointed out deliberate. As we know what we are looking for in our purchases we can take advantage of genuine mistakes to get good bargains, whilst ignoring the lots which are deliberately mislabeled. As for the moral character of those who try to rip of the buyers, maybe questionable, but we would all jump at the chance to win a lot which is mislabeled in our favour?

[RichardAM]

If your dumb enough to buy with out researching you deserve to get got, 2 seconds is all it takes to find something out on google.

This is it summed up perfectly. Yes, to us as Lego fans it may be seen as "cheating", but if the consumer is that blinded by fandom they'll buy anything, it's their problem.

I wouldn't do this false-labelling myself, but I don't have any sympathy whatsoever for the people buying these mock items.

[Darth Legolas]

A similar example is the Adventurer's Yeti sold as a Wampa.

Misleading? Definitely.

Dishonest? Yeah, pretty much, unless the person doing the listing actually thinks that's what it is. I've seen plenty of "pirates" that were really other themes, but the person seemed to believe it.

On the same note, however, I find lots of things that are poorly labeled in the opposite direction and have picked up absolute steals accordingly. I bought castle figures once for the jedi torsos and white ninja princess mixed in.

It's just one of those things.

If someone doesn't know what they are looking at, they shouldn't be buying. If someone doesn't know what they are listing, they shouldn't be selling. People do both. I look for the missed bargains and swoop in. Is that any more honest or dishonest than the person who mistakenly lists something poorly? I hope not, I'm not planning to stop.

Hey now, the adventurer's Yeti makes a kick-(the filter won't let me say it) Wampa. All of this talk is a little over reaction. It's not hat bad to me, if people so desperately crawl to Star Wars. I never use ebay, unless the set is only on ebay and not on bricklink.

On bricklink, a Lego-orientated website, it's impossible to disguise one thing as another. Plus, a true Lego fan would know the difference or not. If it was a little kid getting charged ten bucks for a rock monster and a dumpy minifig, the parents should no better than to pay.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Darth Legolas

[Dadster]

I think this - Lego is a fantastic toy that enables all sorts of folks to create whatever world they want. The recent Space Police line has some great looking "aliens" that can be used in Star Wars and even Castle IMO. If someone wants to try to sell off an extra Squidman, Slizer, or Frenzy (the "4 armed space fink" as he's called) under the suggestion that it could be used as a Star Wars Cantina patron, then so be it.

I worry more about Lego lots showing up dirty, with bite marks, or broken when listed otherwise.

Just my opinion - I may be wrong.

[Eilif]

I think it's definitley a crime what some of these sellers do. Not every buyer can be an expert in the product, and they count on an accurate description from the buyer. Grandparents, parents, friends, etc. Anyone who wants to get something for a LEGO fan in their life could be fooled.

Little Timmy will know that the adventureres figure is not a wampa, but grandma who buys it for him probably won't, and probably won't know how to find out that it isn't before she buys.

Misleading or vague descriptions may fall into a grey area, but incorrect or mislabled items are unexcusable. Sellers have a responsibility to correctly label their products.

[DarthSion]

This is it summed up perfectly. Yes, to us as Lego fans it may be seen as "cheating", but if the consumer is that blinded by fandom they'll buy anything, it's their problem.

I wouldn't do this false-labelling myself, but I don't have any sympathy whatsoever for the people buying these mock items.

More to the point, ebay has a score system, you would have to be retarded to not check out the sellers rating.

[MarcusV3]

Interesting Topic, I agree that it is misleading and a bit unfair. As a child my cousin used ebay and always depended on me to buy it for her. She would give me the money and I would use my paypal. She always had a list of lego figures that she wanted to buy for her town. at least 1/3 of these where misleading, such as one I saw with a title "Lego baseplates" I looked at the picture and found one was MEGABL#%^$. Now in this case the seller was probably an adult who didn't know the difference (Pff ) but still an incorrect title. I tried to help her out with money and say that it wasn't available anymore. Now in my case it wasn't that bad but a lot of other titles are worse.

[Dadster]

More to the point, ebay has a score system, you would have to be retarded to not check out the sellers rating.

Well - that's not always "failsafe". I believe that, over time, Negs and Neutrals cease to count. Even a person with a Neg or 2 might appear 100% due to the length of time between the Neg infraction and current date. Maybe that has changed since the new system of ratings though...

[The Cobra]

I once bought 4 KKII sets from a German sellers, they were listed as new.

They came in, and they obviously weren't new; open boxes, food bags, dusty pieces. Before yelling at the seller, I google-translated the German writings in the auction: they read "as new, only built once and desplayed, never played with".

I learned to beware of German writings (and sellers). And then I sold the sets (listing them as USED!)

[CP5670]

Misleading or vague descriptions may fall into a grey area, but incorrect or mislabled items are unexcusable. Sellers have a responsibility to correctly label their products.

Well, I'm glad that they occasionally forget their responsibility. I have gotten quite a few steals there over the years, ranging from sets with wrong set numbers in the title to MISB sets that weren't described as such but where pictures showed otherwise.

The real problem is when items are incorrectly labelled in such a way that buyers have no way of determining the truth, no matter how much they know about the item. This includes (grossly) incomplete sets advertised as complete, sets advertised as MISB but having missing bags or damaged floating parts (I think TLG no longer does this, but in the past large parts were often not bagged and just floated freely inside the box), and used "excellent condition" parts with plenty of scratches and discoloring. I've run into all of these situations in the past, but in most of the cases it was unintentional and the seller compensated me in some way or took a return.

[Peppermint_M]

I'm not complaining about those who don't know what they have. I have seen random minifig lots sell at £50 for the two or three star wars torsos in the mix, so anyone who had anything worth mega £££s is going to luck out through a bidding war. I just think it's immoral to knowingly mislable things to make more money.

[SuvieD]

I just think it's immoral to knowingly mislable things to make more money.

So then do you also dislike insurance agencies, McDonalds, and every other company who advertises? I have never seen a company advertise the full and total 100% honest truth about what you get for you money. Perhaps it is the lack of flash-bang editing and music that prevents you from seeing this is just another marketing ploy to pocket some extra money. The truth is, advertising and marketing are 99% of the time an effort to mislabel products or trick you into buying more crap you don't need.

I personally think all advertising is fudging at best and criminally misleading at worst and consumer education should be the focus. There will always be a chump willing to hand over cash for a lie. I don't want to be that chump.

Look at it on the bright side. If people are buying those items they will likely have less money to spend on the things you want.

[Tom Bricks]

Little Timmy will know that the adventureres figure is not a wampa, but grandma who buys it for him probably won't, and probably won't know how to find out that it isn't before she buys.

My grandmother couldn't even find ebay let alone know how to use it. I think that it is the buyers responsibility to find out what they are buying before they bid on it not the sellers. What is annoying is when people mark non lego items as lego. To all the ebay sellers out there- no one wants clone brands advertised as lego!!!!!!

[Peppermint_M]

So then do you also dislike insurance agencies, McDonalds, and every other company who advertises? I have never seen a company advertise the full and total 100% honest truth about what you get for you money. Perhaps it is the lack of flash-bang editing and music that prevents you from seeing this is just another marketing ploy to pocket some extra money. The truth is, advertising and marketing are 99% of the time an effort to mislabel products or trick you into buying more crap you don't need.

I personally think all advertising is fudging at best and criminally misleading at worst and consumer education should be the focus. There will always be a chump willing to hand over cash for a lie. I don't want to be that chump.

Look at it on the bright side. If people are buying those items they will likely have less money to spend on the things you want.

Why yes, yes I do.

I am not going to be a weirdy obsessive over it, I just wanted to know your thoughts on such deception using something we all love so much. I evidently asked the wrong place/people.

With certain things I agree that people get what they deserve (like buying Calgon to help diswashers last longer when you don't live in a hard water area etc) Though your argument there doesn't stand up very well, because I am not sure about elsewhere, but all adverts in the UK have to tell you what things really are and what it means(even if its only smaller than small print or superfast disclaimer speak) for insurance, medicines, food products and special offers, heck, everything that is advertised apart from TV programmes, This is a legal requirement. Then if people have a problem they should have read all the information.

These lots are nothing like such things and do not say (even in tiny print) that they are "custom" figures or not really star wars. You can't tell me that someone who has a dedicated eBay shop selling Lego doesn't know what they've got...

[Eilif]

I'm not complaining about those who don't know what they have. I have seen random minifig lots sell at £50 for the two or three star wars torsos in the mix, so anyone who had anything worth mega £££s is going to luck out through a bidding war. I just think it's immoral to knowingly mislable things to make more money.

I completely agree. There is a large difference between "talking up" what you have and lying about what you have

So then do you also dislike insurance agencies, McDonalds, and every other company who advertises? I have never seen a company advertise the full and total 100% honest truth about what you get for you money. Perhaps it is the lack of flash-bang editing and music that prevents you from seeing this is just another marketing ploy to pocket some extra money. The truth is, advertising and marketing are 99% of the time an effort to mislabel products or trick you into buying more crap you don't need.

I personally think all advertising is fudging at best and criminally misleading at worst and consumer education should be the focus. There will always be a chump willing to hand over cash for a lie. I don't want to be that chump.

Look at it on the bright side. If people are buying those items they will likely have less money to spend on the things you want.

I completly agree about the music, flash-bang, and "don't need", but that doesn't justify putting all the responsibility on the buyer. Yes, advertising plays up the positive and ignores the negative, but saying something is when it isn't is different.

For example saying "works with LEGO star wars" is stupid and perhaps misleading, but is not wrong persay. Labeling an adventurers monster as a wompa is just plain wrong.

Lastly, companies that advertise have strict guidelines they have to abide by. We should expect no less from ebay sellers.

My grandmother couldn't even find ebay let alone know how to use it. I think that it is the buyers responsibility to find out what they are buying before they bid on it not the sellers. What is annoying is when people mark non lego items as lego. To all the ebay sellers out there- no one wants clone brands advertised as lego!!!!!!

I couldn't agree less. There are plenty of people who can use ebay who may not have the depth of LEGO knowledge that we have. Additinally to say that it is not the sellers responsibility to know what they are selling is illogical, goes against a mountain of retail law, and is just wrong. If that's the case, than anyone can buy anything -as long as they don't know what it is- can call it anything they like, and sell it as such. Due dilligence is a legal concept that when applied to most transactions requires the buyer to do their homework, but also requires the seller to take steps represent their items honestly and accurately.

After reading some of the posts in this thread, I have to say that I am disgusted at how may people have bought into the bankrupt idea that a seller is allowed to be willfully ignorant (at best) or just plain dishonest in the presentation of items for sale, and that it is the buyer's fault for being taken advantage of. If this is what folks think, then how are they representing the things that they sell?

What we seem to have here is an inability to separate the various issues involved.

Yes, the buyer should do their homework, check feedback, etc. However that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the moral question of whether it is right or wrong to mislead customers.

It is wrong and we should have no hesitation in calling it so.

[prateek]

A similar example is the Adventurer's Yeti sold as a Wampa.

its worse when they call it a "custom" wampa

[DarthSion]

Thing is, most people who buy SW know SW and could spot a fake just buy looking at it.