WARNING: eBay UK - Keithley 2100

[Cerebus]

Personally I hate very expensive prices for very old equipment, where the blurb includes "Guaranteed Working - 5 days to complete full testing process"

Example: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tektronix-1502C-Time-Domain-Reflectometer/401141897985

I seem to remember that those guys have *cough* history with some eevblog members and trade under a number of names. Failure to actually deliver what was promised, if my memory serves correctly; it was more like "five days to realise we don't have one in stock that we can get into anything like working condition".

If it wasn't them, then it was someone whose line of patter was very, very similar and that would be enough to make me highly cautious of them.

[PlainName]

As a seller, I don't really see what the problem is with that kind of statement (ignoring that that particular seller may have history). One of the issues is not being able to have proper closure of a sale because the buyer may turn round at some later date and say it's not what it should have been. Seems to me that specifying a cut-off for complaints is beneficial, in that regard, to both the buyer and seller - if it isn't what it purports to be the buyer can still get a claim in, but the seller can also say "Right now, that's a done sale and I can't forget about it".

And we should bear in mind that these aren't new items covered by the Sale of Goods Act or whatever. They are just overpriced cast-offs.

Maybe there is an issue with five days - is that enough to receive it and get around to testing it as much as you'd like? Who knows, and perhaps more time may be needed, or negotiated, but in principle it doesn't seem wrong to me.

[Cerebus]

You've got the wrong end of the stick. That's a claim that the seller puts a five day testing process in place before dispatching it.

From the listing "*Please note that typical shipping lead time is approximately 1 week because each item is tested after it is sold and before it ships.".

[bd139]

So basically we’ve got a load of shit stacked up that we can’t be bothered to test and when you pay it’s a game of roulette to work out if (a) it turns up and works (b) you get a refund or (c) it has been bodged quickly to cover the sale and then you can still shift it and palm the resolution from the complaint off with a small refund.

Hooky as fuck. If you don’t know if it works either list it as spares / repair or get it into a known condition and guarantee it.

I’ve got over 200 feedback from selling test equipment and I wouldn’t run my outfit like that. Never had to refund and never had a complaint or a negative feedback. What you see is what you get. No gambles.

[PlainName]

So basically we’ve got a load of shit stacked up that we can’t be bothered to test

That's a dislike of the particular seller, assuming he is using the buyer as a tester (which may be correct), not of the principle of timed testing. Which already exists but is about 30 days.

I am thinking of where, say, you  sell a motherboard and all seems fine, you spend the proceeds from the sale, and then three weeks later the buyer complains that the CPU socket pins are bent and he wants a refund. What has clearly happened is the buyer has been switching CPUs and dropped one back in the socket, but you'll end up refunding him because he was 'on holiday and just got back to open the parcel'.

[bd139]

I think if you read into the mechanics of just in time production and testing, one of the main concerns is making sure that your supply lines don’t ruin your production capacity through errors and quality issues. Running your supply line out of boxes of shite on a promise is just a failure of the highest order.

[PlainName]

Sorry? Was that a comment to my post or a misthread? I am finding it hard to correlate the contents of both.

[bd139]

I think it is me being an idiot. Please disregard my comment

[Mav_2014]

My word 4 pages. You boys clearly don't read Section 4/4a of the public order act?
I borrowed matey boys pictures as the meter was on the way, I'm not condoning it, but to be honest I didn't expect someone who's sold a meter weeks ago to get all anal over it, but clearly has very little to do to occupy himself, I thought my suggestions of late night sky entertainment were pretty good!
The pat testing business was sold, I'm a bit beyond pat testing. As for the Fluke repairs, upgrades and calibration, as I'm 1 of about 4 in the country doing them not only for domestic but international customers I'd say along with others I've a fairly good reputation in doing them.

Seriously fella, apologies for borrowing your pictures, I've 3x 2100's here now, it was intended just to get one listed at the time, nothing more and the first has been sold with a UKAS certificate and the other 2 will be sold with traceable to natational standards certificates, so they're not iffy pieces of junk.

Being an Agilent 34401a user mainly for a 6.5dmm and having sworn by it the Keithley (abiet not a real Keithley) stands up reasonably well for the price and functionality. 2 I've sold and the 3rd I've decided to keep.

Can we put the picture thing to bed now? It's getting a little bit old.... point taken on board and off to live happily every after 

Peace out gentlemen, dicks and arsewipes 

[tggzzz]

My word 4 pages. You boys clearly don't read Section 4/4a of the public order act?
I borrowed matey boys pictures as the meter was on the way, I'm not condoning it, but to be honest I didn't expect someone who's sold a meter weeks ago to get all anal over it, but clearly has very little to do to occupy himself, I thought my suggestions of late night sky entertainment were pretty good!
The pat testing business was sold, I'm a bit beyond pat testing. As for the Fluke repairs, upgrades and calibration, as I'm 1 of about 4 in the country doing them not only for domestic but international customers I'd say along with others I've a fairly good reputation in doing them.

Seriously fella, apologies for borrowing your pictures, I've 3x 2100's here now, it was intended just to get one listed at the time, nothing more and the first has been sold with a UKAS certificate and the other 2 will be sold with traceable to natational standards certificates, so they're not iffy pieces of junk.

Being an Agilent 34401a user mainly for a 6.5dmm and having sworn by it the Keithley (abiet not a real Keithley) stands up reasonably well for the price and functionality. 2 I've sold and the 3rd I've decided to keep.

Can we put the picture thing to bed now? It's getting a little bit old.... point taken on board and off to live happily every after 

Peace out gentlemen, dicks and arsewipes 

(I'll assume you are the vendor, and are not someone pretending to be them)

Ignoring your language that merely confirms the initial impressions of you, you are completely missing a couple of points....

You were selling one thing and showing a picture of another thing. That's bad for whoever purchases your thing. It wouldn't be difficult to argue that it was deliberately deceptive.

You were selling something that you didn't (yet) possess, and therefore could not (yet) verify completely matched your description.

I will leave others to think about how reputable that is.

[EEVblog]

I think we need an EEVblog "seller shitlist".

I think we need to calm down and stop personally attacking people and calling them names, because, you know, forum rules...

[Mav_2014]

I'm not saying it was right to use pictures of an item which was in the same overall condition before the others arrived, to be honest I didn't really think it would upset anyone or cause such a stir. Some people would Do well to mind their mouths, playing internet police doesn't really compare to the real thing and I'm sure to forum owner has better things to do than comply with ripa requests from Cheif Superintendent + ranks and hand out up addresses to have people called in for Section 4 public order act offences.

Stick to pushing buttons on your meters lads. It's a genuine cock up and many (although) not rightly do it. At least I've had the balls to come on, hold my hands up and reassure people actually I'm.not taking the pee and I do genuinely sell items, either with a UKAS or natational standards traceable certificate and have the kit and procedure to do them. It's a little but if silliness gone mad really.

The meter sold was legit, it's going out with a UKAS certificate on it which has been done today after 3 hours driving in snow, I think that's fair to say yes probably shouldn't have thrown s one similar images up but yes someone has a very nice meter, no I'm not an iffy guy robbing people's money and no I don't sell crap.... although occasionally buy some!

Openness and transparency, openness to change, all very useful qualities in life
... and professions!

[tggzzz]

I'm not saying it was right to use pictures of an item which was in the same overall condition before the others arrived, to be honest I didn't really think it would upset anyone or cause such a stir. Some people would Do well to mind their mouths, playing internet police doesn't really compare to the real thing and I'm sure to forum owner has better things to do than comply with ripa requests from Cheif Superintendent + ranks and hand out up addresses to have people called in for Section 4 public order act offences.

What on earth are you rabbiting on about? We can recognise strawman arguments and aren't silly enough to respond to them.

The meter sold was legit, it's going out with a UKAS certificate on it which has been done today after 3 hours driving in snow, I think that's fair to say yes probably shouldn't have thrown s one similar images up but yes someone has a very nice meter, no I'm not an iffy guy robbing people's money and no I don't sell crap.... although occasionally buy some!

You continue to miss and/or avoid the points.

Given that you deliberately chose to show a picture of one item and sell a different item, what reason do we have to believe that you wouldn't make a similar choice with a certificate?

[wraper]

I'm not saying it was right to use pictures of an item which was in the same overall condition before the others arrived, to be honest I didn't really think it would upset anyone or cause such a stir. Some people would Do well to mind their mouths, playing internet police doesn't really compare to the real thing and I'm sure to forum owner has better things to do than comply with ripa requests from Cheif Superintendent + ranks and hand out up addresses to have people called in for Section 4 public order act offences.

Using pictures you don't own is one thing. Replying like this when asked to remove is completely on different level of shameless:

Find a hobby rather than scouring eBay for a tester you've just sold... you need a life. Try collecting stamps or I'm sure you'll find comfort in the 900 channels somewhere. Don't forget to make your mum a hot water bottle for bed and tidy your room.

You really should get out more. Night night

[Cerebus]

I'm not saying it was right to use pictures of an item which was in the same overall condition before the others arrived, to be honest I didn't really think it would upset anyone or cause such a stir. Some people would Do well to mind their mouths, playing internet police doesn't really compare to the real thing and I'm sure to forum owner has better things to do than comply with ripa requests from Cheif Superintendent + ranks and hand out up addresses to have people called in for Section 4 public order act offences.

You would do well before making threats to 1) Actually know the UK Public Order Act 1986, like the necessity to prove "intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress", 2) Know that the RIPA won't cut much cloth in Australia it being UK law and all that and I don't think the UK plod will want to waste the time and money on invoking mutual aid agreements for such a trivial matter, and 3) generally it's not a good idea to throw stones whilst in a glass house - vis committing offences under at least section 3(2) and 3(3) of the Trades Descriptions Act 1968 and any defence you might have had by virtue of section 24 of said act disappeared the second you were called out on it and failed to remedy the false description, 4) Realise that your use of foul language and insults would itself fall foul of the Public Order Act and I suspect it would be a lot easier to prove "intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress" from the context and way you presented the same on here.

At least I've had the balls to come on, hold my hands up ...

I'll give you that. I might give you more, if you'd done it without the bluster, insulting language, and foolish quasi-legal threats.

[bd139]

And that's a perfect example of how to ruin any credibility you may have been able to scrape together...

[Simon]

I asked the seller directly first. This is mainly so when he comes back with a mouthful I can report him for being abusive as well.

I am going to add a piece of paper with my eBay and forum user name in every photo now. That is a way to circumvent the watermarking requirements!

I thought I got an email saying they had ditched the ban having listened, or rather remained powerless as everyone ignored it so to enforce it would be to shut ebay down. I used to produce 3D models of my parts for sale and emboss my name on the part and refused to remove it to protect my artwork as my images were unique giving me recognition with buyers that it was my listing

[bd139]

I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere if I’m honest. Hearsay perhaps. Tend not to check such terms. eBay usually remind me if I do something wrong.

[Zucca]

A small mistake can become a tornado if you don't know how to manage it.

[bitseeker]

I thought I got an email saying they had ditched the ban having listened, or rather remained powerless as everyone ignored it so to enforce it would be to shut ebay down.

I wouldn't be surprised if eBay had to back down, but I haven't seen it officially, yet. If you do run across it, Simon, let us know. Thanks!

[Simon]

In our update to business sellers in September, we announced that listings with watermarked images would be removed from eBay search results from 1st March 2018.
I know that this has been an important topic and I want to thank those of you who took the time to contact me directly to explain the challenges you had with it.
We encourage you to have clean images because when watermarks are in place, we cannot typically promote your listings on platforms outside eBay, such as Google and Bing.
We’ve also heard from customers directly in focus groups that they are more likely to buy from us when product photography is on a white background and uncluttered.

But having listened to your views on this, we recognise that you as the seller should be able to make the choice. So I wanted to let you know today that I have asked the team not to enforce this policy, but to keep it in place as guidance only.

Thank you again for your feedback, which made a real difference on this. The views of the people who sell with us are absolutely essential as we continue to evolve eBay for buyers and sellers. We are listening.
I hope that you have a great Christmas trading season.
 

Rob Hattrell

[Simon]

That was sent to me a little while ago. Frankly eBay needs to stop trying to control sellers. It's one of the reasons I left and with no business to my own website with the exception of the micro currents I gave up on components altogether. When you are selling such low value items the amount of work that eBay policy changes involve just do not warrant the time. Which is pretty much what I told them. My images were not watermarked as such the inscriptions were part of the component 3D models used to derive the artwork and are exactly the same as what I put on any 3D model I use in my 3D CAD and electrical Design.

[Leo Bodnar]

Perhaps confront was a bad term.  I didn't expect Farnell or their reps to have a problem per se but our reps denied they even heard about this going on.

Technically, this is not illegal but has a slight whiff of not being right to me.
An eBay seller trying to sell a few dozen items they don't even have in stock is completely OK.
But top-quality-tools has 259,859 items [that they don't have in stock] listed including botched copy-paste incidents like £7000 USB socket.
I think on the stock market short-selling in such volumes would be illegal or at least controlled.

A lot of respected companies embraced what used to be online junk yard presence and now Keysight, Tektronix, LeCroy all have official eBay outlets.
It would be only logical for Farnell to have one too.  I was curious if they have set up a shill account through one of their employees or associates.  It's just industry banter, nothing more.

Leo

top-quality-tools is my favourite pet peeve.  I confront our Farnell sales reps about this account all the time and have not had a coherent answer yet.

Why would Farnell have a problem with it?

[Simon]

Yes I remember seeing those listings and thinking what a con. However given his ridiculous prices seemed nobody would be so stupid as to buy with good people like me around.

[Astrodev]

Just a bit of info, I did speak to someone from Farnell's a few years back and they were reasonably positive about helping me to sell items they would provide on ebay as they saw it as a way of providing additional sales and were even prepared to offer addition discounts to facilitate this based on the extra business generated , so this would suggest that these other sellers are actually being encouraged by the likes of Farnell to put all this stuff on ebay.

Needless to say that I did not pursue this as it was as ebay were starting to place additional requirements on listings and as was mentioned earlier the amount of work for a small reward this was generating just made it non viable to the extent I shut down all my ebay stores back in July last year.

However as I sometimes buy up some items that are end of line from Farnell and some of their associate companies there is great temptation to order the same item from one of these sellers knowing that they can't supply it just to be able to give genuine negative feedback when they have to say they don't have stock to fulfil the order.