offshore Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 These forums are firstly set up, for discussion of watches. That the members want an ability to buy and sell, whether the items are new or used, is a given, (based on the history of these places) When a new seller appears, whether they are private individuals, and selling (or trading) one piece, or whether they ask the admin team, for an area to display a number of new pieces... the principle of Caveat Emptor, does, and will always operate. The admin teams of these forums, are here, for that reason, to administer the running of the discussion forum.... not to become the police force of the replica market place. In a perfect world, there would be no murders, no rapes, no theft, and no scams. Many communities, have tried many and varying methods, to negate, the imperfections of man. NONE have succeeded. Not since Adam! So it is indeed drawing a long bow, to expect the admin teams to firstly become some sort of a policing and enforcing body, and secondly to eradicate the sins of man, which no one has yet been able to achieve....since day dot! And even moreso here, in a virtual world. We are here to facilitate an interchange of thoughts and ideas. We are not here to arrest or prosecute the law breakers. Our best response to those who do not follow, either the simple rules of this forum, or the more widely held ideals, of what is right or wrong, is to remove those people from our little community. Which we do, when the offenders become known to us. Criminals remain at large, innocent people are jailed.... the best intelligene in the world, cannot, and willnot eradicate crime.....or sin in its many faces. CAVEAT EMPTOR Offshore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 I agree with the above sentiment, but this forum and (AFAIK) TRC charge fees to dealers in exchange for recognising their dealer status. In effect, a license to trade on the board. That puts a certain onus on the licence issuer to vet the seller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Look r11co before this goes any further why don't you go and state this on TRC? The dealer in question is not set up on RWG. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Calm down, Ken. I'm just commenting! Plus it is no secret that RWG and TRC are like VW and Audi, Coca Cola and Sprite. Two brands under the same umbrella. What I am saying applies to both, and any other forum that sanctions dealers for that matter. The precipitating situation is a warning for the future..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 As KB has said, this specific, is surely a matter for other places. However in the spirit of open discussion, which we do not seek to quash- When you read the promotion in your local news, for "Slimming Tea", which doesn't work, or "100% pa return on investment", which you never get, do you contact the newspaper, and ask them to protect you? And would they be one bit interested? No way. Is the editor now the local police chief? Long bows r11co! Offshore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 However in the spirit of open discussion, which we do not seek to quash- When you read the promotion in your local news, for "Slimming Tea", which doesn't work, or "100% pa return on investment", which you never get, do you contact the newspaper, and ask them to protect you? And would they be one bit interested? No way. Is the editor now the local police chief? No, you are right. I'd go to Trading Standards instead. They would have the power to punish the sellers, stop the misleading adverts and sanction the newspapers who carry them...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreww Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Ken I do see some validity to what r11co is saying. It does seem that Crippler really had no qualifications to be a dealer. He had no previous selling record, be it on the boards, ioffer or anywhere else. I'm not saying that anybody is liable here, just that TRC was a little lax in its screening process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Yep, Unfortunately no "Trading Standards" in a virtual (and illegal) world. Also no way to police, prosecute or jail! However, and more to the point. Most visitors to these sites, come here to gain knowledge, some also come to assist the running and operation. Others come to pass on knowledge gained from the past. Some do so in a quiet and refined manner, others feel that a confrontational attitude is required to make a point. And some visit to improve their fortunes. Unfortunately there are a few of the latter, who come to do so, through theft, deception, trickery and cunning. And we move them on, once they become known. Sort of a roundabout version of "Trading Standards", in an oh so virtual way! Probably the best compromise, sans a police force! Offshore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 I also think that trying to paint both TRC and RWG with the same brush is one heck of a generalization. I can assure you that the mods here are not privy to the TRC decision making nor are their mods privy to ours, in fact the only thing we share is our Admin and most here (and there) think he does a damn fine job. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 some visit to improve their fortunes. Unfortunately there are a few of the latter, who come to do so, through theft, deception, trickery and cunning. And we move them on, once they become known. I repeat, no dealer should even be let in the door until the forum leaders have performed their due diligence. In the above case that clearly wasn't done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 As stated above. this specific, is surely a matter for other places. Offshore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 We are going round in circles here. Surely the whole situation serves as a warning to every forum that has an official or implied dealer approval system, therefor it is equally valid that it be discussed here? I don't really see why you are calling for the discussion to be taken elsewhere, except perhaps to try and distance RWG from TRC...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreww Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 I don't think we are going in circles r11co, It was obvious that TRC was a little too lax in allowing Crippler in. I also believe that RWG probably has a higher standard, thus why Crippler thankfully never became a dealer here. You are correct however that this incident serves as a wake up call to all boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avitt Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Believe it or not, I think that everything is working as it should... Scammers will always venture onto these forums, and will do their best to steal from members...It has happened before, and it will happen again. The value of the forum is the free exchange of information...When a member is victimized, they share that information with others, and the offender is identified and ostracized. The boards police themselves fairly well. That is exactly what has happened here - It's just very unfortunate that this swindler was very clever, and implemented a plan to inflict maximum damage in a very short time. But now we all know about it, the scammer is gone, and we're all a bit wiser...You live and you learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torques Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 The mere act of a 'trusted' forum introducing its members to a seller will imply to those members a certain level of approval, even if the introduction carries a disclaimer. Setting up a section for a dealer sends the same message. No dealer should even be let in the door until the forum leaders have performed their due diligence, either through several verifiable recommendations from trusted members who have purchased from said new dealer, or by risking their own hard-earned. Affirmative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 By due dilligence do you suggest that the Admins buy watches first?? What exactly is so reprehensible about that suggestion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTone Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 What exactly is so reprehensible about that suggestion? r11co You're a nucking fut case... Double T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Just one last note here, a page or so ago it was suggested that Crippler might be trying to make good on these problems, therefore we still have no proof yet that any kind of scam has been perpetrated. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Just one last note here, a page or so ago it was suggested that Crippler might be trying to make good on these problems, therefore we still have no proof yet that any kind of scam has been perpetrated. Ken We should seriously think of a way to limit new dealers until they prove themselves. This arguing does us no good. Here is my idea: Admins take note: New dealer can only sell 5 pieces to start. That's it. 5 pieces. He gets a section where he can either 1.) List 5 pieces with prices and pictures 2.) Open the section showing who he is, but members have to PUBLICALLY begin the negotiations. The new dealer should have no PM priveledges and their email should not be disclosed yet. This way, every other member can SEE how the first 5 deals are going. This is similiar to Ioffer. To make this work, a HUGE section on the GENERAL DISCUSSION and other primary threads shoudl be posted introducing the new dealer, telling everyone about the 5 piece rules and not to try to conduct any back door business. Anyone who does, and loses their money, TOO BAD. The rules must be the public dealing with the 5 pieces so that we know this dealer can get watches and we see how much they charge for them. Now, if all 5 pieces are delivered, he can sell 10 pieces and he can have PM privs but the dealer will be told that the Admins will be monitoring his PMs. Over time his limit is lifted and he can begin to negotiate via email. Now, is this guy is truly a scammer, he can build up trust and then scam us, but at least we tried to cover our members asses unlike this guy Riz who didn't send anything and probably got paid for 30 or so watches. If you don't like my idea...help me think of a better one. Don't waste time insulting me, or ripping down my idea. Nothing gets done that way. If you have never been part of a corporate think tank, this is how they brainstorm. Throw ideas out there and fix them, but don't spend time breaking down others ideas or insulting the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 @Brian you obviously are not aware of the volume these dealers trade at, even a scammer would be happy to do 5 legitimate deals to get his foot in the door. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian D Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 @Brian you obviously are not aware of the volume these dealers trade at, even a scammer would be happy to do 5 legitimate deals to get his foot in the door. Ken Ken, The number was not important. The idea is. If you think that 10 or 20 is the right start, then start there. But, the problem is....a scammer would love to get in the door to get 20 $400 watches and deliver nothing. Most scam artists live on a series of small deals. 20x$400 is $8000. If you pull one scam that size per month, you are making $100k per year in scams.... So, you could start higher, but my point is that if they deliver 5 watches, then we at least know they have some factory connections OR they are buying the watches at the same price we pay and they are losing money on them (assuming that no one would buy from a new dealer if they charged the same price as a trusted one). Then we can up the count to 10 or 20....... keep it small until they are consistently delivering as promised. Other Ideas: 1.) Charge a refundable bond to new dealers. They get it back later, but the forum holds on to $10,000 in cash in case they pull out without delivering. 2.) New dealers have to meet (in person, at their house) with a reputable member. There are plenty of solid members on these boards in just about every part of the world. No matter where they are, we can find someone to meet them. Meet them, prove that the address on their bank records is real. Make it harder for them to disappear. NOTHING is foolproof, but do you really think we cannot find some ways to slow them down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 NOTHING is foolproof, but do you really think we cannot find some ways to slow them down? As you say Nothing is fool proof but again 1. this is not an Admin issue and it becomes very messy if we do get involved 2. Unlike what has been suggested we do not officially approve any dealer, even a long term dealer can run with the money if he so desires. 3. No dealer will willing hand over even a few thousand dollars to any member of the Admin team, we are after all just regular guys 4. Members are very thin on the ground in China where most of the new dealers come from. In short you are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist, yes members risk their money every time they buy but that is the nature of this hobby which, once again, is illegal. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 It's not as if buying a watch is like trying to win the lottery, stick with the trusted long standing sellers and you will be fine Take a risk on an unknown quantity, listing prices that seem to good to be true? You may get burned.... I am sorry this happened and for those that lost out, but WU payment to an untried and tested dealer? To protect members, maybe at least have PayPal as the ONLY payment method available to all new sellers? Simple enough and will provide some buyer protection...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreww Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 The funny part about this is that I talked to TTK about this and he warned me that this guy would disappear. I thought it would be good to be one of the first customers. Nobody disappears before the first deal right? Anyway, is still think that in allowing a dealer here or there, he should come to the table with at least some credentials. BTW, if the address he provided proves to be bogus, you may want to contact trusty. Apparently he has sold him a watch, as well as shipping him a replacement band. He will definitely have a valid shipping address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo1nah2a Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 A lot of people are repeating that we are dealing with 'illegal' hobby, so we should be practicing the silence of the lambs. Take the hit, and go on with business as usual. I don't agree with that. I don't care if I have to pay on top of what I paid for, tax-duties-penalty to get the watch AND/(or just to) get a scammer behind bars. -1 of them, and an extra thing to consider for the next one trying to outsmart us. In the end, if we get in the mind frame of 'illegal activitiy', the response to a bad supplier of illegal goods would not be silence. Had I not been so busy lately at work, I would have done personally the due diligence on this guy, and I would have probably refrained from buying from him. Not because there were any flags, but just for not having read a review from some of the trusted reviewers (you know who You are). I can't blame anybody for this: I just assumed that I was in a protected environment (TRC fame), it felt good to be able to browse a local (EU) collector's offers after a long day's work, the Corum AdCup was one of the few watches I was eying lately. I have done a couple of transactions on the members trade section that I investigated more than this. Guess I misinterpreted the presence and placement of the rizshop. I am still trying to communicate with the guy on the basis that this is all a misunderstanding or lack of information. I will plan my next actions (or lack of) according to his reaction (or lack of). Maybe the guy had an accident and he was not able to walk to the post office to send the watches. Or maybe he had an accident and couldn't get out of bed to go check WU for my payment. Or maybe he had an accident and he was not able to read on line the tracking of his misplaced shipments. Or maybe he had an accident and he bumped his head and he forgot to send the correct tracking. Or maybe he had an accident and he wasn't able to type with his fingers to reply to my past 10days emails. Accidents happen. Sometimes not only to people with bad karma, but one can only hope and orchestrate as much in life as his wisdom permits. Or his temper and persistence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts