Hacker News Reader

Comment by timakro | Hacker News Reader

Amazon makes it easy to sell especially with FBA. That's as much a good thing as it can be misused. It allows new businesses to get started when they cannot afford to handle shipping to customers themselves.

View on HN

What’s a new company doing selling old spice deodorant? What possible legitimate angle could it have?

Same as any small business reselling stuff bought in bulk that people need like one or two of every year?

One or two in a year? Is this a passing hobby or a hygiene regimen?

How many do you go through? Probably 2 for me. Definitely not more than 3.

I think this conversation will be measuring string. Too many variables. What size container? What's the weather like where you are? How much do you put on each application? What do you do day to day? What's the weather like where you live?

I live in Australia, and I am really active. Safe to say I will be sweating a lot more than someone living in Alaska who's a homebody, and so may use a bit more deodorant.

Perversely, I often find my use of deodorant increases in colder weather. Primarily this is because where I live, people seem to want to compensate by adding one degree to the thermostat for every degree it falls below 21—inside in winter can be absolutely boiling.

This is made even worse by the fact that in order to leave the building (or when you first arrive), you're dressed for the outside weather.

Usage will vary. But the original statement made it seem like it would be unreasonable to use only one or two in a year.

There used to be a pretty active market in selling clearance stuff on Amazon and eBay.

So to block counterfiets and fencing, we need a verifiable chain of custody.

Or just a database of serial numbers.

A database of serial numbers alone wouldn't be sufficient. Counterfeiters frequently copy real serial numbers and print them on fake products.

There are more effective means such as tamper resistant RFID tags, but those aren't cost effective for cheap items. And often no one bothers to check anyway.

Any individual labeling of goods is not cost-effective even on not-so-cheap items.

I've seen implementing individual labeling of items in two cases first-handed. Both were required by new regulations and both almost kill small companies.

Cost of new equipment (readers, dedicated computer which can work 24/7 in real world in the hands of non-IT people), IT system (you have only one vendor, of course, as it is government-required system, and you can imagine quality of this solution, as it is written by government contractor), support for this IT system and integration with existing POS and ERP (by 3rd party company), all these costs are tremendous in practice. If you are not reseller or distributor but producer, you need additional hardware (typically very expensive one) to apply tags to items on your production line.

Unique tags prices are negligible here.

I've seen this for small custom brewery (with very rudimentary bottling line) and for small imported/distributor of fine and exotic alcohol. Both companies are alive, but they were forced to get loans when implemented new regulations about individual-per-bottle tags, and it was long and painful process in both cases.

Who will pay for this? You. And me. In both ways: some business goes out (think: your nearest papa-n-mama grocery store, which struggles to compete with big supermarket chain already), and other business will rise up retail prices to cover expenses to implement supply-chain control systems. As there will be expenses on all steps from producer to retail store, these expenses will accumulate.

And we already pay (with taxes) for police. Which work is to catch thieves.

UPDATE: And as sibling comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33740337) points out, it is not one-time expense for any business in supply chain, as they will need to scan all these tags, and have (much) more warehouse/retail space workers or pay more for more hours. Always, forever.

I think serial numbers would be enough to stop the vast majority of people selling stolen items.

It would require companies to track serial numbers that go into the store, and serial numbers of items put on shelves, or otherwise legally leave the store. After a while, it'll be clear which items & serial numbers were legelly sold vs. stolen. And, to address the original point, copied stolen serial numbers still aren't any good.

The serial numbers of stolen items get reported to the authorities and/or Amazon, and it becomes their legal problem. As another post in this thread poins out, pawn shops have to do something similar to check for stolen items. So there is some sort of legal framework in place.

Im not saying that this should be i plemented or anything, I'm just trying to say that individual serial numbers might work. It will not be easy to implement, and cost money. But so does rampant theft. Maybe it's worth pursuing.

So, I drive a truck.

It’s hard enough to get them to unload you when all they have to do is count pallets like “yep, 22 pallets of potatoes” even harder when they have to break down pallets to count individual cases and would be impossible if they had to verify every single item by serial number.

Even when I used to deliver to individual grocery stores it was difficult because they didn’t plan for unloading the truck on the schedule and they had to stock the shelves before the store opened so more often than not they just got their stuff off the truck as quickly as possible without even doing any sort of verification, just pull the pallets with their store number and let the department heads deal with it in the morning.

It sounds like a valid idea but the amount of labor would be astronomical.

You could do it like the expiration/plant batch codes on food - ignored unless there’s an investigation for some reason.

Who would investigate? Amazon idngaf to the point that they are find with co-mingling fake and stolen goods and selling them under their own brand.

Attorneys General, likely. Amazon would be found selling stolen goods, told to clean up, they wouldn’t, and there’d be a kerfuffle and suddenly it would be one of the items that is harder to list (try listing Milwaukee cordless equipment on Amazon now for example).

Obviously that technique doesn’t work, as Amazon just patches up the hole and nothing else.

So you’ll be unable to buy serialized deodorant, but toothpaste will still be “off the truck”.

You need an actual consumer law with teeth that gets enforced, not one-off AG litigation.

This is what happens (in theory) with GSM mobile phones. GSM devices have a serial number in the form of an IMEI which can be blacklisted from networks if stolen [0]. There are, of course, still ways round it as detailed in the wikipedia entry - e.g. the blacklists are national ones, and organised groups can "just" ship the phones to another country and sell them there.

Even so, as you intimate, it does make it _harder_ to resell stolen phones.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mobile_Equipment...

Just marking product with seller's ID would be enough. You don't care which exact product was counterfeited, you care which seller sold it

Enough for what? And how exactly would you mark it?

None of this refutes the fact that a blockchain would have all the same problems plus a whole load more.

Let's keep that part quiet from our VCs

I never claimed that a blockchain would help.

It was more for tracking stolen product.

Buying a deodorant? Please show your biometric government ID.

In the U.K. you have to pay a premium not to use your corporate ID card. Tesco for example will charge a 20% markup on lunch for privacy.

Interesting, got more info? Which corporations provide the ID card? Are retailers legally obligated to ask for it? Do retailers get fined by the gov't for every non-ID'd transaction?

This _could_ be taken to mean that Tesco employees get a 20% discount if they flash their Tesco ID card, which sounds completely normal to my American self.

If you don’t get a Tesco (Major U.K. corporation) ID card scanned at the till you get charged a lot more for your food.

This is normal customers, not employees.

You could do that, or you could compel Amazon to not look the other way when they accept goods that “fall off the truck”.

GIGO

Amazon knows that the deodorant it’s selling is not discontinued or clearance. It knows Old Spice isn’t giving some mom and pop a better wholesale deal than the world’s largest retailer either. There’s no legit reason for there to be “other sellers” for that product, or really most any product it itself sells.

Amazon barely knows who is listing products on their site, whether the products are even legal, and sometimes they can’t even tell what a “product” is.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/15/tech/cpsc-sues-amazon/index.h...

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/07/amazon-mails-postcards-to-se...

https://slate.com/technology/2021/12/amazon-listings-wrong-r...

But that's because they deliberately chose not to know it. A responsible business would have processes in place to identify all of that information.

"responsible" doesn't earn them as much

The only pressure on them to do it would be money. And not in "someone decides to not use them to buy some stuff" but getting sued for hundreds of millions

This is just false. There are "grey markets" for basically any major product. Quality King Distributors is one company that dominates this space and has been sued many times (they win nearly every time on the basis of the first sale doctrine and are responsible for [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_King_Distributors_Inc.....) case) for undercutting manufacturers. Example: Dollar General sells some prepaid phones at prices substantially lower than on eBay/Amazon but in limited amounts per customer. Companies will hire a bunch of runners to go buy the max amount of these phones to resell (or unlock and export to other countries). Or: "Diversion"/products that are intended to be exported to another country actually being reimported, liquidations/bankruptcy auctions etc.

Lots of manufacturers and distributors who play by the rules don't like this because grey market distributors will undercut MSRP on places like Amazon so they will report the listings as fakes to get them removed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com