| |
In order to provide myself with a bit of a vent, I thought I’d post this
message and see if others share my perspective/experiences or whether I’m
just completely wrong in my attitude and thinking (wouldn’t be the first time).
My “problem” is that lately I seem to be getting more and more dirty/damaged
LEGO parts from BrickLink sellers.
Before continuing, let me pause and provide a bit of background and setting.
First, in a little over a year I’ve purchased from BrickLink shops
approximately fifty times. I’m sure that doesn’t put me anywhere near the
top of the list of heavy-duty buyers but I think it’s enough experience to
provide a platform to speak from. Many (if not most) of my orders have
been from the small handful sellers that I keep going back to because
they’ve never disappointed me. It’s when I venture out to try someone new
(at least to me) that I’m starting to get stung more and more.
Secondly, in my mind there is (or was) a difference between buying on ebay
(pretty much the only other online source for LEGO that I use) and buying
from BrickLink. The difference is that I expect an ebay seller to be
someone who might not know much about LEGO, may have picked up the item
they’re selling from a yard sale (or their own children), and most certainly
will never clean old parts if they’re dirty. So I try to pay extra
attention to ebay descriptions and pictures to make sure (as much as
possible) that I know what I’m getting myself into with a purchase. And
like most folks who have purchased LEGO from ebay or similar sources, I’ve
spent plenty of time at the kitchen sink trying to get the caked-on dust and
dirt to go away.
When it comes to BrickLink however, I guess I’ve tended to let my “Buyer
Beware” guard down. I think this attitude was based on an obviously wrong
idea that sellers on BrickLink are LEGO fans themselves, have an
appreciation for The Brick (i.e. they build & play also) and are not out to
rip off and con fellow AFOL’s (though I do understand, of course, that the
aim is to make money).
Well paint me green, call me naïve and put a “SUCKER” sign on my back
because it turns out that’s not the way it is at all (at least not for
everyone).
In recent months, I’ve had about 5 orders that contained parts that I
considered to be completely useless. For the most part, these have been
white pieces that turned out to be closer to brown or yellow in color and
which no amount of scrubbing will clean. There have also been pieces like
the pink fabuland umbrella that I purchased at top price from Germany only
to find that when it arrived a month later that it looked like half of it
had been soaking in a nicotine cocktail. This piece, and some of the white
pieces I’ve discarded, were at times described by the sellers as being in
“good” or “excellent” condition.
Then there are the unsatisfactory purchases that didn’t come with a New/Used
label or any other description that would have alerted me to their poor
condition. The example of this (and pretty much what has led to this
venting) are the two King Kahuka figs I received in the mail this week.
Both were sold at the average price for these figs (over $2) with no
descriptions regarding their condition. One has had the stud on its head
chewed on (it’s sort of triangular in shape now). The other’s torso has
chewing and gouge marks. Both faces and torsos have scratches and faded
spots. The white headdress on one has filth encrusted in the grooves
between feathers. A dip in the Palmolive is not going to help these guys.
(Staring at these figs put me in mind of the old SNL skit about the
restaurant that served pre-chewed steak – Yes! Now you too can purchase your
bricks from The House of Pre-Chewed LEGO).
So, I’ve notified the seller that I’ll be returning these figures for a
refund. Up to now I’ve just sort of sucked it up and moved on, because the
pieces I’ve had to discard have never amounted to more than a couple of
dollars per order. I hadn’t considered it worth the hassle to contact the
buyer, repackage the items, go to the post office, shell out my own money to
re-ship, etc. all for a dollar or two in parts. I also have been hesitant
to even inform the sellers of my dissatisfaction because I anticipate some
kind of “battle” in reaching a resolution. I think part of that attitude is
based on the idea that if the seller stuck me with the part in the first
place, they’re probably going to resist efforts on my part to return it.
What really gets me about my “taking it” when it comes to these dirty and
damaged parts is that I’ve even ended up giving positive feedback to some of
these buyers. Having seen the outrageous squabbles that have erupted over
negative feedback (or in some cases over the fact that no feedback was left)
I didn’t feel motivated to get caught up in that. And, after all, most of
the parts I received from these sellers were fine and the service (contact,
delivery, packaging etc) was usually acceptable. So I’ve left feedback that
I’ve categorized as “positive” while not gushing (like I normally would) in
the actual written part of the feedback.
I realize now that I’m helping to contribute to these sellers staying in
business and continuing these practices and for that I’m starting to feel
some guilt.
From now on though, I’m going to start notifying sellers of my
dissatisfaction, returning parts for refund, and posting appropriate
feedback whatever the consequences. After all, that’s why these systems
were developed and put in place – so that other buyers won’t fall victim to
the same practices by these sellers.
So having laid out the basis for my consternation, I have some questions for
online Sellers and Buyers of LEGO (both BrickLink and other sources).
Questions for Sellers (I don’t really expect any answers to these questions)
- Do some sellers consider “excellent” or “good” condition to be based
solely on the fact that the piece is simply intact without any regard to
discoloring or the fact that dirt is caked on the piece?
- Obviously, the point of BrickLink is for sellers to relieve themselves of
unwanted parts. Are there some sellers then who think it’s okay to slide a
few useless parts in orders here and there in order to profit from pieces
that otherwise they’d be unable to sell if described honestly?
- And as a follow-up to the previous question – is this practice of slipping
a few cruddy parts in orders here and there based on the belief that buyers
aren’t going to consider it worth the hassle to complain about and return
these pieces?
- Do some sellers believe that “Let the Buyer Beware” is the basis of doing
business on BrickLink? That is, if the seller provides no description of
the item and someone buys it then they’re just out of luck because there’s
an assumption that pieces are sold “as is” with no guarantee of condition.
- Would these sellers consider it my fault because I didn’t ask for a
truthful report about the condition of each and every part I’m interested in
prior to actually purchasing it? If this is the case should I also inquire
about the parts that are described as being in “excellent” condition since
as I’ve learned this word doesn’t seem to have universal meaning among sellers?
- OR are these sellers operating on “good faith” because in their opinion,
experience and use of LEGO they honestly believe there’s nothing wrong with
building with discolored and damaged pieces?
Questions for Fellow Buyers
- Are there other buyers who have been purchasing what they thought would be
“ready to use” LEGO from BrickLink sellers only to find that the parts that
show up are filthy or discolored to the point of being useless?
- Are there other buyers who, like me, have been wimping out on providing
the negative feedback that these sellers deserve?
- Are there buyers who feel like they must approach BrickLink with a
completely cynical attitude and assume that “no description” equals “poor
condition” and just avoid these parts?
- Is there anyone out there who feels like they have to get a “Statement of
Condition” on each and every part prior to actually purchasing it?
(ridiculous I know but maybe someone actually does this).
So there it is, my venting about dirty and damaged parts I’ve bought from
BrickLink. I want to reiterate that I am not talking about all sellers on
BrickLink – only a small handful (4 or 5 at most) that I’ve had bad
experiences with in recent months. The sellers I use regularly have NEVER
let me down (thanks Melanie, Troy & Brett!) and I WILL continue to use
BrickLink. In fact, I’m planning to open my own shop this summer and hope
to eventually be viewed as good seller of bricks.
In the meantime, though I’ve definitely soured on a couple of BrickLink
sellers and while I haven’t provided the negative feedback that I probably
should have, our local LUG here in Richmond is sharing information about our
collective experiences with sellers so at least I’ll be able to steer a few
folks from people I’ll never buy from again.
I’d be interested in the experiences and views of others on this subject.
However, as I stated previously my primary purpose was just to provide
myself with a little venting and make my declaration of “Not Taking It
Anymore” when it comes to paying for LEGO that I can’t use.
Greg
Posting Justification:
Posted to General to start things rolling since most folks on LUGNET
purchase LEGO online at one point or another.
Request that follow-ups be directed to Market.Shopping (unless someone wants
to dictate that a posting on this subject belongs somewhere else like maybe
Market.Theory).
|
|
Message has 10 Replies:
 | | Re: Tired of Paying for Dirty, Discolored and Damaged LEGO
|
| Greg: As the person that wrote this: (URL) can tell you that I have certainly come across dirty, already been chewed, bubble gum encrusted, snot caked, putty filled, milk spattered, larvae infested, and otherwise disgusting elements in my time. It (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
