[Rachel]

I agree about these homemade smurfs but unfortunately, as far as I know, the seller does state that these are homemades and so really it is the bidders who are to blame here unless of course there is other naughty shill bidding practices going on.

I have added a page to Blue Imps recently to try and highlight this problem and as Dyar says, educate bidders.

http://www.blueimps.com/smurfs_news21.html

[toydreamer]

Two cents worth... dodgy smurf sellers set up one selling account and then a host of shilling accounts through another family member or friend. The seller continues to trade in a reputable manner, whilst the shill names bump up prices. If they win, the auction is relisted in a week or two. The shill names also bid on other smurf items round the world and thus build up a positive rating and also start to make it less obvious when they don't buy all the items from the one source. The items they buy are just resold by the main selling account... and the process keeps going.

[toydreamer]

I've been getting emails over the last few months asking me why I don't stock the Jim Beam Smurf and the Bacardi Smurf. They also ask how much I'd sell 'em for. When I reply that the items are fakes and that are worth about $1 the people are less than impressed about their newly acquired, unsellable, disfigured non-smurf.

Poor suckers.

As people said before, I guess it's just best to spread the word.



One thing of interest. Most smurf-heads don't like what potions11 is doing with the fakes, but it seems that the 100% feedback with nearly 7000 transactions means that the customers like 'em. Can't believe there is not one negative.

http://feedback.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAP ... dback:2:au

Oh well...