The infamous "FOR"+ manufacturer + part

[johnny2007]

I am more and more often coming across parts for bikes and cars, bearing the word "for" in the description alongside "genuine" or "original".
All pictures and descriptions are taken from the manufacturer website, so one would wrongly assume they're buying a genuine product.
No, you're buying a fake, counterfeit product.
Example: Shimano bike chain, usual price £20/25.
eBay price £8~
The key word in the description is "for".
I wanted to see this fake and bought it.
The packaging is very very similar, apart from the print quality of the blue bits.
The chain itself is total rubbish.
Anyone who's ever fitted a standard, average, branded chain will notice the poor quality at once.
Apart from my gripe, how many fakes things are we being sold as genuine?
And aren't some of them dangerous?
I understand bike parts, but for example, if you gave me a fake car oil/petrol/air filter, I wouldn't spot it unless really obvious.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

It's a legal loophole/exclusion that's allowed. The first time I encountered it was years ago when selling non-genuine (very good quality) toner cartridges to fit HP laser printers, at a much lower price than HP ones. My listing was taken down after a request from HP. I contacted them, explained that they weren't HP-made but were designed to fit their printers. They said that if I put "for" before HP then it would be fine. Non-genuine printer consumables are normally almost as good as originals but are often around 80% cheaper. I definitely wouldn't waste money on genuine cartridges.

It's good healthy competition. But... it is being abused. The bike chain is a good example. If the Shimano gear set needs a specific chain then it would be OK to make an equivalent Shimano-specific chain that is "for" it. But if it's a generic part to do a generic job then it's not OK. My understanding anyway.

You can exclude words from an ebay search with a minus character, e.g. you can enter "Shimano chain -for". This should remove all the tat.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

The quality of fake goods is getting ever better. And yes, for some products (e.g. electrical items) there can be significant risk to the buyer/user if the product is substandard, which they often are.

I have a friend of a friend who buys and sells fake football shirts. He doesn't make much from it, I think it's more a point of principal thing for him i.e. due to high price of the genuine items. However fake goods are often linked to organised crime that you're helping to (financially) support of you sell and knowingly buy these goods.

A few years back mum needed a new hinge on her freezer. The branded part was something like £80, for 1 x upper hinge. I found a non-branded (but not fake) alternative for something like £20. It's still working fine. However that sort of item doesn't really present any sort of risk.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

I keep being surprised by just how mundane some of the faked items are now. We all heard of fake Rolex watches. But now you can get fake Bosch car oil filter cartridges, while even the genuine ones are pocket money anyway.

I don't want my £5000 engine to get ruined as a result of saving £3 on a filter that falls apart and clogs its internals.

I tend to avoid ebay and amazon for car consumables now, just buy from car parts companies. But for all I know they could be selling the fake stuff too, you just can't tell.

 

[Brigadier]

I keep being surprised by just how mundane some of the faked items are now. We all heard of fake Rolex watches. But now you can get fake Bosch car oil filter cartridges, while even the genuine ones are pocket money anyway.

I don't want my £5000 engine to get ruined as a result of saving £3 on a filter that falls apart and clogs its internals.

I tend to avoid ebay and amazon for car consumables now, just buy from car parts companies. But for all I know they could be selling the fake stuff too, you just can't tell.

I used to work with a lad who sold loads of fake stuff.

Iirc, Lee Cooper jeans.

I said that I wouldn't buy real Lee Cooper, let alone fakes, and was surprised that anyone would.

His reply : "If dog turds were a quid each, someone would buy a fake one if it was 50p".

 

[motorbiking]

For Shimano, might just as well have said for a bike.

 

[johnny2007]

It's ok if they sell the "for" and use their own pictures and descriptions.
In many cases, including the bike chain, they use the genuine website pictures and descriptions.
That's deceiving because one might think they're buying the genuine product.
Especially if the title is "Genuine mountain bike chain for Shimano HG 91"
The "for is somehow hidden in there.

 

[motorbiking]

I had a quick look and would say the use of DEORE is a problem.

 

[johnny2007]

I had a quick look and would say the use of DEORE is a problem.

What do you mean?

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

Especially if the title is "Genuine mountain bike chain for Shimano HG 91"
The "for is somehow hidden in there.

If HG 91 is a chain then it's not OK.

If HG 91 is a crankset then it probably is OK.

"For" means it's compatible with, it shouldn't be used to mean its a replacement for. But the Chinese sellers probably don't understand this distinction, or more likely don't care.

Shimano could register with ebay and remove the dodgy listings if it wanted to. Many manufacturers do this, some are utterly ruthless and abuse the process to stifle competition. I often sell genuine products for less, which definitely irritates manufacturers, some falsely use low price alone as evidence of fakery.

 

[Brigadier]

Makes it more and more implied to be a genuine shimano part?

I had a quick look and would say the use of DEORE is a problem.

What do you mean?

 

[motorbiking]

DEORE is a registered trademark also the HG-X is too close to their range trademark e.g. XT XTR etc.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

That's just a fake, not an equivalent.

I've bought things like this, knowing it's non-genuine. You may find that if you order one then in fact the pack has a Shimano logo on, it's just been edited out of the photo.

 

[motorbiking]

It’s advertised as “For..”. I couldn’t find any that were much different.

 

[morqthana]

I heard a programme on the radio a few weeks ago and there was a guy talking about telescopic ladder safety, and the BS EN whatever they are supposed to comply with.

They made something like 100 test purchases of ladders from "online marketplaces", all supposedly compliant.

Every single one failed safety tests. 100%.

They bought 100 from proper ladder sellers. Every single one passed.