Replica Factor Ostro VAM

[voidptr]

Exactly! All these shops seems to be using the same photos. When asking for instock items, it's probably best to request at least one picture with a handwritten timestamp (or ask them to hold a household item or something else). You can also check for exif metadata (gps data, timestamps, etc.).

[patliean1]

Exactly! All these shops seems to be using the same photos. When asking for instock items, it's probably best to request at least one picture with a handwritten timestamp (or ask them to hold a household item or something else). You can also check for exif metadata (gps data, timestamps, etc.).

If you have to request any of this nonsense, you should immediately take your business elsewhere.

[Serge_K]

If you have to request any of this nonsense, you should immediately take your business elsewhere.

Yep... And that goes back to my thread about not buying fakes because of how shady the whole thing gets the moment you start asking questions... If i spend 500$ on a frame, I ask questions. If i am asked to shell $1000, i ask even more questions

[acino]

Yep... And that goes back to my thread about not buying fakes because of how shady the whole thing gets the moment you start asking questions... If i spend 500$ on a frame, I ask questions. If i am asked to shell $1000, i ask even more questions

I see where you're coming from, and I understand why you hold that perspective.

You're likely looking for technical details, but that depends on whether the sellers are directly involved in manufacturing or just third-party resellers. For the same reason, my local seller probably couldn't answer detailed questions about frame production. Even with well-known Western brands, you'd likely not get more than, "that's proprietary information." I get that those brands have already built a certain level of trust. But when buying a frame from Asia, there’s always some degree of risk. You never really know if the answers you get are accurate or just what the seller thinks you want to hear anyway - and that applies not only to those selling fakes (e.g. Winspace telling the guy that the disgusting BB is ok is a good example)

My perspective is much more cynical - I am suspicious of the answers regardless of the seller. Perhaps it's the experimental scientist in me, but ultimately all we can rely on is empirical testing and first-hand experience with a reasonable sample size is what really matters imo. At the end of the day, it all comes down to how much of a gambler you are.

Edit: That is why people like Pat above are such a fantastic resource

[dieNadel]

I asked RK Ultra Extreme Carbon Fiber Store about shipping to the EU/Germany, which isn't possible atm. They said that they're working on implementing DPD shipping "this year" and to wait patiently for a while.

[Serge_K]

You're likely looking for technical details, but that depends on whether the sellers are directly involved in manufacturing or just third-party resellers. For the same reason, my local seller probably couldn't answer detailed questions about frame production. Even with well-known Western brands, you'd likely not get more than, "that's proprietary information." I get that those brands have already built a certain level of trust. But when buying a frame from Asia, there’s always some degree of risk. You never really know if the answers you get are accurate or just what the seller thinks you want to hear anyway - and that applies not only to those selling fakes (e.g. Winspace telling the guy that the disgusting BB is ok is a good example)

My perspective is much more cynical - I am suspicious of the answers regardless of the seller. Perhaps it's the experimental scientist in me, but ultimately all we can rely on is empirical testing and first-hand experience with a reasonable sample size is what really matters imo. At the end of the day, it all comes down to how much of a gambler you are.

I disagree because that line of reasoning is anti human and frankly just nihilistic, and ultimately puts on the same plane the worst criminals with the best operators. Or it ultimately implies that due diligence is useless.
I do agree that getting an answer to a question doesn't make it true, yes illusion of control is a thing, but you can't use that line of thought to say that nobody can't be trusted so it's just a gamble. It's not.

[acino]

I disagree because that line of reasoning is anti human and frankly just nihilistic, and ultimately puts on the same plane the worst criminals with the best operators. Or it ultimately implies that due diligence is useless.
I do agree that getting an answer to a question doesn't make it true, yes illusion of control is a thing, but you can't use that line of thought to say that nobody can't be trusted so it's just a gamble. It's not.

I do not think it is nihilistic. That is the consequence of virtually zero custom protection when purchasing through these channels. There is a reason why customer protection laws are established, or the situation would be very similar elsewhere. What good is an answer if you have no way of telling if it is accurate? Seller tells a buyer that the frame is 90% T800 and 10% T1100 - there is no way of knowing if its accurate (knowingly or unknowingly), but I understand why it can make the buyer more inclined to make the purchase. There are many motivations to give you a genuine answer, many motivations/reasons to not give you an answer at all - not necessarily due to malice or connected to quality of the product - and there are no repercussions either way whatsoever.

I did not say that nobody can be trusted, but that empirical evidence is all that matters. Whether we like it or not, it is a gamble - even established, tested Chinese brands sometimes ship a flop. All of us are just trying to improve our odds, either by asking questions or relying on (someone's) first-hand experience.

Edit: I don't know, perhaps it's just my job, where experimental evidence is the only thing that matters, manifesting...

[acino]

Maybe try reading it one more time, and the conversation that it is part of.

Because nobody is expecting or asking for any protection or guarantee.

[Sander2177]

Maybe try reading it one more time, and the conversation that it is part of.

Because nobody is expecting or asking for any protection or guarantee.

Hows this:

Your message raises a valid point about the lack of consumer protection when purchasing through certain channels. I wouldn't necessarily call it nihilistic either—it's simply acknowledging the reality of an unregulated market. Consumer protection laws exist for a reason: to provide buyers with recourse in case of misleading claims or defective products. Without such safeguards, verifying a seller's claims—such as the exact carbon layup of a frame—becomes nearly impossible.

I agree that there are various motivations for sellers to be truthful or evasive, and that this isn’t always tied to malice or product quality. However, the absence of accountability means buyers have to rely on empirical evidence, personal experience, or trusted reviews to mitigate risk. Even well-established manufacturers occasionally produce flawed products, which reinforces the need for due diligence.

Your perspective, shaped by a reliance on experimental evidence, makes complete sense. In the end, purchasing from these sources is inherently a gamble—one that can be informed but never entirely risk-free. The best approach is to gather as much reliable information as possible and weigh the potential risks against the benefits.