StockX scamming? How is this legal?

[dblplay1212]

 

[crazyrichazn]

we need that former stock x employee that cried in the car on his first day to explain.

 

[DB Cooper]

Amazed people still use StockX. After that whole data breach, I was out.

 

[アミーゴ]

DCAllAfrican is a VP there - send help

 

[Belgium]

Na they taxed me off the $700. I think the accounting is correct, just some sales are being inflated and therefore inflating the market bc the next guy thinks a Maha sold for $1000.

I'd be very surprised if they aren't also cooking the books in some way. Generally those actions would go hand in hand.
It's clearly a pattern of behavior at this point rather than a unique error, albeit a seemingly random pattern.

The way I see it, there's 2 explanations here and neither of them sound legal.
The first is that the shoes did sell for $700 but they're falsifying the public sales price to articifially inflate the value for future sales.
The second is that the shoes actually did sell for $1034 but you were only paid out for a $700 sale.

The first option seems odd, because you mentioned that particular sale was very rare, to the point that a different sale couldn't explain the $1034.
Either way, someone is getting defrauded by a false representation of a transaction.
On the one hand, inflating the market on somewhat rare sales like this would presumably have a low yield, but it would also be less likely to get flagged as potential fraud due to the low sales volume.
On the other hand, straight up cooking the books and paying out significantly lower false sales prices would have a much higher yield but also much higher risk.

 

[dblplay1212]

At this point at least a dozen people have checked the price they see on the Maha am90 and about half see $700 and half see $1043. Thought it might be a regional thing but someone in my city saw $700 while I see $1043. Guy in Canada saw $1043, buddy in Chicago saw $700. Make it make sense.

 

[slaughterx]

I'd be very surprised if they aren't also cooking the books in some way. Generally those actions would go hand in hand.
It's clearly a pattern of behavior at this point rather than a unique error, albeit a seemingly random pattern.

The way I see it, there's 2 explanations here and neither of them sound legal.
The first is that the shoes did sell for $700 but they're falsifying the public sales price to articifially inflate the value for future sales.
The second is that the shoes actually did sell for $1034 but you were only paid out for a $700 sale.

The first option seems odd, because you mentioned that particular sale was very rare, to the point that a different sale couldn't explain the $1034.
Either way, someone is getting defrauded by a false representation of a transaction.
On the one hand, inflating the market on somewhat rare sales like this would presumably have a low yield, but it would also be less likely to get flagged as potential fraud due to the low sales volume.
On the other hand, straight up cooking the books and paying out significantly lower false sales prices would have a much higher yield but also much higher risk.

You choose the listing price on these platforms... so theres no way he could list them for $700 and then stockx charge someone $1,034.

I do think GOAT makes up BS claims about the condition of shoes and then gives you the option to take a further loss that they dont always pass on to the customer... but I have no way of proving this.

 

[Belgium]

You choose the listing price on these platforms... so theres no way he could list them for $700 and then stockx charge someone $1,034.

I do think GOAT makes up BS claims about the condition of shoes and then gives you the option to take a further loss that they dont always pass on to the customer... but I have no way of proving this.

Ok so the $700 is undisputably the actual sales price then. So the remaining questions in my mind are where does this artificial $1034 come from, why some people (in different regions?) see the correct $700, and how this affects laws regarding market manipulation and fraudulent accounting.

Looking at this from a fraudster's point of view, this hypothetical scheme seems very high risk for very low potential yield. If the purpose is simply to increase their commission fees by artificially inflating the value with falsified sales prices, why bother doing so on a rare shoe with low trading volume?
If anything that makes the scheme extremely obvious in exchange for a relatively negligible amount of potential yield, and it also doesn't make sense why some people see $1034 and others see the real sales price.
Maybe it's something that's been going on across the board regardless of value and/or trading volume but I wasn't really able to find any other allegations of this particular practice at first glance.

Based on the available information, I think it'd be logical to conclude that some form of corrupt and presumably illegal scheme is going on there. It could also be a technical issue, which would explain why some people see the false $1034 and others see the correct $700. However, a bug that blatantly looks like a fraudulent scheme should not be happening.

 

[Beruseruku Desu]

shows 760 for me


edit*

this might be for just my size I think

 

[executive76]

I know NTers are fake anti social media but this is where Twitter comes in handy. Would get a lot more attention since NT is basically a halfway house x nursing home at this point.

Not that it would change anything considering other Stockx revelations/accusations.

 

[frankmatthews]

Have you tried contacting stockx and asking them?

 

[johnnyredstorm]

This is the weirdest humble brag I’ve seen on here

 

[dblplay1212]

Have you tried contacting stockx and asking them?

Honestly no, the few times I have for other things I've gotten canned responses. Might be worth a shot next time I have some time to burn.

 

[dblplay1212]

This is the weirdest humble brag I’ve seen on here

That's what you took from this thread?

 

[Kobekobe]

That's what you took from this thread?

I noticed something interesting with stockx that I haven't seen addressed. It seems like they're double dipping on taxes. Unfortunately, since I live in Canada, it will never be addressed as no one gives a flying f what happens here and we don't have any governing bodies that care to do anything either.

I'll try to explain as best as possible so if there is any confusion, then I'll try to clarify of course.

Right now, if I want to buy Kobe 8's in size 12, it will cost me $260 USD + fees + taxes + shipping to any address in the USA (all of which, to me, is reasonable for their service).

If I change my address/region to a Canada, they now all of a sudden want $54 extra --> $314 USD + fees + TAXES + shipping.. for no reason other than??? (Yes this is USD pricing, not CAD. I changed my region only not the currency). I thought it could be an import tax, however, it can't be as our import tax is only 5%. So I should be charged an extra ~$13.

Anyway... When I go checkout, they want to charge me an additional $45.58 in taxes? I'm not opposed to paying the tax but they're already asking me to pay an extra $52?

The worst part about this is I set my region to Canada and put in a bid for $255 USD (beating the lowest bid of $251 USD). I went into incognito and set my preferences to USA and my $255 USD bid not even showing up on the website. So even if I only wanted to pay $255 USD for the shoes + taxes, not a single seller would even SEE my bid unless the seller is in Canada.. that being said, the chances of me actually being matched with a seller are slim to none as the stock levels here are about 1% of what they are in the USA.

Here is the total I would pay if I ship to Canada paying in Canadian funds. It's less than $400 CAD after taxes and fees (about $300USD all in right now for any US buyer) to ship it to a US address for pickup. There is absolutely 0 justification as to why I should pay $136 more even when you factor in import taxes and shipping fees.

Through my researched I figured it could be a few things but the only logical explanation I could come up with is extra shipping costs. But then why not charge me an extra $15 and have the seller directly ship it to Canada (it doesn't cost any more than that to ship it to StockX warehouse in my area.. yes we have one that authenticates here which I have used)?

For reference, a pair of Lebrons that retail for $200 USD on Nike.com are $260 CAD on Nike.ca.
Nike Canada charges $260 + tax. There's no extra taxes or duties that they are charging other than the standard tax mandated by law.

StockX is a scammy company and I personally refuse to do business with them after discovering the above in recent weeks. For reference GOAT has a similar practice and eBay does not. The price of the auction is the price. So it seems to me like there's double dipping happening and StockX is collecting more taxes or fees because of a cross border shopper.

 

[cs02132]

I was about to sell something today and realized I can’t even sign in because last year someone got into my account for like the 3rd time and I never bothered to fix it. SMH

 

[PatRiley]

 

[dblplay1212]

That's what you took from this thread?

 

[d e beatup]

Totally unrelated but I was going to bid on AMM AJ3s until they listed a $41 verification fee. Why would authentication be a percentage and not a flat rate?

 

[Public Enemy]

At this point at least a dozen people have checked the price they see on the Maha am90 and about half see $700 and half see $1043. Thought it might be a regional thing but someone in my city saw $700 while I see $1043. Guy in Canada saw $1043, buddy in Chicago saw $700. Make it make sense.

$701 on the east coast (maryland). I know when I looked into it a few years ago (2020ish), they said that stuff about how different markets have different amounts etc, so the sale price isn't always what you think it is. I'm not really up in arms about them cooking the books, because I expect all of these companies cook the books, though that is beside the point in a way.

I'd send them all the screenshots and what not, and ask "Please explain these variations in the listed price of this sale, and provide the actual price the product sold for".

Or, get your local "Channel 5 on your side!" type reporter involved and have them hound stockx for an answer. You'd obviously be outing yourself as involved in the transaction, but at the same time this is small potatoes enough that I don't think you'd face any actual dangers.

 

[fahqu001]

Clean off those keyboards, boys. It’s time to re-form the NT Detectives Special Agent Division. I’ll start filing the paperwork to enforce the RICO Act.

Before we do, we need a hearty breakfast. I’m swinging past the doughnut shop. Y’all want anything?

P.S. Feels good to get the band back forget. Now let’s go catch us some bad guys!

 

[cs02132]

dblplay1212 do you know a contact number or email for stock x where they’ll actually respond? My account was breached over a year ago and I never fixed it. Been trying to get back into my account and I can’t

Edit: nvm I got it

 

[fapmasterjr]

so they went from OK/Selling fakes to now manipulating buy/sells ??!! Oh stockx

 

[WASHED KING]

If sales are higher, they get more money on fees.

I'm sure Stockx hasn't been making nearly as much money this year as they did 2020-2021

 

[dinyc3st]

F StockX