Astley Pipes = Re-Stamped Estate Pipes (Photos)

[flakyjakey]

So, pitchfork, in this interesting thread you've set running what seems a very cunning and slippery hare! Is it cornered? Is it winded? Or is it sitting happily in a copse watching the hounds baying in frustrated futility?
On the subject of "fraud" there is the "damning" photographic evidence you provided which was supported by other pics. There is rebornbriar's information on the mystery of the large number of old estate lots bought up by Mr Ezrati and not properly accounted for. And there are other more circumstantial concerns raised by others. If a pipe is re-branded as being made by another maker and then sold on for profit, it seems to me that this would indeed constitute fraud.
Under the UK Trading Standards Act I believe that companies, especially large ones like eBay, have a legal "Duty of Care" to its clients/customers (i.e. us who pay for the pipes). If they should act knowingly for another company that is selling potentially counterfeit/fake products it seems to me that they would be in breach of this duty. I am sure that eBay will have many protective elements written into its business articles, but if they have not been informed of their customers' (the pipe smoking community) concerns about the issue you have raised, and which has generated such a stromache in the forum, they can simply say they were completely unaware and continue to allow "made-for-Astley" pipes to be sold through them. In other words, would you consider communicating this thread to the appropriate eBay representative simply as a "heads up" about the anxieties and depth of feeling in the pipe-buying fraternity? Many have said that eBay won't care, but they might!

 

[ssjones]

There is not a chance Ebay will give a hoot in hell about this issue. Check the thousands (millions?) of fake pocketbooks, watches, jewelry that is sold on Ebay every day.

 

[flakyjakey]

Okay Al, I know little about eBay and bow to your knowledge/experience

 

[pitchfork]

I don't know if ebay would care or not. It would make more sense for a complaint to come from an aggrieved buyer, not just members of a pipe forum. I have bought from them once -- a Tilshead Lovat that, in spite of what we have learned, I have every reason to believe is genuine. It's a good pipe and I'm happy with it. Ideally, the complainant would be the person who purchased the Taylor-made "Astley" we've been discussing. Does anyone know who bought it? Similarly, the Charatan-made "Astley" would be a viable option. Alternatively, anyone who has bought an "Astley" pipe from that account, especially if it's an estate, could argue that their purchase is also suspect, based on the other clear examples we've seen.

 

[flakyjakey]

All good points pitchfork, and I agree with them all. It will be interesting to hear if one of those buyers is identified.
I also agree with your comment about the Tilstead. Upshall Tilsteads and p-grade Upshalls represent real quality for the money in my view. I have a few Upshalls (from g- to e-grade). They are all great pipes and I wouldn't part with them.

 

[ssjones]

Okay Al, I know little about eBay and bow to your knowledge/experience

I wasn't trying to be a smart aleck, but rereading my comment made it sound like that to me....

The sheer volume of auctions would practically make it impossible for that kind of follow-up from Ebay (particularly here since Ezrati owns the Astleys and Upshall trademarks). There wouldn't be enough time in the day for Ebay to chase down these type of issues. It's a bit like the wild-wild West in that regard. Ebay lets the feedback function serve as the only Sheriff in town. If you have a dispute, they will side primarily with a disgruntled buyer, at least that has been my experience. That is one reason why great sellers like Mike @ BB, Pipestud, etc. work so hard to maintain their reputations, it is everything.

 

[pitchfork]

BTW, if anyone wants a genuine Astley pipe, there's an unsmoked one on ebay with a very low bid (no affiliation, etc.). The "Tudor Rose" line is well documented as an Astley product.
www.ebay.com/itm/ASTLEYS-UNSMOKED-TUDOR-ROSE-BILLIARD-SHAPED-PIPE-WITH-NICE-GRAIN-PIPESTUD-/390644512066?

 

[flakyjakey]

No offence taken Al, I did not think it was a 'smart alec' comment.
You are absolutely right about the importance of sellers maintaining their reputation. In this regard I notice that on eBay a number of very good-looking and attractively-priced 'real' Upshall made pipes have not sold. I have 5 Upshall pipes of various grades and can vouch for their build, grain and smoking qualities.
Could it be that the continuing "Astley" controversy is beginning to tarnish the whole Upshall brand? I for one would hate to see those classical straight-grain Upshall-made pipe disappear.

 

[pitchfork]

Could it be that the continuing "Astley" controversy is beginning to tarnish the whole Upshall brand? I for one would hate to see those classical straight-grain Upshall-made pipe disappear.

It's possible, but I haven't seen that happening yet. Moreover, it remains an open question as to whether Upshall is producing new Upshall pipes or not -- although that's probably a topic for another thread. It's been discussed before, but I forget if any consensus was ever achieved on this question.

 

[ssjones]

I can't recommend the Tudor Rose line based on my one pipe experience. Unlike Ferndown, where that grade is a premium product, in Astley speak that is a 2nd line. I had one and the stem work, which was a plasticky, premolded affair was awful.

 

[pitchfork]

can't recommend the Tudor Rose line based on my one pipe experience. Unlike Ferndown, where that grade is a premium product, in Astley speak that is a 2nd line. I had one and the stem work, which was a plasticky, premolded affair was awful.

Interesting. Thanks for that, Al. Sorry to hear your experience was less than great with that line.

 

[cigrmaster]

Here is a reply I received after the owner I presume read this thread.
" Dear Sir,

As explained earlier Dunhill manufactured the pipe you bought. All pipes listed as Dunhill made are Dunhill made. After Dunhill made the bowl it would have been sent to Mr Bentley. He would then outsource the pipes to varying pipe manufacturers depending on the type of mouthpiece, finish and whether the pipe was to be silver banded or not. I have read the various opinions on the link you forwarded and find all the bs nothing more than rumour and speculation by people who are ignorant to the realities of pipe making. Some pipe smokers are so sad all they do is speculate and hope someone out there will listen to them. I thank you for bringing this to my attention. Best regards, M Ezrati - Managing Director James Upshall pipe Company"

 

[ssjones]

My Tudor Rose did have an A stem stamp. It was sold as unsmoked, but that was not the case so I rec'd a refund. The bowl looked great, it may have been a good smoker but the stem didn't impress me much (and I have seconds line GBD/Comoys, etc. for comparison and find them to be fine)

 

[pitchfork]

Harris,
Three things about that response.
1. What is advertised as a Dunhill-made pipe has now been walked back to "a stummel from the Dunhill factory." So it's not a Dunhill-made pipe with an Astley stamp after all. It's a stummel from the Dunhill factory finished by someone other than Dunhill. The ebay descriptions are misleading in this regard.
2. The response tries to dismiss the critics as "ignorant," insinuating that only someone with inside knowledge of pipe manufacturing could raise legitimate questions about these pipes. This is a classic tactic used by people who don't want to be held accountable for their actions ("We're the experts, you are mere peons -- why should we bother answering your ignorant questions?") Now, the process by which Astley pipes were/are made MAY account for some of the questions rebornbriar raised about the silverwork on these pipes. Otherwise, this claim of specialized knowledge says nothing about the questions raised here.
3. Most importantly, the response never addressed the questions raised about the Ashton-made "Astley" that started out as a no-name estate pipe, or about the "Charatan" discussed here. They were bought and sold by the same account. Why? They started out as no-name estates and then turned into "Astley" pipes. How is this anything other than what it looks like? The response doesn't even begin to address this.

 

[cigrmaster]

pitch, I totally agree, his response was completely lame and in my opinion confirms his guilt. I believe he is taking people to the cleaners and is completely dishonest.

 

[flakyjakey]

pitchfork, I am sure you are right on all counts, but what would you propose doing?

 

[pipinho]

Are people really blaming ebay?

 

[flakyjakey]

The "blame" seems to lie with "Astley/Upshall": if indeed they are re-branding pipes as e.g. "made by Dunhill/Charatan/etc", and selling them on as such, when they have not actually been made for Astleys by these elite companies, this would constitute fraud.
The issue regarding eBay is that if eBay were aware that a Company such as Astley/Upshall was selling falsely branded pipes through them, eBay, according to the UK Trading Standards Act, would be in breach of their statutory "duty of care" to their clients/customers (a bit like a car dealer knowingly selling on a dodgy car).
So the remaining questions are whether the photographic evidence shown in this thread is sufficient to establish fraudulent practice by Astley/Upshall, whether eBay is aware of the concerns raised here and whether they should be informed. Some other members doubt whether eBay would care. I'm not so sure; estate pipes do represent a significant part of their business.

 

[cigrmaster]

Knowing ebay, you would need a lot more evidence than those pictures. They could care less about protecting their customers, all they care about are their fees. They allow shills, they allow sellers to bypass their buy it now system even when presented evidence someone is doing it. Their security department is a complete joke, and Upshall will be allowed to continue unless incontrovertible proof is presented.

 

[ssjones]

Their security department is a complete joke, and Upshall will be allowed to continue unless incontrovertible proof is presented.

Worse still, I suspect if they were presented with incontrovertible proof, they'd turn a blind eye.
It would be an interesting legal question as to if any Ebay seller has been charged with fraud thru Ebay sales, by Ebay or outside authorities (who handles fraud on an internet auction, ie seller is in Texas and a buyer in Maryland). Perhaps no one? With the proliferation of opportunistic law suits these days, surely someone has tried to do this?
Google didn't yield much, save this 2002 (!)MSNBC article on Ebay fraud. Read it, my first sentence in this reply is supported:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3078736/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/evidence-undercuts-ebays-tough-talk-fraud/#.UhotR3-Zbbo

(note the case of the fraudulent stamps sold).

My guess is the sports memorabilia section has 100 times the fraud and oversales has to vastly outnumber the meanger number of tobacco pipes sold world wide.
Some other interesting Ebay fraud hits:

http://www.truetex.com/ebayfraud.htm
And interesting, this, the "Internet Crime Complaint Center"???

http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx