Some Retailers Criticize Amazon's Recall of Eclipse Glasses (kgw.com) 150
An anonymous reader quotes Portland TV station KGW:
Amazon issued a widespread recall for solar eclipse glasses early Saturday morning, one week before the August 21 eclipse. That move stunned some sellers who say their glasses are verified safe.... "We recommend that you DO NOT use this product to view the sun or the eclipse," Amazon wrote... "Out of an abundance of caution, we have proactively reached out to customers and provided refunds for eclipse glasses that may not comply with industry standards." At least a dozen KGW viewers said they received recall notices from Amazon Saturday... KGW viewer Heather Andersen said she bought two separate sets of solar glasses and learned both were not verified. "I give up," she tweeted...
Manish Panjwani's Los Angeles-based astronomy product business, AgenaAstro, has sold three times its average monthly revenue in the past month. Ninety-five percent is related to the solar eclipse... Panjwani's eclipse glasses come from two NASA-approved sellers: Thousand Oaks Optical in Arizona and Baader Planetarium in Germany. He said he provided documentation to Amazon proving the products' authenticity weeks ago, with no response from Amazon. On Saturday morning, he woke up to 100 emails from customers after Amazon issued a recall for his products. "People have some of the best glasses in the world in their hands right now and they don't believe in that product," he said. "They're out there looking for something inferior." Panjwani said Amazon is temporarily retaining some of his profits because of the recall. He also has almost 5,000 glasses at an Amazon warehouse, which customers can no longer purchase. "That's just sitting there. I cannot sell it and I cannot get it back in time for the eclipse," he said.
Manish Panjwani's Los Angeles-based astronomy product business, AgenaAstro, has sold three times its average monthly revenue in the past month. Ninety-five percent is related to the solar eclipse... Panjwani's eclipse glasses come from two NASA-approved sellers: Thousand Oaks Optical in Arizona and Baader Planetarium in Germany. He said he provided documentation to Amazon proving the products' authenticity weeks ago, with no response from Amazon. On Saturday morning, he woke up to 100 emails from customers after Amazon issued a recall for his products. "People have some of the best glasses in the world in their hands right now and they don't believe in that product," he said. "They're out there looking for something inferior." Panjwani said Amazon is temporarily retaining some of his profits because of the recall. He also has almost 5,000 glasses at an Amazon warehouse, which customers can no longer purchase. "That's just sitting there. I cannot sell it and I cannot get it back in time for the eclipse," he said.
Massive Retailers Have Market Power Over Suppliers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The trick is for all the legit retailers to file a class action against Amazon in California. It is Amazon's own fault for letting in a massive number of no name knockoff vendors from China (or same with a single front person in the US forwarding their cheap knockoff junk with zero vetting).
Amazon should eat every penny of the losses because they are the ones that polluted their marketplace, not the legit vendors. I hate how Amazon has become a third world flea market in a lot of ways. I would much rathe
Re: (Score:2)
Both ... (Score:5, Informative)
Both Thousand Oaks Optical and Baader are really well-known in the astro community. They both have been making solar filters for a long time and I doubt they would jeopardize customers safety and their brand recognition like this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Both Thousand Oaks Optical and Baader are really well-known in the astro community. They both have been making solar filters for a long time and I doubt they would jeopardize customers safety and their brand recognition like this.
It's sad when organizations whose good reputation likely exceeds that of Amazons' existence have been impacted in this way.
The only thing that's worse is damn near every vendor is now too small to do a damn thing about it. Even if they could afford a sizeable class action suit against Amazon, it would not be settled for years while thousands of unjustified 1-star reviews pile up.
Just another reason we should despise monopolies of any kind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Both ... (Score:5, Informative)
I buy stuff from AgenaAstro all the time, they are the best in the business. And know the Baader solar film very well. It is in fact the industry standard - it is widely used for telescope solar filters. The products in question are all ISO and NASA certified.
Amazon is simply screwing AgenaAstro not out of "an abundance of caution" but out of impulse and ignorance, and greed (they are keeping some of Panjwani's money for good measure). If they are just exercising their own caution, give him all of his money. Bezos can afford to take the astronomically small risk.
In fact they should buy his inventory from him. Let Amazon take the hit out its own "abundance of caution".
Re: (Score:2)
Bezos can afford to take the astronomically small risk.
I see what you did there.
Re:Both ... (Score:4, Informative)
While I'm sure AgenaAstro is fine, I wouldn't put it past some fly-by-night shop making glasses out of the photo filter film (because he was unable to purchase the visual filter film). So Amazon is justified in their caution. Where they're screwing up is in bringing up this issue so close to the eclipse, and not reviewing the documentation AgenaAstro sent them in a timely manner.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Both ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Thousand Oaks and Baader glasses just got caught up some sort of frantic Amazon response when the retailer realized some people are selling unsafe crap and they don't have the expertise (and don't care enough to source it it seems) to tell the good from the bad. :) They will complement my Baader Astrosolar filters for the telescope and Thousand Oaks for the binoculars.
I tried out of curiosity to order a pack of glasses from an ebay seller in the UK (I'll be going to the US in a couple of days). I got glasses with all the marks (CE, ISO...), through which you could see a CFL bulb and its surrounding glow! If they let that much visible light through, who knows about IR/UV - well I could test, but not worth my time... (Note to readers, through real ND5.0 or denser glasses you would only be able to see something as bright as the filament of an incandescent bulb, nothing else - oh, and the sun of course).
The experiment done, I got a refund and ordered from a proper retailer
It is interesting that Baader had to modify their classic Astrosolar filter that we use in telescopes, in order to get the strict ISO rating, as they allowed a little bit of UV to pass which meant you could take photos at near UV (e.g. Calcium II K-line).
Re: (Score:2)
Important warning too, many cheaper ND filters do not IR/UV so don't just buy ND5.0 without full spectrum filtering.
Re: (Score:3)
You wanna see daytime astronomical stuff, at awesome size and resolution?
Get a cheap-ass Newtonian telescope that you don't give a fuck about, and use that to project a daytime event, or just the plain old sun, onto a non-textured white wall.
Now you can take pictures of it without destroying the shit out of your camera.
Re:Both ... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Both ... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can thank Amazon's horrible co-mingling of inventory. Even Amazon won't even know which ones are real or fake once they hit the warehouse shelf, so they have to take them all down. I'm sorry some imbecile modded you down but I think you are right, and this is probably what happened.
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering if this exact problem was the source of the trouble. The co-mingling BS has to stop. It's why I don't buy memory cards, charger cables, and certain other often counterfeited items through Amazon anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course I also ordered them a year ago...
Re: (Score:3)
This is overstated. Azazon does not co-mingle inventory unless the seller reuqests it. The default is to keep each seller's inventory of the same SKU separate. In fact, the bar-code labeling you have to supply for FBA inventory has a unique FNSKU that identifies item -and- seller.
That said, you can choose to not label and co-mingle. As a seller I think this is stupid - as other sellers that co-mingle could be selling sub-par (expired, counterfeit, damaged) product,
Re: (Score:2)
it's like the stuff you would find in a fashion brands "factory outlet" where one of the pockets is the wrong length, or the fly is two inches off center, etc. but the chinese resellers don't tell you it's a second which is the problem.
The bigger problem is that this is boing done with safety gear to begin with. That's totally different from factory second fashion accessories.
Being upfront about selling QC-failed safety gear is still pretty shitty, especially if it's still being sold for its intended purpose: "Watch the eclipse with these factory rejected solar glasses!"
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon has a warehouse problem where counterfeit products from other sellers are co-mingled with the real thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's the point, actually.
The point (from the seller) is that he is selling (he says) completely authentic, legit glasses and provided proof of such to Amazon.
As a consumer, there is almost no way to prove it. Anyone can print whatever the hell they want on the glasses, all the certifications, link to authentic websites, etc - nobody would catch that in time. They can take the EXACT text from legit glasses and print them there.
We bought some months ago (not from this guy). They said on Ama
Re: (Score:3)
By the time your eyes hurt, the damage is already likely done.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what?
As kids, we all try looking at the sun once or more.
And our eyes didn't melt, nor did we go blind.
Occasionally in life, we are dazzled by a blindingly bright light. Life goes on.
I've got glasses. They seem pretty good. I'm going to use them. I genuinely don't know that they are certified. It's literally impossible to tell...and really, I don't care.
I'm not saying it's not worth being careful. I'm saying that I'm not going to cringe in terror at the idea of looking through only-90%-good-e
Re: (Score:1)
Except that vision damage, short of catching a high watt density laser full on, takes a few hours to onset, but once you are blinded, that is it you are never going to see again. It is kind of like nuclear radiation. Once you know you are being injured, you are already screwed...
Eclipses are not that big a deal, just go outside, see it dark in the middle of the day and then check out the pictures posted online of the eclipse. Eyesight is our most critical of the 5 senses, with hearing being next most cri
Warning... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Surge pricing.
Anyway, if you drink enough vodka and grapefruit juice, you can view the eclipse with the naked eye. I read it in a men's health magazine. Wait, maybe the article said you can view the eclipse naked.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, flimsy paper and solar film going for $10+ each now...not a week ago it was a buck a piece for the cheapy (and probably non-certified) glasses.
I got 3 pairs of nice plastic ones for maybe 10 bucks...guaranteed certified except I probably have a recall notice too. FML.
B&H included a 5-pack for free when I bought a lens recently...I almost refused them (returns are complicated by 'free' items) but now it sounds like I could sell them for $20 each!
Re: (Score:2)
"Profiteering" is just another word for market economics. This is just supply and demand. The supply is limited, the demand is surging, so of course the price should go up to the market-clearing level. The alternative is rationing and shortages, which is idiotic.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they going to build factories to speed up production to meet demand, for a product that no one will want to use in over a week?
Supply is quite limited compared to the current demand, then after the eclipse there will be a surplus. Bubble economics at work.
Re: (Score:2)
An annular eclipse is cool, or a partial, but a total eclipse is fantastic.
Most people can walk off the job for five minutes without disrupting things. There are exceptions.
Re: (Score:2)
The interesting thing about cheap knockoffs, is the fact that they are cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
It is bigger then on-line, it is putting all your product into any one retailer in general is risky. The product that you sell that accounts for 100% of your profit is 1% of the profit of the retailer. Their interest in selling your product is limited to if they can make money from yours, or if your spot can make more money then something else.
If your product is a liability then chances are you going to loose that retailer.
Re: (Score:2)
If you diversify, you can still wind up selling 90% of your stuff through Amazon, because a lot of people buy stuff through Amazon. If Amazon screws you over, you're probably screwed no matter what you did.
How about this (Score:1)
We stop acting like children thinking a solar eclipse is a once in a life time event.
There's another one crossing the US in 2024 (south to north) by the way. And being in the path of totality is nothing special. Believe me I've been there, it's nothing to write home about.
The only reason to pay attention to this is if you're a scientist doing research. If you're not, you will be very disappointed.
Re:How about this (Score:5, Insightful)
No one who has actually seen a total eclipse of the sun is disappointed. No one.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're one of those pussies who's afraid of UV light, you're probably not going to be going outside to look at it anyway.
Have you never enjoyed a day at the beach? An afternoon picnic? Are you one of those douches who wears dark sunglasses all the time?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have these little things called EYES focusing the UV light.
Oh, and you might not realize but excessive UV does damage your skin. Luckily for you, skin heals quickly and easily except in extreme cases.
Your retina? Does. Not. Heal. Any damage is permanent and, while your eye will adapt and 'fill in' blank spaces of damaged retina you will forever have a demonstrable blind spot. Go google laser eye injuries for some funtastic examples of how well that goes over.
Re:Eclipse Glasses (Score:5, Informative)
I hope people don't listen to your advice. They may permanently damage their eyes. As a result, they may sue you. From https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/... [nasa.gov] :
The only time that the Sun can be viewed safely with the naked eye is during a total eclipse, when the Moon completely covers the disk of the Sun. It is never safe to look at a partial or annular eclipse, or the partial phases of a total solar eclipse, without the proper equipment and techniques. Even when 99% of the Sun's surface (the photosphere) is obscured during the partial phases of a solar eclipse, the remaining crescent Sun is still intense enough to cause a retinal burn, even though illumination levels are comparable to twilight [Chou, 1981, 1996; Marsh, 1982]. Failure to use proper observing methods may result in permanent eye damage or severe visual loss. This can have important adverse effects on career choices and earning potential, since it has been shown that most individuals who sustain eclipse-related eye injuries are children and young adults [Penner and McNair, 1966; Chou and Krailo, 1981].
Re: (Score:2)
No he is absolutely right - for the actual total eclipse. If you use solar filters for that you will not see anything.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need eye protection any more than you do on a normal day. In fact you need less. Much less.
Take the amount of time you spend staring at the sun on a normal day and compare it to the amount of time you plan to spend staring at the eclipse factored by the average amount of eclipse coverage over that time. A few minutes of staring at an eclipse is nothing compared to about a century of existing on this planet. Unless you're a cave dweller. And like I said, if you're worried about it, use your bu
Re: (Score:2)
You won't be blinded by glimpsing at the sun briefly...even if you do it a bunch of times over the years. Everyone knows that.
Staring at it for a few minutes straight? Very different story.
Kind of like the 1000's of hours of sun we all get but when we spend 6 hours straight at the beach we turn into a lobster. Skin heals. Retinas do not.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need eye protection any more than you do on a normal day. In fact you need less. Much less.
Take the amount of time you spend staring at the sun on a normal day and compare it to the amount of time you plan to spend staring at the eclipse factored by the average amount of eclipse coverage over that time. A few minutes of staring at an eclipse is nothing compared to about a century of existing on this planet. Unless you're a cave dweller. And like I said, if you're worried about it, use your built in sunglasses by squinting. If you're a pussy, use regular ol' sunglasses that block UV.
I know exactly what you mean! People keep telling me that I shouldn't put my hand in the gas flame of my stove, because I will get burned. But I say that the flame in my gas furnace is way bigger, and heats my whole freaking house! And yet apparently it is safe to use 5 months out of the year, even when I am asleep. But put a dinky little flame on the stove, and all of a sudden people are like "OH NOES, DON'T TOUCH THE FLAMES!". Pussies.
Re: (Score:2)
When the Moon completely covers the disk of the Sun, you can't view the Sun at all. So, safe, OK, but misleading.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In 1979, I put down my welding glass to see totality and just stared at it. The corona was so beautiful. Then I missed Bailey's beads because they stabbed my eyes with sunlight and I automatically flinched and closed my eyes. Looking at anything other than a total eclipse during totality is a really bad idea, but most of us will react appropriately.
Why Wait so Long to check on this? (Score:2)
welding glasses? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Shade #14. Not especially common, but not difficult to find (normally at least).
AFAIK, the plastic film isn't the filter so the thickness doesn't matter. It's the deposition layer on the plastic that does the filtering and that's a very well established technology. Not to mention, the vast majority of legitimate solar film comes from two manufacturers who have been in the business (and certified) for quite a long time. There's plenty of people who study the sun and want to look at it on non-eclipse days
Re: (Score:1)
I already sent one set back (Score:2)
I bought a pack of 4 eclipse glasses. The listing on Amazon claimed they were ISO certified. However, before they arrived, I had some doubt about the glasses because the manufacturer was not listed as a supplier of safe glasses. When I went to look at the listing again, it had been taken down (not just zero available, but the product was not found).
When they arrived, there was no ISO marking on the glasses. In fact, there was a marking "Do not use for Sun glasses".
So, they went back, then about a day later,
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, there was a marking "Do not use for Sun glasses".
Not saying the glasses were legitimate or not, but that warning would actually be good for real eclipse glasses. With actual eclipse glasses, you can look at an unfrosted incandescent light bulb, and all you'll see is a faint glowing filament surrounded by black. Using those as sun glasses would be a good way to crash your car.
Re: (Score:1)
The Logical Result of American Tort Law (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem Amazon faces is true of all safety equipment. If some fly-by-night or foreign vendor puts sunglasses on the store as being fit for solar eclipse viewing Amazon is on hook for injuries. The same will be true of any other safety equipment that fails. As the only deep pocket left in sight, Amazon will bear the hole burden. It is the result of making sure the injured person is compensated if someone is more responsible than the injured person. Our system encourages knee-jerk decisions just like this to prevent injuries.
It's the American way. Once you move away from caveat emptor, it is the only logical stopping place.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no possible way for you to confirm yourself before buying, when you're buying online. The problem here is that Amazon should have exercised more caution earlier--it should be beyond obviously simple here to refuse to list safety equipment without getting its claims verified & have in the contracts penalties for any seller who might let their standards...relax once they've gotten their listing OK. (Given the nature of Amazon, I'd suggest that there should be a financial penalty, and the sum tha
Re: (Score:2)
There's no possible way for you to confirm yourself before buying, when you're buying online
Actually, I don't believe there's any way to actually confirm AFTER RECEIVING in this case either. Virtually no one has even rudimentary testing equipment to verify UV filtering on glasses. You can make an approximation for the visible light using a bright bulb but that's only half the equation.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I'd expect testing the translucency of a lens to actually be a relatively simple exercise in spectroscopy, and the only thing you'd really need to do is find the right type of spectrograph. First check your light source to make sure it produces UV light, then do a second reading after sliding the glasses into place as a filter--and I'd actually be rather surprised if people haven't recycled paper glasses as a filter/lens source in science, since they're light, inexpensive, and sometimes distinctly
Re: (Score:2)
The problem isn't because of tort law, it's because of lack of meaningful regulation on places like amazon that allow counterfeiters to sell things and mix up inventory so much that even legitimate sellers have the counterfeiters' knockoffs sold from their storefront.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why Amazon is turning into a cesspool in their quest to sell everything to everyone. All the 3rd party sellers that afforded them that opportunity without having to sink all their own money...now have exactly the same quality as randos selling nonsense on fleabay.
Re: (Score:1)
The issue here is NOT tort law, but contract law: specifically, see Hawkins v. McGee [wikipedia.org] 84 N.H. 114, 146 A. 641 (N.H. 1929). If Amazon sells something with the claim that it is safe for eclipse viewing, but it is not, then Amazon is in breach of its contract with the purchaser, and is liable for any damages caused by its failure to live up to its side of the contract.
The issue with Amazon is analogous to me hiring a plumber to install a sink, with terms in the contract that the sink would not leak, and disco
Meade Instruments (Score:1)
Put them on (Score:2)
Put them on.
Look at the sun
Do your eyes hurt, Is it too bright, or leaving spots?
--Yes- return These are garbage
--No- Pass these have been verified.
You're not a garden slug. You can tell if something is too bright to look at. If not better move into a cave.
Re: (Score:1)
Put them on.
Look at the sun
Do your eyes hurt, Is it too bright, or leaving spots?
--Yes- return These are garbage
--No- Pass these have been verified.
You're not a garden slug. You can tell if something is too bright to look at. If not better move into a cave.
No. You can't tell. That's exactly why the fakes can be so dangerous. Some block visible light just fine but not the damaging levels of non-visible light, so you happily stare at the sun in perfect comfort while the UV burns away your retina. (Your retina doesn't have pain receptors. The discomfort from looking at overly bright objects is generated in the brain based on the input from the rods and cones.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. It's my understanding / recollection (I remember the one in '79) that you can stare right the eclipse bare eyed no problem (except the damage you're doing); it won't hurt one bit at the moment.
So ... I ordered #14 welding goggles months ago [Amazon]. I got the email telling me NOT TO USE THEM. Yet they are certified / stamped 14 [NASA recommended].
Now what the fuck do I do?
It's easy to test your glasses (Score:1)
If you (like me) bought glasses and then got a warning email from Amazon, the American Astronomical Society has a guide to checking your glasses [aas.org]
Where can you find glasses in stock? (Score:2)
I've checked about 20+ retailers, and they're all sold out. Anyone have a source on where a pair of glasses can still be ordered in time for the eclipse?
Re: (Score:2)
Your best bet at this point is probably to get them in person. Are there any planetariums or museums in your area? You might see if they have them in their gift shops. If there's a university with an astronomy department near you, they might be able to help you find some.
Re: Haha (Score:1)
I realize it's asking a lot but RTFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they didn't sell the certified products. Hoping to make a fast buck off the eclipse. Their products could in fact be safe, however because they are not certified, we don't know. And the seller doesn't really know either, but they got them and tried to sell them anyways. Too bad, so sad. But that is what you get trying to sell non-certified safety products. A warehouse of unsellable products. Next time they will learn to be more careful when trying to sell such things.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup - if you were selling good merchandise, then you should have warranted it as good, rather than putting up big disclaimers saying not to watch the eclipse with it.
More to the point.. (Score:2)
I wonder when they are issuing a general recall on most welding goggles/masks?
After all, you can get more damage, more quickly, if those are not up to standards.
Well? Amazon?
No, didnt think so..
Oh well, I am sure a pack of lawyers will have a whole lot of rather profitable fun from this.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, I have seen reports of customers who ordered #14 welding filters (as well as eclipse gear not even intended to be used in any way for viewing) getting the same refund notice.
Vendors selling fake glasses are a problem, but Amazon is forcing this on a huge number of items -- virtually anything eclipse related -- and will be burning far more legitimate sellers than illegitimate ones.
Re: (Score:2)
They are not certified for viewing the eclipse. Not being certified doesn't mean they won't work, but not tested to prove that it does.
When buying safety equipment, you need to make sure it is design to protect you from what you need it to protect you from. Welding masks, can come in a verity of different levels. From slightly darker then sun glasses, to nearly opaque. As well googles and masks are mostly designed for people who are looking down, if you are looking up, will it fully cover your eyes.
Sure
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In order to safely view the sun with a welding filter, you need a shade #12 or higher. The certification for those is more stringent than the ISO certification for visual eclipse filters.
Re: (Score:3)
And I'm going to watch a shaky vertical smartphone video recording of the eclipse being played back on youtube.
Better safe than sorry.
Re: (Score:1)
can't get the day off, so this doesn't affect hard workers so I have trouble caring. My employer here in Seattle said we get no time off that entire week, so I'm not sympathetic to lazy people that don't want to work.
There's a difference between a "real" job, and a good job.
A good job means you can take vacation whenever you want to, because you work for an employer who understands work/life balance, and respects employee requests for time off.
I work hard to earn my time off, so I'm not sympathetic to that fucking pathetic "lazy" excuse of yours. The fact is your employer is a greedy bitch who's looking to maximize revenue at the expense of every employee. Enjoy that real job of yours. I'll be on vacation having trou
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Going 31 years without a real vacation sucks, but it means I know I'm valuable.
It doesn't mean you're valuable... it means you are a slave to your job and have little value of your own time. It mean's you're a fucking idiot. I can 110% guarantee you that you're employer doesn't value you as much as you think they do.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why I got my time off request in in February. We're not going to close the company down, and I wanted to get it in early and beat the competition. There are places that can shut down.
If you can't get a vacation, find a real job. If your company will go broke if you take a week off, it's doomed anyway, because you're probably going to be out sick that long some time or another.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, if you're that scared about losing your job you must have close to nothing of value to offer employers.
Re: (Score:1)
...As someone that has worked for twelve years without a single day off, I have no respect for their kind.
I have no respect or sympathy for robotic idiots who think that working twelve years without a single day off should impress the rest of the sane people on the planet.
Our kind is not lazy for wanting a day off. It's called being human. You should wake up and try it sometime. Might stop you from looking back on your life in utter disgust, since there is far more to life than working every fucking day.
Re: People that have real jobs... (Score:1)
Yup. Been sitting by a river all day playing guitar after quitting work this summer. One of my best days in a long time.