Where's all the Christmas promos?

My only issue with that scenario is possibly giving one customer's address to another.
Agreed. Otherwise, I think it was handled quite well? I guess we also don't know for sure that they were being asked to re-distribute the order to other customers, it's just speculation.

Given this is the first time I've ever heard a complaint about GYC, it does seem a bit extreme to remove them from a vendor list, as opposed to issuing a warning.
 
He's taking the trash out. That purity test for the CJC no DAC..... yuck. Not great numbers on some of the other stuff either. I'm tempted to pick up some of the Tesa/Ipa and BPC/TB4 but I'm just not sold on acting on that temptation after looking at some of the Jano reports
Just a theory, so keep that in mind, but I've long suspected QSC uses blends to hide low bad/low purity raws since purity can't be measured in a Jano test for a blend.
 
I have learned you can negotiate with the majority of vendors to price match. Some will even beat a price if you provide them proof. If you have a preferred supplier who has proven themselves to you, it is worth asking. I feel like they respond well to loyalty of return customers.
Ok I never thought about this one.
 
Frl I'm gonna order from them anyway, I don't really mind as long as I get a good product tbh. They usually offer good CS, better than most vendors and the third party tests look good with some overfill.

At 300$ for 30mg reta it's a banger in my book

I don't blame you - the story probably isn't enough to tilt over my risk tolerance - and I believe the story is probably true too. As long as the product continues to test > 99% purity (among the constant sampling) and there's no big health scares then the cost differences make it worth dealing with less than professional middlemen (and the risk of them screwing something up).
 
Can you explain this more? What is a blend and why can't it be tested?
A blend is 2 peptides in the same vial. CJC/Ipa is a common blend. But purity can't be measured in a blend, only mass. The why has to do with how the purity is measured, I wouldn't do the explanation justice because I'm not a chemist.
 
My only issue with that scenario is possibly giving one customer's address to another.

Agreed. Otherwise, I think it was handled quite well? I guess we also don't know for sure that they were being asked to re-distribute the order to other customers, it's just speculation.

Given this is the first time I've ever heard a complaint about GYC, it does seem a bit extreme to remove them from a vendor list, as opposed to issuing a warning.

I feel like this was handled terribly and the community lucked out that the initial buyer was a decent person.

If you need help imagining how bad this all is, just replace the initial buyer with me in this story. Do you want me having your address? I barely want me having my own address. GYC 100% should of just said, "our mistake, happy holidays and enjoy your free peptides." Instead, they turned a buyer into a supplier.

Also, beyond that, would you feel safe if you unknowingly got some vials of peps that made a detour at my house first?

Am I overreacting here?
 
I feel like this was handled terribly and the community lucked out that the initial buyer was a decent person.

If you need help imagining how bad this all is, just replace the initial buyer with me in this story. Do you want me having your address? I barely want me having my own address. GYC 100% should of just said, "our mistake, happy holidays and enjoy your free peptides." Instead, they turned a buyer into a supplier.

Also, beyond that, would you feel safe if you unknowingly got some vials of peps that made a detour at my house first?

Am I overreacting here?
pffft, i'd have no issue with you having my address! you can come over and we'll dance to taylor swift! 😂

i def agree the best thing they could have done is to just say oops, keep it. but i don't think i have an issue with them wanting it back at their expense... it's kind of in line with amo wanting people to destroy their stinging peps to me. it's a bit annoying but doesn't really bother me. i do get very uncomfortable with them handing out other customer's addresses, though, if that's truly what they did.
 
I feel like this was handled terribly and the community lucked out that the initial buyer was a decent person.

If you need help imagining how bad this all is, just replace the initial buyer with me in this story. Do you want me having your address? I barely want me having my own address. GYC 100% should of just said, "our mistake, happy holidays and enjoy your free peptides." Instead, they turned a buyer into a supplier.

Also, beyond that, would you feel safe if you unknowingly got some vials of peps that made a detour at my house first?

Am I overreacting here?
I said that was the part that bothered me. But I also buy and trade from other people often. I know other people aren't comfortable with that. Its definitely not ideal and they should be warned not to do something like that again. I don't think I'm goin to write them off over this incident.

I also don't think they should have let the customer try to cancel the order, but they did and there was consequences for it.
 
Agreed. Otherwise, I think it was handled quite well? I guess we also don't know for sure that they were being asked to re-distribute the order to other customers, it's just speculation.

Given this is the first time I've ever heard a complaint about GYC, it does seem a bit extreme to remove them from a vendor list, as opposed to issuing a warning.
It is outrageous behavior because it compromises the anonymity of buyers and exposes the consumer shipping the item to legal consequences. If Tirzhelp talks to GYC and is convinced that they'll behave differently in the future, perhaps reinstating GYC at some point in the future would be warranted.
 
It is outrageous behavior because it compromises the anonymity of buyers and exposes the consumer shipping the item to legal consequences. If Tirzhelp talks to GYC and is convinced that they'll behave differently in the future, perhaps reinstating GYC at some point in the future would be warranted.
it only exposes the consumer shipping the item if the consumer chooses to ship it to the other consumers - which they can (and did) say no to. i don't know if i'd go so far as to say it's outrageous. it seems like an isolated incident - one that i don't want to see repeated, but not one that gravely concerns me.
 
I feel like this was handled terribly and the community lucked out that the initial buyer was a decent person.

If you need help imagining how bad this all is, just replace the initial buyer with me in this story. Do you want me having your address? I barely want me having my own address. GYC 100% should of just said, "our mistake, happy holidays and enjoy your free peptides." Instead, they turned a buyer into a supplier.

Also, beyond that, would you feel safe if you unknowingly got some vials of peps that made a detour at my house first?

Am I overreacting here?
That is fair, I may not care a lot because I'm Canadian and would spot that sort of thing right away, but I can see how it could've gone worse.
 

Trending content

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,942
Messages
31,807
Members
3,552
Latest member
Maizu
Back
Top