"Same Product, Different Quality" Online and Offline? — Investigation into E-commerce "AB Goods" Chaos

Source: Economic Information Daily Author: Guo Yujing, Yang Na, Ji Ning

In recent years, as online shopping penetration gradually increases, many people’s shopping methods involve visiting physical stores for an experience and then placing orders online, carefully comparing online and offline prices. However, investigations reveal frequent chaos in e-commerce platforms’ “AB goods” practices, where some merchants lure customers with low prices by promoting “same style, same quality,” but in reality, there are hidden tricks such as style confusion, product downgrades, and mismatched goods. Behind seemingly getting a bargain are the harsh realities of consumers’ right to know being infringed and difficulties in providing evidence for rights protection. Why do “AB goods” issues persist on e-commerce platforms? How should merchants and platforms be held accountable? And how can consumers be better protected? Our reporters conducted an in-depth investigation.

Frequent Complaints

Recently, some consumers have complained on social media about purchasing a certain brand of down jacket. The product detail page online indicated a fill power of 90%, consistent with the in-store version, but upon receipt, they found a significant difference in the fill power label compared to the physical store.

On social media, many consumers have voiced similar complaints, mainly about the discrepancy in quality between online and offline versions of the same product. Interviews with merchants show that some use “same style and quality online and offline” as a low-price lure, intentionally misleading consumers to create the illusion of a bargain.

— Online and offline look the same but are not the same product. Ms. Yang from Beijing recently saw a pair of jeans from a certain brand in a physical store and ordered the same from its online flagship store. However, upon receipt, she found the product was very different from the offline version, and the same size waist couldn’t fit. Later, she compared it at a physical store, where the salesperson said, “This isn’t the same style; the online version is an earlier model, and it’s no longer available offline.” Ms. Yang believes that from the online promotional images, the appearance and even product parameters of the two are almost identical, which can easily confuse consumers.

Low-priced online products also hide “downgrading” tricks. Liu from Xi’an experienced this: a nearly identical refrigerator was sold online at hundreds of yuan less than in physical stores. After asking the offline staff, he learned that the online version had a downgraded system, which is hard to notice without carefully checking the specifications.

— “Display version” and “actual product” mismatch. Investigations found that some industry standards involve “display version” versus “actual version,” which are even considered an “industry unspoken rule.” Online merchants often promote high-quality fabric and meticulous craftsmanship using high-definition images to repeatedly showcase details, but what consumers receive are rough fabrics and uneven stitching, with a large quality gap.

On the Black Cat Complaint platform, consumers have reported that they bought a pair of shoes for 39.9 yuan in a live broadcast room, originally priced at 189.99 yuan, but found the sole was completely different from what was shown. Another complaint involved a cotton blanket purchased from a flagship store on a platform, advertised as “double-sided cotton,” but received with one side cotton and the other polyester fiber.

Random checks on multiple e-commerce platforms show that customer service representatives clearly state “same style and quality online and offline,” but complaints about differences between online and offline goods are frequent on platforms like Black Cat and Xiaohongshu, especially in clothing, daily chemical products, and small appliances.

Lawyer Zhao Zhanling from Jiweili Law Firm in Beijing states that if merchants do not clearly indicate “e-commerce version” or specify differences between online and offline products, it may be misleading. Online products should not only be labeled as “same style” but also meet the legal scope of consumers’ right to know, including all basic product elements. Deliberate ambiguity or omission of elements constitutes falsehood or concealment, infringing on consumers’ right to know.

Industry Competition Has Deviated

Why do “AB goods” frequently appear on e-commerce platforms, leaving consumers helpless?

On one hand, the chaos of “AB goods” is a result of the distorted competition in the e-commerce industry. In the context of a mature and saturated traditional e-commerce market, this “visible low price, invisible downgrade” approach has become a shortcut for merchants to reduce costs and achieve high profits. Experts interviewed believe that compared to offline sales channels, online prices are more transparent, and long-term price competition has led to “price wars,” with “low prices” becoming a primary strategy. Promoting “same style, low price online” also caters to consumers’ expectation that online prices should be lower than offline.

朱巍, associate professor at China University of Political Science and Law and vice president of Beijing E-commerce Legal Research Association, states that initially, brands differentiated products for online and offline channels to expand sales. But as e-commerce severely impacted offline sales, some merchants began to prioritize online over offline, leading to prolonged “price wars” that drove prices far below normal levels. This inevitably results in merchants sacrificing quality to gain profit and competitive advantage, pushing out good products with inferior ones.

On the other hand, current laws and regulations are not clear enough, allowing a mixed industry environment and making consumer rights protection difficult. Many consumers report that they are willing to pay for online products significantly cheaper than offline versions mainly because of online content—text, images, and descriptions—that are almost identical to offline products, with some slight differences not clearly marked. Some merchants do not label “e-commerce version” or “same as mall version,” intentionally leading consumers to believe that online and offline products look the same and are the same style.

Industry insiders say that especially during promotional periods like “Double Eleven,” merchants may adjust prices and discount similar or out-of-season products along with new and high-quality items.

Zhao Zhanling emphasizes that the key issue with “same style, different quality” is whether merchants clearly inform or intentionally mislead consumers. Proving merchant fraud or insufficient respect for consumers’ right to know is currently difficult due to the lack of specific definitions and standards for “AB goods.” Judgments are mostly case-by-case, relying on consumers’ perceptions, making evidence collection challenging.

Urgent Need for Refined Regulation

Regarding the “mismatch” issue, Zhu Wei states that e-commerce platforms must assume primary responsibility, using AI and other technological means for supervision, especially for products and merchants with frequent negative reviews and complaints, to ensure product quality. Platforms should also visualize merchants’ sales and credit scores, and once a merchant’s credit is marked, their behavior will be more self-regulated.

“Existing laws are principle-based. It is hoped that normative documents or industry standards addressing these issues will be introduced,” Zhao Zhanling suggests. Regulations should specify the definition and requirements for “AB goods,” such as detailed online product descriptions, including item number, color, texture, etc., and avoid vague language, hidden small print, or incomplete content that intentionally confuses consumers.

Platforms should facilitate consumer complaint and reporting channels, not only ensuring “complaint access” but also providing timely feedback and genuinely resolving issues. Regulatory authorities should also accelerate research on new problems and phenomena raised by consumers, quickly establishing long-term restraint mechanisms and deterrent measures.

Zhu Wei recommends that consumer associations and other organizations should play a guiding and supervisory role by strengthening targeted publicity, guidance, and periodically releasing negative cases to promote industry self-discipline. Consumers should also improve their discernment, shopping rationally—not just comparing prices but also comparing quality.

(Edited by: Wen Jing)