Discussion: Prime Peptide Solutions
-
Randy, you’re right about one thing: I confirmed that certain products were listed while their third-party testing was still in progress. I never denied that, and I’ve never claimed otherwise.
Where your argument falls apart is the implication that we represented those products as already third-party tested or tried to hide their testing status. We didn’t.
In fact, when you asked about the testing status, we told you directly that testing was underway and that the COAs would be published once the results were received. That’s the exact opposite of concealing it.
You also asked where our website advises customers not to purchase a product without a COA. We showed you the exact language in our Terms:
“IT IS RECOMMENDED NOT TO BUY A PRODUCT THAT DOES NOT HAVE A COA.”
You can certainly disagree with our decision to have products available while testing is pending. That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. But that’s very different from claiming we deceived customers about the testing status.
As for the “Add to Cart,” subscriptions, and promotions — those don’t magically turn an untested product into a product we’ve claimed was tested. The testing status is a separate issue, and we’ve been transparent about it.
And bringing up my former business partner is completely irrelevant to whether the statements you’ve made about the current business are accurate. If you have an actual factual issue with the products, testing, or documentation, I’m happy to address it. Personal comments about why someone left the company don’t establish anything about the quality or testing of our products.
So let’s keep this factual:
Testing pending? Yes, we’ve acknowledged that.
Claimed testing was already completed? No.
Customers told to avoid products without a COA? Yes — explicitly in our Terms.
COAs being obtained and published as results come in? Yes.If your criticism is simply that you believe products should never be available until third-party testing is completed, that’s a position you’re entitled to hold. But please present it as your opinion rather than claiming we concealed or misrepresented the testing status.
Where your argument falls apart is the implication that we represented those products as already third-party tested or tried to hide their testing status. We didn’t.
Cool! So you are a trash company who is willing to sell peptides to customers that have not come back validated and safe yet. That's all anyone needs to know about your site.
-
Randy, you’re right about one thing: I confirmed that certain products were listed while their third-party testing was still in progress. I never denied that, and I’ve never claimed otherwise.
Where your argument falls apart is the implication that we represented those products as already third-party tested or tried to hide their testing status. We didn’t.
In fact, when you asked about the testing status, we told you directly that testing was underway and that the COAs would be published once the results were received. That’s the exact opposite of concealing it.
You also asked where our website advises customers not to purchase a product without a COA. We showed you the exact language in our Terms:
“IT IS RECOMMENDED NOT TO BUY A PRODUCT THAT DOES NOT HAVE A COA.”
You can certainly disagree with our decision to have products available while testing is pending. That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. But that’s very different from claiming we deceived customers about the testing status.
As for the “Add to Cart,” subscriptions, and promotions — those don’t magically turn an untested product into a product we’ve claimed was tested. The testing status is a separate issue, and we’ve been transparent about it.
And bringing up my former business partner is completely irrelevant to whether the statements you’ve made about the current business are accurate. If you have an actual factual issue with the products, testing, or documentation, I’m happy to address it. Personal comments about why someone left the company don’t establish anything about the quality or testing of our products.
So let’s keep this factual:
Testing pending? Yes, we’ve acknowledged that.
Claimed testing was already completed? No.
Customers told to avoid products without a COA? Yes — explicitly in our Terms.
COAs being obtained and published as results come in? Yes.If your criticism is simply that you believe products should never be available until third-party testing is completed, that’s a position you’re entitled to hold. But please present it as your opinion rather than claiming we concealed or misrepresented the testing status.
“IT IS RECOMMENDED NOT TO BUY A PRODUCT THAT DOES NOT HAVE A COA.”
Hey guys my local street dealer told me he recommends that I don't continue buying crack from him because it could be laced with fentanyl but he still let me buy it from him. What a wonderful business establishment. Can't wait to leave him a positive review on Yelp.
-
Randy, you’re right about one thing: I confirmed that certain products were listed while their third-party testing was still in progress. I never denied that, and I’ve never claimed otherwise.
Where your argument falls apart is the implication that we represented those products as already third-party tested or tried to hide their testing status. We didn’t.
In fact, when you asked about the testing status, we told you directly that testing was underway and that the COAs would be published once the results were received. That’s the exact opposite of concealing it.
You also asked where our website advises customers not to purchase a product without a COA. We showed you the exact language in our Terms:
“IT IS RECOMMENDED NOT TO BUY A PRODUCT THAT DOES NOT HAVE A COA.”
You can certainly disagree with our decision to have products available while testing is pending. That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. But that’s very different from claiming we deceived customers about the testing status.
As for the “Add to Cart,” subscriptions, and promotions — those don’t magically turn an untested product into a product we’ve claimed was tested. The testing status is a separate issue, and we’ve been transparent about it.
And bringing up my former business partner is completely irrelevant to whether the statements you’ve made about the current business are accurate. If you have an actual factual issue with the products, testing, or documentation, I’m happy to address it. Personal comments about why someone left the company don’t establish anything about the quality or testing of our products.
So let’s keep this factual:
Testing pending? Yes, we’ve acknowledged that.
Claimed testing was already completed? No.
Customers told to avoid products without a COA? Yes — explicitly in our Terms.
COAs being obtained and published as results come in? Yes.If your criticism is simply that you believe products should never be available until third-party testing is completed, that’s a position you’re entitled to hold. But please present it as your opinion rather than claiming we concealed or misrepresented the testing status.
You wrote all of that and still skipped the screenshot of your own product page:
Each GLP-2 TZ batch is tested by an independent third-party lab; its lab report (COA) is posted on our COAs page.
That tells a customer the batch is independently tested and the report is available. Where was the GLP-2 TZ COA when your page said it was already posted?
Your terms don’t answer that question. Neither does telling me privately that testing is still underway. An email to me doesn’t change what your product page tells everyone else. There’s the factual issue you asked for. Address it.
And yes, I think selling peptides before completing your third-party testing is shitty practice. Call that my opinion all you want. That you’re doing it is a fact you’ve already confirmed.
Your own terms advise people not to buy products without a COA. I’m advising them exactly the same thing. Funny how that suddenly becomes a problem when somebody says it where customers will actually see it.
-
@randy @primepepsolutions Opinion or not, it has become the MINIMUM STANDARD these days when buying from retail sites. If you can't even do the very least, you are shitty business and deserve to be trashed on here and everywhere else, and no one should be buying anything from you.
-
@randy @primepepsolutions Opinion or not, it has become the MINIMUM STANDARD these days when buying from retail sites. If you can't even do the very least, you are shitty business and deserve to be trashed on here and everywhere else, and no one should be buying anything from you.
This post is deleted! -
@primepepsolutions thank you so much for posting here publicly so I know to avoid your business at all costs. Horrible business practices IN MY OPINION BASED ON FACTS.
-
@primepepsolutions thank you so much for posting here publicly so I know to avoid your business at all costs. Horrible business practices IN MY OPINION BASED ON FACTS.
This post is deleted! -
BeeKind, I understand where you’re coming from, and I want to clear up my position because I don’t want anyone to think I was trying to put customers at risk or intentionally mislead anyone.
I have been fully transparent about the fact that testing is underway. I have never tried to hide that. The testing process is in progress, and as results come back, the corresponding COAs are made available.
I also want to be clear that I was never trying to harm or hurt any of my customers. That has never been my intention. I take my customers seriously, and I understand why people expect clear testing information before purchasing products like these.
My Terms of Service also explicitly recommend that customers do not purchase a product that does not have a COA. That information is there for a reason. I understand that not everyone reads the Terms, but that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t provided.
That being said, after reading through this entire thread, I understand where everyone is coming from. I can see how the wording on the website could have created confusion, particularly where it stated that a batch was tested and that its COA was available when the corresponding report was still being processed.
For that, I sincerely apologize to everyone involved in this thread and to anyone who felt misled by the wording on the website. That was not what I intended, and I don’t want there to be any ambiguity about the status of testing.
I will be contacting my web developer and having the website language reviewed and corrected so that the testing status and availability of COAs are communicated as clearly as possible. I would rather address the criticism, fix anything that could have been clearer, and make sure there isn’t room for this kind of misunderstanding going forward.
I understand that some people may still choose not to purchase from my business, and I respect that decision. But I hope people can also recognize that I am willing to listen, acknowledge where the communication could have been better, and actually make changes rather than simply arguing with everyone in this thread.
Again, I apologize for everything that has gone on in this thread. I understand where everyone is coming from, and I appreciate the criticism—even when it was delivered harshly. My intention has always been to operate honestly and transparently, and I’ll be taking the appropriate steps to make that clearer going forward.
-
If you would change those products to “COMING SOON” and disable the add to cart option, you might be able to rehab your reputation. But, doubling down on a bad practice isn’t the way to do it.
-
@primepepsolutions But in your deleted post you write you don’t care. Now because you saw no one will purchase from you and you can’t actually defend your stance you had a sudden change of heart. LOL go away you fraud.
Your reputation is already ruined. You’re just like most sites out there who don’t actually care about their customers. Just looking to make a quick buck on high margined peptides. You’re just one of the worst at it in that you couldn’t do the very least which is wait until you have a COA for the peptides before you put them up for sale. Then you come on here and try to debate that stance as if it’s trivial and someone’s opinion if it matters or not. Go ahead and shut down your site now and try again with a new shitty website. Maybe you’ll have your COAs ready then.
-
Gotta love a screen shot before its deletion.
-
So if I am in the hospital and the nurse wants to give me a shot for pain, but she says We are not sure what is in the vial or the strength, but we will know in a couple of weeks. Do I take the Jab? HELL NO. I Test everything that I put in this ugly ass body.
-
So if I am in the hospital and the nurse wants to give me a shot for pain, but she says We are not sure what is in the vial or the strength, but we will know in a couple of weeks. Do I take the Jab? HELL NO. I Test everything that I put in this ugly ass body.
-
@primepepsolutions There are RUO vendors who sell products before testing is complete, they call it "pre-sales", and clearly display that warning in bold colors on the product page, not buried in T&C page.
This community is fairly aware of how those vendors do it right. You are not doing that and that's why you are getting heat.
My 2c!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login