
eBay bans sales of face masks and hand sanitizers to combat price gouging - prostoalex
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/06/ebay-bans-sales-of-all-face-masks-and-hand-sanitizers.html
======
lend000
eBay is a somewhat unique case, because the goods are often resale items.
However, the reaction of many social-economics-warrior types suggests they
have failed to realize that this kind of behavior is exactly why there is such
a shortage of masks in the first place, despite somewhat recent scares with
SARS and Ebola.

Letting prices rise is one way to increase production in a hurry. If the mask
producers only get to make the same profit margin regardless of demand, why
bother fronting the money to increase stock or investing in extra storage
space, if there is no guarantee they will be able to recoup those costs during
black swans?

~~~
nitwit005
There's a shortage of masks because the production facilities for masks cannot
be built and staffed instantly. If you tried to start one up now, the price
will likely have collapsed by the time you have it running, leaving you with
an unprofitable facility.

~~~
londons_explore
I own equipment, have stock, and have staff that could start making masks this
afternoon (I normally make decorative covers for custom car interiors).

It probably isn't as fast as other production lines, but I could probably make
2 masks per second, and if I brought in night workers, that works out to a
million masks a week. Not much, but profitable if I could sell them at
inflated prices, but not at regular prices.

I don't though, because I don't have the contacts to be able to sell them. And
anyway, I'm scared of liability if my masks don't work as expected.

That equipment will sit idle if coronavirus spreads to my bit of the world.

~~~
MertsA
It's absolutely crucial that masks actually filter out very fine particulates.
N95 masks are rated to filter out >=95% of 0.3 micron particles. You probably
have the stock to make something close enough to a typical surgical mask, but
that's not going to protect the wearer from Coronavirus, at best it would
prevent a contagious patient from spreading it. You also need to form the mask
such that the edges will seal against the face. I doubt you have suitable
filter media on hand, and tight woven fabric will not cut it here. It's
significantly harder to trap virus laden particles in the air after they've
dried out, so coarse filter media is only going to be effective if it's right
in front of the source where the breath is still hot and humid.

~~~
sildur
But the droplets the virus uses to spread are bigger than 5-10 micrometers.
You don’t need a N95 mask to stop that.

~~~
DoctorOetker
Can you give me a reference for the "bigger than 5-10 micrometers" size?

Any scientific article, published or unpublished, peer reviewed or not...

~~~
thedailymail
Not OP, but here is an article that says the size-based definition of droplet
vs. aerosol remains a bit vague (the article is about influenza A virus, but I
believe the statement on vector size remains relevant):

"There is essential agreement that particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 5
µm or less are aerosols, whereas particles >20 µm would be large droplets.
Some authors define aerosols as ≤10 µm or even ≤20 µm (Knight 1973; Treanor
2005); particles between 5 and 15 to 20 µm have also been termed
‘intermediate’ (Couch et al. 1966; all values refer to the aerodynamic
diameter; for bioaerosols, they refer to the aerodynamic diameter after
evaporation). When reviewing the literature, it is therefore important to
verify the size of the particles being studied and the authors' definitions."

[https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsif.200...](https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsif.2009.0302.focus)

~~~
DoctorOetker
that's a great reference ... for Influenza A!

some diseases cause larger droplets, other smaller droplets...

I still look forward to a paper describing experimental measurement regarding
SARS-COV-II

Also if anyone finds a paper that measured the UV doses (fluences) for N-Log
reductions, I would be very happy to read it!

------
H8crilA
So they jacked up the prices from high (few people can buy) to infinity
(nobody can buy). How's that a good thing?

~~~
threeseed
Simple. People shouldn't profit from misery.

~~~
14
I wish this were true but instantly I think tobacco, alcohol and gambling.
Also where do you draw the line? Should Walmart be able to charge so much to a
struggling single mom who has to choose between eating herself and feeding her
baby? There is no easy solutions to this but I ultimately think big
corporations try and maximize their profits at any cost every single day and
no one says Walmart or whoever sells these masks should sell them at cost.

~~~
perl4ever
What is the cost of a mask when the capacity of the existing factories is
tapped out and (in principle) one more mask requires a new factory? It's fuzzy
when that point comes exactly, but it kind of has to exist. If you want to say
the cost of masks is exactly what current operations require, then that _one_
mask must be millions and millions of dollars. So who pays for it?

------
joshvm
The panic buying has also trickled over to isopropanol/IPA. I needed to buy
some anyway and I picked up a litre earlier this week for about £6. At the
time Amazon had a lot for sale, now they're all out.

Given that _consumer_ hand gel is basically just IPA diluted down to 60% (see
edit), I also bought a few tubes of aloe vera to mix it with... I suspect a
lot of other people had the same idea.

It looks like there's a lot still available on eBay, so if you really want to
by sanitiser, you might as well make your own. Just remember to dilute it a
little, 99% won't do too much damage, but it's not particularly kind to your
hands if you rub it in on purpose. It's also extremely flammable!

EDIT:

The WHO has published guidelines on making your own gel:
[https://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/Guide_to_Local_Production.pdf](https://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/Guide_to_Local_Production.pdf)

Interestingly Wikipedia seems to suggest that you should use at least 90%
alcohol to kill flu. And that lower concentration formulations are potentially
ineffective because they evaporate before killing stuff off. Hospitals use
70-95%. Obviously the higher you go, the more flammable things get.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_sanitizer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_sanitizer)

This article tested a number of gels vs rinses:

[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(02\)08426-X/fulltext)

> Based on our efficacy data, we do not consider any of the tested alcohol-
> based hand gels to be suitable for hand antisepsis in the health-care
> setting because their antimicrobial efficacy may be insufficient to prevent
> the spread of pathogens. Future ethanol-based hand gels used in hospitals
> should contain at least 80% (v/v) ethanol as the active ingredient and
> should be as effective as the EN 1500 reference alcohol within 30 s.

~~~
xvedejas
But my sanitizing gel says it kills 99.99% of all bacteria and viruses!

~~~
masonic
... leaving only the hardiest survivors, who now replicate in no time, now
with resistance.

~~~
aarongolliver
they don't have resistance

~~~
masonic
Of course bacteria have resistance. Bacteria mutate, some random mutation will
be resistant to a given antibiotic, and that new strain will propagate and
dominate.

Lots of people fall to understand that, which is why we have antibiotic-
resistant strains of gonorrhea in the wild now.

~~~
aarongolliver
Hand sanitizers use alcohol, not the same thing as a "prescription"
antibiotic. The same resistance arguments do not really apply the same way.

~~~
masonic
Many use triclosan, which was even legal in the US until last year, so a lot
of it is still in consumer hands.

------
johnpowell
I have the same "Coronavirus Protection Mask" in the screenshot and I got it
from Amazon a year ago. It barely works for keeping dust out of my nose when I
am using the table saw. I feel comfortable saying it will offer zero
protection for airborne illnesses.

~~~
paulryanrogers
Masks may do more to protect the vulnerable around you from what you may
unknowingly have. Please don't rule them out entirely.

~~~
johnpowell
These things are just a charcoal pad on the inside of a mesh with very large
holes. If sawdust can come in my cough can go out.

And I am not saying all masks are dumb. Just this specific one when it is
marketed as protection from the current problem. It is fraud.

I spent six hours on the cancer floors of the local hospital the other day
getting injections and we had to wear masks in the lobbies. It was the only
part of the hospital I know of that required them. But it is the cancer floors
and people have very little immune systems. When I was a few months into chemo
my WBC count was under 1200. So low they couldn't do anymore chemo.

So every little bit helps. And perhaps I am a bit angsty thinking that people
are using the masks for no reason when there are people that actually need
them. Again, I am not talking about the ebay garbage mask. I am talking about
the ones that actually could help our sickest people.

~~~
imglorp
ALSO be aware masks like that have one-way valves to make exhalation more
comfortable. They're just a little rubber flap so the exhaled air is not
filtered.

So construction mask like that might catch some inhaled droplets but won't do
protect others from exhalation if the wearer is ill.

~~~
dTal
I would imagine they will offer a similar protection to a surgical mask, which
also cannot "filter" outgoing air as there is no seal; it's just a line-of
sight protection, perhaps helped somewhat by absorbing moisture droplets. A
piece of tissue paper inside the valve would probably have the same or better
effect, if you could persuade people to do that purely for the benefit of
others.

------
forkexec
I got several 3M 1870's just in time then. Heh. They weren't _that_ expensive.
It was a pretty good deal actually.

To play the devil's advocate: price gouging _is_ market efficiency because
subsidized products in times of scarcity can be over-bought and resold for
more. It reduces demand to those who actually need it.

To play the angel's apprentice: price gouging _is_ wrong when people who
aren't made of money need a particular product and need to use it now
(inelastic demand). The rich can also bid a product up beyond what a poor
person could afford, and always prevent them from acquiring it.

I think in this situation, it might be better for the federal government to
crack open the enormous strategic stockpile, distribute masks to make people
chill out and seem like they're doing something on-the-ground. Even if it's
ineffective if worn properly, the emotional support value may make the
difference in mood and trust.

~~~
anigbrowl
_It reduces demand to those who actually need it._

 _And have money to afford it,_ something which is not accounted for in the
simplistic models of supply and demand that people are promoting with
religious levels of certitude up and down this thread.

~~~
dTal
So it would seem that the _real_ problem is wealth inequality (again!) rather
than "price gouging" as such. If everyone had the same purchasing power, there
would be no ethical problem whatsoever with rising prices in the face of
increased demand and limited supply - your willingness to pay would accurately
reflect how much you needed the product.

Essentially creating a command economy for a particular good is missing the
larger picture.

~~~
anigbrowl
It's a lot simpler to create a command economy for particular goods under
emergent circumstances than to reorder the entire economy such that everyone
is resembles _homo economicus_.

Command economies are fallible because they are run by humans with varying
levels of trustworthiness and accountability. But they have their uses, and
are often far mroe efficient than trying to automate the human factor away
completely and live in a idealized model.

------
3fe9a03ccd14ca5
People should be wearing these masks in public. I’m not sure why this is being
so actively discouraged.

You don’t know if you’re infected. You may be asymptotic for _days_. That’s
why we should be wearing face masks — to prevent us from accidentally
spreading it when we’re sick.

------
ce4
Hopefully they enforce the action worldwide. I guess the ebay listings don't
only include resale masks, but also stolen goods.

Berlin's Charite Clinic just had an incident where a shipment of up to 60.000
masks was stolen from the delivery truck (news in german):

[https://www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/mitte/charite-wurde-
komplett...](https://www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/mitte/charite-wurde-komplette-
lkw-ladung-mit-atemschutzmasken-gestohlen)

Edit: it was stolen from an intermediate storage room, not the truck.

~~~
BSVogler
Friend of mine working in a hospital reports the same. The staff is stealing
masks to sell them online.

------
userbinator
_" Our first priority is to ensure the safety of our employees and customers
around the world," an eBay spokesperson told CNBC in a statement._

...by restricting the sale of items whose purpose is to increase the safety of
their users? The inflated prices are bad, but making it harder to acquire such
items --- even at higher cost --- seems an even worse situation.

 _The spokesperson added that eBay is also "taking significant measures to
block or quickly remove items" on its marketplace that make unsubstantiated
medical claims._

On the other hand, I think this is a far more sensible thing to do.

~~~
DuskStar
> _The spokesperson added that eBay is also "taking significant measures to
> block or quickly remove items" on its marketplace that make unsubstantiated
> medical claims._

> On the other hand, I think this is a far more sensible thing to do.

it's sensible as long as the unsubstantiated medical claims are actually
unsubstantiated. There's been a lot of stuff going around (including from the
CDC) about how masks don't actually protect you from coronavirus and things of
that nature - whereas the truth there is that the right kind of masks _will_
protect you if used properly. But there's a limited supply, and telling the
masses that they don't work makes getting supply for hospitals easier...

------
cosmodisk
I live in London.As of at least last week,one can't buy masks or hand
sanitizers. This is a country of 60M people.Yet, when I commute to work,I see
probably 1-2 people with mask,which makes it about 0.1% of all people I see on
daily basis.So my question is,who has all the masks and who's wearing them?

------
seibelj
The best thing that can happen in an emergency is to let sellers increase
prices. When gas is scarce, let the price of gas go up. This signals to people
that they should carefully ration the supplies that exist, and only let the
people willing to pay the most get it. Supply and demand solves the problem
itself.

When you arbitrarily constrain prices, you make people wait in lines and
clever entrepreneurs stock up to sell at inflated rates on the black market.
Terrible policy!

~~~
perl4ever
I don't think it's as black and white as that. If demand exceeds supply, you
have to have some means of making them match. But it doesn't _have_ to be
price. You just have to accept that it _will_ be something and not pretend
there is no issue. In WWII, people got through it with rationing.

------
pishpash
This will simply cause a bigger panic buy next time. It would have been much
better for retail to raise prices until they are always stocked, that way at
least no one will have to pay shipping and eBay fees. If government wants to
have enough for healthcare workers, then pay up, they can get as many as
needed.

~~~
mentos
I agree with this criticism the most I think best move is for eBay to put a
price maximum in play.

------
robomartin
It might have been better to set a maximum allowed price per unit rather than
to make the supply evaporate.

To be clear, I think what a lot of these vendors were doing was just immoral.
I've been buying these masks for years for our shop. Normal pricing is in the
range of $12 for a box of 20 (or something like that).

I would allow a 2x to 3x premium and that's that. I don't have an issue with
someone who has an inventory that might be very difficult to replenish getting
a reasonable premium. That's OK. When people take an item like this and use an
emergency to charge $50 for a $0.50 product, well, that's just wrong.

~~~
sneak
Why is it wrong? No one is forced to buy it. The only people buying it are
ones who _consent_ to that price—same as any other transaction.

How can someone be a victim if they _want_ to engage in the trade, and
explicitly chose to do so?

~~~
zaarn
If someone is in a personal emergency, even if it's just perceived, that they
need to protect themselves against a virus, their consent is no longer freely
given. It's coerced consent, not by the seller, but by circumstances. In
plenty of european countries, price gouging is illegal for that reason. You
can't charge what you want, especially in situations like this.

~~~
sneak
No third party has any business telling the first and second that they can’t
transact at a price to which they both agree (or threatening them with
violence if they ignore them and do anyway). Governments that do so are
infringing upon their rights. All this feel-good sort of law does is make the
thing that they feel they need, which would otherwise be expensive, now be
totally unavailable. That doesn’t benefit the buyer or the seller, and in fact
makes the situation worse for the buyer who it supposedly wished to protect:
it just makes some busybody who is not even party to the transaction feel good
about themselves.

There’s no such thing as “coerced by the circumstances”. We all need to enter
into transactions to not die; we buy food, water, medical care even outside of
emergencies. Sometimes those things are expensive due to supply and demand.
This instance is no different.

~~~
zaarn
If a doctor were to ask a patient for 100k$ or they won't do a life saving
operation, then the patients consent is fabricated. Their need for a life
saving operation is the third party.

I think you misunderstood what I mean by third party; it's not necessarily a
person, legal or natural, interfering with the transaction, it can be a force
of nature, circumstances and many other things. It won't go away because you
don't like it.

And yes, there is such things as "coerced by circumstances", see above
example. Normally, when you buy food, water or medical care you're not in a
life threatening situation or perceived or real emergency. If you are then you
cannot give informed and free consent, simple as that.

------
jacquesm
They shouldn't ban the sale, they should cap the price.

~~~
tomp
Why not just buy all of them and resell them on your own website (without the
cap)?

------
agoodthrowaway
In California we have a declaration of emergency. This declaration makes price
gouging illegal for essential needs.

~~~
sneak
Neither masks nor hand sanitizer are essential.

------
hurricanetc
The only way we’re going to get more masks is to pay manufacturers a premium
up front and then absolve them of legal responsibility for the mask not
working.

Prices are high because demand is high and supply is low. Demand isn’t going
anywhere so the only answer is more supply.

------
sneak
Censorship (even private censorship, like this) in markets is deeply offensive
to me.

It’s not eBay’s place to tell people who want to buy these things that they
should not be able to.

------
pbreit
That seems reactionary.

------
koolba
This would a great time to launch an eBay competitor.

~~~
Scoundreller
AliExpress gets better and better every day.

Just bought an ultralight tent and sleeping pad off it, cheaper than Ebay.

~~~
34679
Might want to have a look at the return address after they show up.

~~~
Scoundreller
Non-issue for viruses: They don't live outside their hosts for more than a few
hours.

Bigger concern is the reduced cargo capacity from China these days.

------
elken
This seems like a terrible move. Even if the prices are extortionate, how can
eBay take away people's right to protect themselves?

Surely educating and empowering the general population to take their own
measures to prevent the spread is the best thing we can do in this situation.

If this is a matter of supply shortage. Why the heck have the people in charge
not covered this?

