This is the thinnest kind of file we publish, and it is worth being exact about why. We read 132 comments across five threads that touch TIGER, the store at the handle tiger-official. Two of them name the seller. Neither was written by a person describing something they bought.
One is a caption block from a haul post, made almost entirely of buy links. The other was posted by an automated account, and its subject is a comment that no longer exists.
You will not find a quoted review on this page, because there is not one to quote. You will not find a rating either — this site grades evidence and refuses to grade sellers, and here the evidence grades itself.
The 2025 comment is a list of links
In March 2025, a buyer posted a 15kg haul on r/FashionReps combining items from this store with items from another seller, shipped through an agent they name in the text. The comment our corpus captured is the caption: the word haul, the agent's name, a figure of 1200 CNY sitting next to the word shipping, then a run of item names with the buy links stripped out and the brand names deliberately misspelled to get past filters.
We are not reproducing it as a blockquote. Our stored copy of a comment is cut off at around 300 characters, and this one ends mid-word, in the middle of a product name. Presenting a fragment like that between quotation marks would turn a truncated caption into what looks like a sentence somebody wrote, and this site does not do that. Describing it accurately is the honest option.
What it does establish is narrow and real: in March 2025 a buyer had ordered from this store, combined it with another seller in one consolidated parcel, and thought the result worth posting. What it does not establish is anything about the items. There is no quality assessment in it, no sizing note, no comment on stitching or print, and no account of anything going wrong. It is an index, not a verdict. The figure next to the word shipping is one buyer's number for one parcel on one day, and we are not going to tell you what it covered or what yours would be.
The photographs, though, are the part our corpus cannot carry, and in a link-dump haul the photographs are the whole substance. The permalink is on the TIGER evidence page, and half an hour in the original thread will beat anything we can write from a caption.
The 2026 comment is a bot reporting an absence
The newer of the two, from April 2026, under a post about a few pickups from this seller, was written by an automated account. Its function is to mirror a comment the original poster pinned, so that people can find the links.
Three things had happened to it by the time we captured it. The account that wrote the pinned comment had been deleted. The body of the comment had been removed. And what our corpus therefore holds, as the single most recent thing anyone has said about this seller, is a bot noting that a comment containing links used to be there.
That is the newest entry in the file. It carries no opinion, no item and no outcome, and we count it as on-topic only because it names the seller.
Zero positive, zero negative, and for once the counter is right
Our own sentiment tally files both comments as neither positive nor negative. On most seller pages that counter deserves suspicion, because a count of two or three is a coin flip with a decimal point printed after it. Here it happens to describe the record exactly: nobody in our sample praised this store, nobody complained about it, and the reason is that nobody in our sample evaluated it at all.
That cuts both ways, and the direction people get wrong is the reassuring one. An empty complaint column is not a clean record. It is an empty column. What you want from a seller file is a problem that appears in it and an account of what happened next, and this file contains no problems because it contains almost nothing.
The brand list is a scrape artefact
Our indexing attaches eight brand labels to this store: Denim Tears, Corteiz, Trapstar, Stussy, JNCO, Palace, Supreme, and Trapstar again in different capitalisation. That duplicate is a useful accident to see, because it shows you what these lists are — strings harvested from captions and threads, deduplicated imperfectly, not a stock list anyone typed out on purpose.
Read them as a rough map of what got photographed and discussed, which is streetwear and denim, and nothing more. We hold 225 items from the store, sorting into apparel, bags and outerwear. These are replicas throughout; nothing here is or claims to be the brand named on the label.
What you can actually check
The store is not password-gated. That sounds minor and it is the single biggest practical advantage this seller has over the locked stores in our index, such as the eight-year-old NAISAN record, where the usual next step is closed to you. Here the albums open, so the catalogue can be inspected before you spend anything.
A workable sequence, given a record that tells you nothing:
- Browse the albums and read the spec cards. Measurements in centimetres beat a size letter every time.
- Find the original haul thread and look at the pictures. Somebody has already photographed this seller's work; our text file just cannot carry it.
- Order one item, not a haul. A first order from an unreviewed store is a test, and tests should be cheap.
- Make the QC photos the decision point. How to read QC photos covers what to look for and what to ignore. It is the last moment a mistake costs you nothing.
- Assume nothing from the silence. No news about a seller is genuinely no news.
Buying runs through a shopping agent, since a Yupoo store is a photo host rather than a shop. Paste a product link into the link decoder and it returns a buy link for every agent this site supports, recovering the item from the URL's own shape even when the link is dead. If this is a first order, read how to buy reps first, and why we do not rank sellers for the method to use when a file looks like this one.