675x4.5-inch(114.3mm) reflector

According to Terence Dickinson and Alan Dyer of The Backyard Astronomer's Guard, trying to sell a telescope on the basis of its magnification is a sign of a 'Christmas-trash scope'. In fact, they say, "We've seen models advertised as providing 675x! All are sure signs that the telescope is just a junky toy in disguise." In fact, according to the BAG, the highest usable power for a 5 inch telescope is 200x. I wish I'd known that before I bought my 4.5 inch scope. I can use my 4mm lens to observe at 125x, which gives fairly okay views, but when I add a 3x Barlow lens to get 375x, the image is all fuzzy.

4mm, 12mm and 20mm eyepieces

I didn't get a 12mm, but I did get the other two. The 20mm was Huygenian and the 4mm was Ramsden. I found out from reading the BAG, that these are crappy eyepieces. They don't actually say what sort of eyepieces you'll be getting. If this was being targetted at amateurs who knew what they were talking about, they would probably say.

1.25-inch format eyepieces

That's okay. It 0.965 inch you have to worry about. That's a symptom of CTS.

Professional primary mirror

Yeah, but what kind? Spherical or paraboloidal? An unknowing buyer will not understand these terms but they will understand professional and be led into thinking it's good.

5x24mm finderscope

That can be misleading. According to the BAG, many finders are advertised like this but end up being stopped down inside to about 10mm. But I can't see a good picture of the finderscope to decide if this is one of them.

NOTE: This is an astronomical telescope. As such, images will appear. . .
. . .upside-down. We will not accept returns for this reason.

Any amateur astronomer who had read into the business before going out to buy a telescope would already know this. It smacks of targetting unwitting parents, who know nothing about it, trying to get their kid a new telescope for Christmas (ie a CTS).