Have you ever bid to protect your cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>chiprop</b><p>I just placed a bid (in one of the current auctions) on a card similar to a card I currently own. I did this because it is currently too cheap and I would be delighted to own another at its current price. How many times do you find yourself bidding in an auction to protect a card you own? By the way, I did not do this to run up the price, rather to own another and cost average my investment. If I don't end up with it, then I guess I helped myself anyway.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>never have done it. Questionable ethics at best when we try to influence the market price this way.<br><br>Kmac

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>What is the ethical issue, as long as you pay the bill if you happen to win it? Many collectors go after duplicates for trade bait.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>It sounds like you didn't do so in your case, but bidding on another instance of a card with no intent of owning it for the sole purpose of pushing up the sale price, smacks of shill bidding. The difference between the two is that instead of taking the profits from the current sale, you'll get the profits when you sell yours. <br>I'm sure it happens all the time and many have no issue with it, but it always smelled funny to me.<br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>chiprop</b><p>I mentioned that I would like to own it at its current price, so why can't I bid like everyone else, free of guilt?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Dan - I think your thread title is what's causing the confusion - you're bidding to own AND to protect; I think the questionable ethics part is when you're only purpose is to protect.<br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Claude</b><p>If you don't bid on your own card I do not see anything unetical about it, I don't see why you should not be able to own more than one specific card.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Dan, this is a hilarious thread, truly. The more significant question to ask is: have you ever bid on your own cards to protect your cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I think the issue is if you bid on a card you don't need just to keep the price up, and of course we assume you don't own it, then how does it differ than if you bid on a card you do need? In either case you either win it and pay the bill, or get topped by somebody else and drop out.<br><br>If you think the card is worth say $1000 and it's currently sitting at half that, why wouldn't you bid?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>chiprop</b><p>Matt- You are absolutely correct, although I think it is samantics. The answer is - I think I bid for both reasons. I wanted to make sure if the card sold for X, that it would be mine. I don't think that I was trying to run up the price as much as I wanted another at 1/2 the price as my last one.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Dan - and that's why I think you're in the clear.<br><br>Barry - could the same argument be made with regards to shill bidding? If you think the card you are selling is worth $1000 and it's currently at $500, why wouldn't you bid $600? <br>As I mentioned above, a case can be made that the only difference between the two is that you directly get the profit from shill bidding and you only indirectly get the profit when you sell your other copy with the above. <br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Bidding on your own card is shilling, make no mistake. But if you see a card going cheap in an auction and you already have one, why not bid on it? You are allowed to own two of the same card.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>chiprop</b><p>&quot;Dan, this is a hilarious thread, truly. The more significant question to ask is: have you ever bid on your own cards to protect your cards?&quot;<br><br>I would think that happens more than most people think. Along those same lines, I would bet that most &quot;sold&quot; cards in auctions are manipulated, unsold, shilled, or never get paid for, leaving us sold prices that are not valid.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Dan, I think a very small percentage of realized lots in both Mastro and REA will not be the result of some form of shill bidding. It's like cheating on your taxes: lots of people do it thinking that &quot;everyone does it, so what's teh big deal?&quot; And no one thinks they'll get caught -- until they get caught.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Barry - agreed - it's a question of intent - same as shill bidding. With shill bidding you could argue that I see a card going for half price, why not bid - I'm allowed to own that copy of that card, it just so happens that I am the seller. The issue is that with traditional shill bidding your intent is to avoid a loss - if you're bidding for that same purpose over here, then I think you're in the gray.<br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Bidding to raise the price with no intention of winning is an equivalent to shilling. Bidding with the hope of winning and willingness to pay the bill is fine. What the initial poster describes deserves no apology, he has perfect right to try and win a second one.<br><br>I doubt single handedly 'propping up the market' works. The investor can't survive forever on his own bids.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>In Dan's case, he wants to purchase another card, so no one can accuse him of anything unethical. However, if one of the main motivations for bidding is to drive up the price of like cards, then there is certainly something wrong. I have a feeling that there is a large percentage of collectors who bid in this fashion to protect the value of cards that they own. In fact, this kind of activity by dealers and collector is probably one of the main reasons why prices for cards have not fallen dramatically in the past year.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Matt- completely agrre, it is a matter of intent and good faith. If you don't own a card and are an eligible bidder, you are free to bid on it for any reason whatsoever, and no auction house will ask you to explain why you are doing so.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>&quot;If you don't own a card and are an eligible bidder, you are free to bid on it for any reason whatsoever, and no auction house will ask you to explain why you are doing so.&quot;<br><br>I'm sure you also agree that just because the house lets you doesn't make it ethical. <br><br>Had to write that just for Jeff <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif"><br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br> Hi Matt,<br> Jeff went to Duke.... He has no ethics....<br><br> Be well Brian<br><br><br>PS Jeff knows I'm kidding.... Go Heels

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Greg Ecklund</b><p>Not ethical, but there's no way to stop it.<br><br>And as long as you're paying the bill what you do with your money is all your call.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Andrew</b><p>Such an act would be blasphemy in this highly ethical hobby. <br><br>&quot;Take your life in your own hands and what happens? A terrible thing: no one to blame.&quot; -- Erica Jong

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Brian, where the hell have you been? I expected you to rear your ugly heel a few weeks back! Seriously, congrats on that one.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>&quot;What is the ethical issue, as long as you pay the bill if you happen to win it? Many collectors go after duplicates for trade bait.&quot;<br><br>I agree

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p>Hi Jeff,<br> I've been busier than a one armed paper hanger lately.... I've been traveling, raising kids, and changing my computer system at work, so cards have taken a back seat. I even skipped going to the Final Four for the first time since 2005 when the Heels last won.... (My Mom is still pissed at me for not taking her). Luckily I was at the Masters for a couple of days of relaxation.<br> I hope you and the family are well....<br><br> Talk to you soon. Brian <br><br><br>PS Quit bidding up the Red Hindu Cobb...<br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Hey Brian- hope you are well. Wondered why we haven't heard from you in a while.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br> Hi Barry,<br> Have a Junior Mint.... They are very refreshing....After all; the Summer of George (the Hamptons) is right around the corner. Be well Brian<br><br>PS Prickly Pete is waiting for you....<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I'm in the Hamptons right now...it's been cold this month but it's getting warmer. Have to pick me up some of those Hampton's tomatoes. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br>Mom would be proud..... It was 88 here on Saturday and in the low 80's ever sense.... I'm sending it your way. Have a good weekend.<br> Be well Brian<br><br><br>PS LA is loading fine here in NC.... Want me to place a few bids for you???<br><br><br>PS 2 watch out for shrinkage<br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I have my eye on Jack Kennedy's golf clubs...I'm thinking I may go as high as $10,000 on them. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br> I thought Jack gave you his old set before he took office???? You wouldn't be running up the price to secure your investment... would you? That O'Henry candy bar chick will pay anything for those clubs...In fact she'll walk around half topless for them... smiley Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>&quot;Along those same lines, I would bet that most &quot;sold&quot; cards in auctions are manipulated, unsold, shilled, or never get paid for, leaving us sold prices that are not valid.&quot;<br><br>Is THAT why we keep seeing such high prices in auction after auction in a down economy? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif"><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Alan</b><p>Hey Brian - Welcome Back. How the hell was your sedar ?<br>Barry - Have you seen George Costanza &amp; his girlfriend in the Hamptons ? What was she wearing ? <img src="/images/wink.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="wink.gif">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>back to the question at hand...I have done this once...years ago...for the same reason. I owned the same, scarce card...the price seemed way below market...so I bid on it as I'd have been happy to own another at such a low price...It's not the same as shill bidding in my opinion.<br><br>Ultimately...I did not win the card! In my opinion, this is no different than placing a bid on any card...in any auction situation that you are interested in...at the current price.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>Clubs are fine, just stay away from Wallace Simpson's wedding cake...........<br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>The real wedding cake, or the Entemann's?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>joe d.</b><p>I have thought about it - - but I have never done it.<br>i'm not sure if it really protects your card value.... rather it just makes you more heavily invested in a card that is decreasing in value.<br><br>That being said....<br>there are cards that I own multiples of. <br>but each time I buy one it is because I want another one (not to protect a value).... and actually I would prefer values going down on the card (so that I could spend less).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>You can look at each lot as an individual transaction. You are free to bid on anything that seems to be undervalued. If you just happen to already own the same card, so what? Buy the second one as an investment.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Barry - I'm not sure I understand your stance - above I thought you agreed that depending on your intent, it could be unethical to bid in such a circumstance (if your sole purpose is to avoid taking a loss on your other copy of that card). What you just said seems to mean carte blanche to bid regardless of intent<br><br>As I said above you can use that same logic to justify traditional shill bidding:<br><br>You are free to bid on anything that seems to be undervalued. If you just happen to be the seller of that card, so what?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Matt- this discussion is bordering on silly.<br><br>If you consign a card you are not eligible to bid, or to ask a friend to bid under any circumstances.<br><br>If you do not own a card and choose to bid on it, you do not need to explain why you are bidding. Nobody cares. If you win it you pay the bill. If it starts getting pricey you drop out. What else is there to say?<br><br>Too much analysis and too much paranoia here. And I am done on this thread. And no private emails please. Thank you.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>I think it's a worthwhile discussion. If I recall correctly Lew Lipsett had a sizable article discussing it in a mid 1970's issues of TTS. I think he called it Market Price Manipulation or something like that. Regards.<br><br><p><br><br><br><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/mwieder" rel="nofollow">My Trade/Sale Page</a></p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>I think Barry summed it up perfectly. I've been trying to decide how bidding on a card you don't own is unethical in any case and have come up empty.<br><br>The difference between this and shilling is in how it relates to another bidder. If you bid on your own card or on behalf of the owner, you drive up the price to a single (hypothetically) independent bidder. If you bid on a card that you don't own and aren't bidding on behalf of the owner, then you are legitimate competition and the subsequent rise in price to another bidder is part and parcel of auction basics - bids raise prices.<br><br>So as long as you don't own the card or are bidding for the owner and will buy it if you do happen to win it (even if you did not bid with the intention of winning it), then your intent for bidding is 100% irrelevant. You are a legitimate bidder making a legitimate bid. <br><br>It doesn't matter if you bid to raise the price, to stay on the active catalog mailing list, to place a bookmark, give the card to your Aunt Fanny, collect a duplicate or decopage it onto the side of a coffee mug. <br><br>J<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Nice summation. <br><br>I want to pose a devil's advocate question though. You mentionend that as long as you aren't bidding on a consignors card with them knowing it, then it is ok. Let me first say I have NEVER bid on a friends card in auction for them....(had to get that out of the way, as at least someone in this thread probably can't even say that currently).<br><br> Lets say my friend &quot;Bob&quot; has a card and wants me to bid on it for him as he doesn't want to sell it so low. Lets say I bid and I win...I then send the money to the auction house and get the card. Is that wrong? I dunno...but it's an interesting thought....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Actually, I wouldn't have that much of a problem if the owner of a card wins back his own card in an auction. Changed mind, protecting investment, whatever - he bids he wins.<br><br>Where it goes south quickly for me is when an owner bids on his own card and doesn't win it. In the case where there was only one other bidder that topped the owner, the price has been artificially and deceptively driven up.<br><br>The key issue with me is that deceptive part. The single bidder thinks he was in legitimate auction competition with another independent bidder and that that's why he ended up at the price he did. If he could have ended up at a lower price but for the owner's bids, then he has been decieved and that crosses the line.<br><br>The problem is that if an owner bids and does not win, you never know if he legitimately was trying to win his card back or if he was just trying to goose a few more dollars out of the system. For this reason, my line is no owner bidding at all b/c you can't separate the two circumstances even though I think the owner-buy-back would be okay in its own right.<br><br>As to the friend Bob, that's just as bad as the owner bidding since it is pretty much done as an attempt to avoid the rules about sellers/consignors bidding deceptively.<br><br>J<br><br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Joann,<br><br>Please remember to e-mail your thoughts to Barry.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Shouldn't she check with Bruce first?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>You mean to get advise (sic)?<br><br>Yes. Good point.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>I'm sure she checked with Bruce 3 times already - she just doesn't know it.<br><br>

[frankb22]

Hard to follow who is saying what in this thread due to the site transfer
but did Leon just ask?:

"Lets say my friend "Bob" has a card and wants me to bid on it for him as he doesn't want to sell it so low. Lets say I bid and I win...I then send the money to the auction house and get the card. Is that wrong? I dunno...but it's an interesting thought...."

Sounds pretty wrong to me.

[Leon]

I was just throwing something out there for conversation. Your opinion is certainly appreciated...That's what we are here for..

[sportscardtheory]

If you bid on a card and the seller did not ask you to bid for them, it is not shill bidding... no matter what. Your intent is meaningless if you are going to pay for the card. I'm quite certain the seller would not care in the least if you only bid on their item to manipulate the pricing for yours. They would take the money and run.

[Matt]

I have a related question, interested to get people's take on it:

Hypothetically, I have two copies of a card, and they are the only two copies known to exist. As such, I could sell each for $5k. However, if I destroy one, making the other, the only copy in existence, I could sell it for $15k. Any ethical issues with me destroying the card?

[Doug]

If you own both of them I guess you are technically entitled to do whatever you want with them, but personally couldn't see myself ever doing that.

[barrysloate]

You could actually place the second card in a safe deposit box and not let on that it exists. That would be one alternative to destroying an artifact.

[Matt]

You could actually place the second card in a safe deposit box and not let on that it exists. That would be one alternative to destroying an artifact.

Oh come'on barry - that's cheating! Say everyone knows you have two so hiding it will do you no good.

[barrysloate]

Well that actually creates an ethical dilemma. Is it better to lie and preserve the card; or tell the truth, but destroy something of great value?

What you have are two bad choices. Of course, there are other ways to look at it.

[drc]

I don't think you should destroy the one card, and I don't believe the price would rise from $5,000 to $15,000 anyway. Even if you are an unethical bastard, keep both cards.

[Matt]

it's a hypothetical - assume the facts are as offered.

David - you can't see a circumstance where two guys both badly want the card - if there are two of them then they aren't bidding against each other and if there is only 1 then they are?

[Gecklund311]

I think everyone pretty much agrees that if a person can pay the bill, they can do what they wish with what they purchase, even destroy it.

That does not, however, make the person's actions right or even ethical.

The actions of Upper Deck and others in destroying many historical bats and jerseys in order to place small pieces of them in cards are a good example here. They may have paid the bill for what they destroyed, but I'd still love to give whoever came up with the idea a swift kick in the nuts.

[Jacklitsch]

Seems to me that if you locked one card away and advertised the other as the "only" card in existence that would be fraud.

[drc]

I differentiate between hypothetical possible and hypothetical impossible. Hypothetical impossible go into the moot pile.

Besides, I said you should not destroy one card, and that was my opinion of the ethics.

[drc]

Beyond the question of what is ethical, a question is when is if and when is it okay to act unethically? Does $10,000 and a dumb trading card come close? Is it okay to break baseball card ethics for $1 million? Duly note that this scenario doesn't involve lying or deception-- ala altering a card or hiding cards in a safe then lying about it. In this scenario, the seller accurately states at sale that there is only one card in existence. Does this say that the the practical result ($1 million) can be so enormous that it makes performing the unethical act okay? Even further, can the enormity of the gain transform an unethical act into an ethical one?

[Matt]

Fair enough :)

Is it limiting you to one edit per post?

[Mark]

As I see it, it helps to make a few distinctions regarding ethics. In the scenario that Matt offers, the destruction of the valuable card or other item would be base, lowdown, petty, and altogether mean. But I wouldn't accuse the guy who destroys the card of injustice. He owns the card fair and square and can rip it up as he pleases. But it still shows bad taste and dubious character. As for David's question about whether a million dollar profit can make something ethical, I don't think it would. Overwhelming duress can excuse an unjust action, but it does not transform an unjust action into a just one. The same thing goes for a base or dishonorable action.

[mightyq]

if this is an entirely different card then how are you shill bidding? and where is the ethics problem? it is not 'his" card he is bidding on, rather bidding on what he thinks is value according to a previous purchase..