the list (of criminals) is revealed

[Stonepony]

Yes, Dave Forman is the owner of SGC, he may also be President but I am not sure. He and his brother Steve are identified on the list in several places.

ADDED I have not looked up the lots so I don't know the answer to the second part of your question.

Yes it looks like they shilled each other's lots right and left. I welcome a response.

[Bicem]

Has this been answered? It's a long thread so I may have missed it.

Yes, according to the document, Dave Forman (SGC owner) and his brother Steve Forman shilled each other's auctions on many occasions, including high grade SGC cards. The example below was consigned by Dave, shilled by Steve, and actually won by Steve... looks like he got stuck with it.

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=70524

Here's one that was consigned by Steve, and shilled by Dave, and won by Greg Bussineau.

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=74170

There are many, many other examples.


JEFF PR|ZNER

[byrone]

Yes, according to the document, Dave Forman (SGC owner) and his brother Steve Forman shilled each other's auctions on many occasions, including high grade SGC cards. The example below was consigned by Dave, shilled by Steve, and actually won by Steve... looks like he got stuck with it.

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=70524

Here's one that was consigned by Steve, and shilled by Dave, and won by Greg Bussineau.

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=74170

There are many, many other examples.


JEFF PR|ZNER

Who's the real hobby villian...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=113951

[MattyC]

And here I was, utterly oblivious to the fact that SGC really stands for:

"Shill, Get Cash."

Thank God baseball cards are such happy and pure things, in and of themselves, that the enjoyment they bring trumps and outshines that odious list.

[Iron Horse]

Seems to me that SGC should pack it up.
How can a grading company not only grade their own cards (likely over grade) then list them in auction and the shill their own lots.
It's bad enough when an individual does it but a grading company????
Ruben Baghdassarian

[Dpeck100]

And people are worried about the grading company that has 90% market share going out of business.

SGC has less then 3%.

If any of these revelations are a death sentence for a third party grader it glaringly obvious that it's the company that's owner is caught up in this mess.

How unreal. You grade the cards, you sell them through auction houses and you enhance the price with illegal bidding.

Haha

You can't make this stuff up. We might be seeing these fellas in an episode of American Greed.

If I had a large amount of funds tied up in SGC cards this would make me sick to my stomach.

[ksabet]

Seems to me that SGC should pack it up.
How can a grading company not only grade their own cards (likely over grade) then list them in auction and the shill their own lots.
It's bad enough when an individual does it but a grading company????

+1 Agreed! I am not sure why but I feel 100x worse knowing that the head of a TPG would do this. Auctioneers are like mechanics...I try to find the ones who will rip you off the least, but the heads of SGC?!?! pretty ridiculous.

[1952boyntoncollector]

And people are worried about the grading company that has 90% market share going out of business.

SGC has less then 3%.

If any of these revelations are a death sentence for a third party grader it glaringly obvious that it's the company that's owner is caught up in this mess.

How unreal. You grade the cards, you sell them through auction houses and you enhance the price with illegal bidding.

Haha

You can't make this stuff up. We might be seeing these fellas in an episode of American Greed.

Yeah there seems to be a huge conflict of interest.........who is ready to argue with me again that SGC are worth the same as PSA for the exact same card in same numerical holder.....still not sure on B/S/T people ask and wont sell unless get a PSA 4 price for a SGC 4 card with all things being equal with the card .....and usually we get an 'off to ebay' or 'ill keep it (because dont want to sell at market price) '
comment..

Boca Raton, has a great homestead exemption like all of Florida...that's why OJ moved down to Florida

[1952boyntoncollector]

+1 Agreed! I am not sure why but I feel 100x worse knowing that the head of a TPG would do this. Auctioneers are like mechanics...I try to find the ones who will rip you off the least, but the heads of SGC?!?! pretty ridiculous.

same with politicians....I vote for the guy/gal that will steal the least

[bn2cardz]

Is Forman the same one from SGC? And can anyone see if those shilled lots were SGC cards? ?


Here is a list of all the shilled lots consigned by Steve and Dave. Most are SGC, but there are some PSA and GAI.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CxLW9me6srZIDNEs9Vby7ZGaHJGFIvOFeL9pqCCInD4/pub?output=pdf

[Stonepony]

Forman shills
April 2007
Lot 464 1953 B Mantle SGC 88
Lot 476 1955 T Koufax SGC 92
Lot 1111 1911 E94 Crawford PSA 8
Lot 1354 1934 Goudey uncut sheet
Lot 1379 1953 T B Russell SGC 96

June 2007
Lot 1035 1964 T Giants F Robinson SGC 96
Lot 1678 1938 PSA graded collection

[Dpeck100]

Here is a list of all the shilled lots consigned by Steve and Dave. Most are SGC, but there are some PSA and GAI.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CxLW9me6srZIDNEs9Vby7ZGaHJGFIvOFeL9pqCCInD4/pub?output=pdf


Just means he is an equal opportunity profiteer.

[AGuinness]

The consignor obviously would have preferred a reserve, as it would not have cost him thousands of dollars not to sell his set, as it turned out, but he was told the option was not available. So he took the instruction of what was then still a mostly highly respected auction house as to an alternative. Sure everyone can sit in judgment now. Whatever.

Peter, I guess that's the point I made earlier: this type of practice is not just reflected on as shady now, it was shady then. As evidenced by its appearance in the court documents.

If ANY auction house offers this type of shady practice, it should have been a big red flag and clearly was not worth the respect people were giving it. Just because a person or auction house compels someone to do something illegal/unethical, doesn't mean they have to do it.

Parsing it for people sitting in judgement now is a cop out. It was wrong then - that's the point.

[bn2cardz]

Just means he is an equal opportunity profiteer.

The hypothesis that came to mind as to why the Formans had some cards they didn't cross to SGC prior to selling were:

1) They couldn't bump it to SGC because it was trimmed and were worried about their "guarantee".

2) The pop report with the other graders made the card look rarer than their pops would.

3) So they could have deniability that they showed preference to their cards

[bn2cardz]

.double post.

[Dpeck100]

The hypothesis that came to mind as to why the Formans had some cards they didn't cross to SGC prior to selling were:

1) They couldn't bump it to SGC because it was trimmed and were worried about their "guarantee".

2) The pop report with the other graders made the card look rarer than their pops would.

3) So they could have deniability that they showed preference to their cards


Sounds pretty logical to me.

I wonder if SGC's move to Florida was planned after they new this bombshell was coming out.

[xplainer]

The hypothesis that came to mind as to why the Formans had some cards they didn't cross to SGC prior to selling were:

1) They couldn't bump it to SGC because it was trimmed and were worried about their "guarantee".

2) The pop report with the other graders made the card look rarer than their pops would.

3) So they could have deniability that they showed preference to their cards

Thinking like a criminal there...and probably right.

[Shoebox]

Here is a list of all the shilled lots consigned by Steve and Dave. Most are SGC, but there are some PSA and GAI.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CxLW9me6srZIDNEs9Vby7ZGaHJGFIvOFeL9pqCCInD4/pub?output=pdf

The head of SGC is involved in nearly 30 lots that were shill bid with approximately 2/3 of the card graded by his own company.

PSA has members of its Board of Experts appear as shill bidders.

Maybe no one else goes to jail after Bill and Doug but there are certainly a lot more than just one auction house getting sh#t on them over this.

[vintagetoppsguy]

And people are worried about the grading company that has 90% market share going out of business.

SGC has less then 3%.

If any of these revelations are a death sentence for a third party grader it glaringly obvious that it's the company that's owner is caught up in this mess.

How unreal. You grade the cards, you sell them through auction houses and you enhance the price with illegal bidding.

Haha

You can't make this stuff up. We might be seeing these fellas in an episode of American Greed.

If I had a large amount of funds tied up in SGC cards this would make me sick to my stomach.

Selective reading? Comprehension problem?

There are just as many PSA names on the list as there are SGC.

[Dpeck100]

Selective reading? Comprehension problem?

There are just as many PSA names on the list as there are SGC.


You see an owner?

[xplainer]

Sounds pretty logical to me.

I wonder if SGC's move to Florida was planned after they new this bombshell was coming out.

No, just happened the same week.;)

When the news broke about the move, someone on here questioned if the company was being sold. That might be holding more water now.

[Snowman5520]

You know what is most infuriating about this mess?! Last spring I taught a card collecting class to my students. Many members on here donated cards/supplies to us and they LOVED it. It was collecting in its purest form and was great to see. I know there are thousands of honest collectors out there and I will convey that to these kids......but I do have a few questions:

How am I supposed to explain to them what this group of lying, cheating, SCUMBAGS managed to do to the hobby? I don't care if you are a member of this board or not......how am I supposed to explain to these kids that a bunch of greedy adults took one of the most wonderful hobbies in the world and turned it into something VILE and DISGUSTING?!

[boneheadandrube]

You know what is most infuriating about this mess?! Last spring I taught a card collecting class to my students. Many members on here donated cards/supplies to us and they LOVED it. It was collecting in its purest form and was great to see. I know there are thousands of honest collectors out there and I will convey that to these kids......but I do have a few questions:

How am I supposed to explain to them what this group of lying, cheating, SCUMBAGS managed to do to the hobby? I don't care if you are a member of this board or not......how am I supposed to explain to these kids that a bunch of greedy adults took one of the most wonderful hobbies in the world and turned it into something VILE and DISGUSTING?!

Just tell them that your classroom is make-believe.

[irv]

You know what is most infuriating about this mess?! Last spring I taught a card collecting class to my students. Many members on here donated cards/supplies to us and they LOVED it. It was collecting in its purest form and was great to see. I know there are thousands of honest collectors out there and I will convey that to these kids......but I do have a few questions:

How am I supposed to explain to them what this group of lying, cheating, SCUMBAGS managed to do to the hobby? I don't care if you are a member of this board or not......how am I supposed to explain to these kids that a bunch of greedy adults took one of the most wonderful hobbies in the world and turned it into something VILE and DISGUSTING?!

Tough question, but tell them this type of thing has been going on for years in all areas of the world and that 2 wrongs don't make a right and the fact these people were caught.

Reinforce the love about collecting and not about making money and the hobby will survive.

[vintagetoppsguy]

You see an owner?

If someone at a company is breaking the law, does it matter if it's an employee or an owner?

You're free to talk about it over here on this board. Let's see you go start a thread about it over on CU, and call out the PSA names that are involved. No, you want do that because you and have no balls! Grow a set!

[RichardSimon]

What a shame.

As someone who prefers business be left to it's own as much as possible, these auction businesses show the need for regulation/enforcement/oversight...at least more so than has been in the past

I think the two leading auction houses in the world are Sotheby's and Christies. Just Google them and see how many times they have broken the law.
Regulation is definitely needed.

[AGuinness]

I think the key word is ethics in this statement. Lawyer......ethics............ethics............la wyer.

Just when I was warming up to you Pete......... Please tell me that you're not a family court lawyer though. Then I could care less. Those are the ones that directly piss me off the most.

I think you can basically now be known as the Jason Giambi of this site. You admitted it and thus will take less flack. You will also be commended for owning up to it rather than hiding behind lies. It will be a mute point, it will all blow over. Now I'd like to know who the other's are on the site that aren't owning up !!

Just to clarify, my name appears at the top of that post as I'm replying to Pete. I am not Pete...

[Dpeck100]

If someone at a company is breaking the law, does it matter if it's an employee or an owner?

You're free to talk about it over here on this board. Let's see you go start a thread about it over on CU, and call out the PSA names that are involved. No, you want do that because you and have no balls! Grow a set!


There is a huge difference between an employee and the owner.

Use some common sense.

In terms of starting a thread on CU about it. You are right I won't. But obviously you recognize my name from there and I have taken on all comers. That is a fact.

There isn't one person on any of these boards that would have withstood the hazing I took and never once complained or went to the mods. I obviously have a set. Thank you very much.

[tiger8mush]

So much shilling and scam, from ONE auction house during a small window in time. Imagine if that window were opened up a little wider, and threw a few more auction houses into the mix? I bet a lot of people are hoping that doesn't happen ...

[sbfinley]

How am I supposed to explain to them what this group of lying, cheating, SCUMBAGS managed to do to the hobby? I don't care if you are a member of this board or not......how am I supposed to explain to these kids that a bunch of greedy adults took one of the most wonderful hobbies in the world and turned it into something VILE and DISGUSTING?!


Because it can be just a hobby if you want it to be. I never had any illusions that something some people are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on would be all sunshine and lollipops. I could care less Peter helped a friend out, SGC and PSA names are on the list, or Allen tried to pull a Wolf of Wall Street. I collect baseball cards. I like my signed cards in PSA slabs. I like my unsigned cards in SGC slabs. When place a bid in a AH or on eBay I place it knowing that the item is both worth that price to me and that I expect to pay that amount. If I win it for less, it's just extra syrup on my pancakes. I have nothing against those outraged by this, card doctors, coaches corner, or any of the hundreds of other hobby villains. I could just care less, I'd rather be looking for the next card on my list.

[slidekellyslide]

I'm shocked that Dave Forman's lawyer hasn't made a comment yet.

[tiger8mush]

Because it can be just a hobby if you want it to be. I never had any illusions that something some people are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on would be all sunshine and lollipops. I could care less Peter helped a friend out, SGC and PSA names are on the list, or Allen tried to pull a Wolf of Wall Street. I collect baseball cards. I like my signed cards in PSA slabs. I like my unsigned cards in SGC slabs. When place a bid in a AH or on eBay I place it knowing that the item is both worth that price to me and that I expect to pay that amount. If I win it for less, it's just extra syrup on my pancakes. I have nothing against those outraged by this, card doctors, coaches corner, or any of the hundreds of other hobby villains. I could just care less, I'd rather be looking for the next card on my list.

And if you discovered one of your slabbed signatures was doctored? You could care less? Employees were willing to do what it took to make more money by shilling - would they authenticate a doctored signature to make more money?

[vintagetoppsguy]

In terms of starting a thread on CU about it. You are right I won't.

Of course you won't. You have no balls. If you did, you would call out Reznikoff, Keating, Rullo, etc.

Why will you do it over here, but not over there?

[slidekellyslide]

Because it can be just a hobby if you want it to be. I never had any illusions that something some people are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on would be all sunshine and lollipops. I could care less Peter helped a friend out, SGC and PSA names are on the list, or Allen tried to pull a Wolf of Wall Street. I collect baseball cards. I like my signed cards in PSA slabs. I like my unsigned cards in SGC slabs. When place a bid in a AH or on eBay I place it knowing that the item is both worth that price to me and that I expect to pay that amount. If I win it for less, it's just extra syrup on my pancakes. I have nothing against those outraged by this, card doctors, coaches corner, or any of the hundreds of other hobby villains. I could just care less, I'd rather be looking for the next card on my list.

The only problem then is that your next card is going to cost you more money because the market for years was artificially inflated by the shillers in these auctions. Even if they won their own lot back it created a false market.

[slidekellyslide]

Of course you won't. You have no balls. If you did, you would call out Reznikoff, Keating, Rullo, etc.

Why will you do it over here, but not over there?

Probably because he knows the thread will last 5 seconds before it's gone.

[ALR-bishop]

Someone did start a thread. The OP, who I do not know and had a fairly low post count, generally just mentioned the matter and referred people to this board.

The thread lasted longer that 5 seconds ( or various lamb shakes), but not by much. Not sure if the OP was banned or put on probation :)

[ashes13]

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/sgc-boss-claims-shill-bidding-in-counter-suit/

what to make of this?

[Stonepony]

So much shilling and scam, from ONE auction house during a small window in time. Imagine if that window were opened up a little wider, and threw a few more auction houses into the mix? I bet a lot of people are hoping that doesn't happen ...

I think it will. It's the very reason the silence from some board members is deafening.

[vintagetoppsguy]

There is a huge difference between an employee and the owner.

41 Apr‐07 1512 Joe Orlando (consignor) Bill Mastro and Andrew Filipowski (shill bidders) Rob Rosen (Winner) $85,245.00 (winning price) $19,099.00 (loss amount)

Now what do you say?

[rdwyer]

If Peter Calderon for example shill bidded, does that mean Heritage Auctions shill bids in their auctions?

[Leon]

Because it can be just a hobby if you want it to be. I never had any illusions that something some people are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on would be all sunshine and lollipops. I could care less Peter helped a friend out, SGC and PSA names are on the list, or Allen tried to pull a Wolf of Wall Street. I collect baseball cards. I like my signed cards in PSA slabs. I like my unsigned cards in SGC slabs. When place a bid in a AH or on eBay I place it knowing that the item is both worth that price to me and that I expect to pay that amount. If I win it for less, it's just extra syrup on my pancakes. I have nothing against those outraged by this, card doctors, coaches corner, or any of the hundreds of other hobby villains. I could just care less, I'd rather be looking for the next card on my list.

See R312 thread. I found my next card last night and am looking for the next one!! All of this thread is a good learning lesson.

[slidekellyslide]

41 Apr‐07 1512 Joe Orlando (consignor) Bill Mastro and Andrew Filipowski (shill bidders) Rob Rosen (Winner) $85,245.00 (winning price) $19,099.00 (loss amount)

Now what do you say?

This may be a mistake on the government's part. I thought that lot was consigned by JOHN Orlando a BoSox batboy?

[TNP777]

Of course you won't. You have no balls. If you did, you would call out Reznikoff, Keating, Rullo, etc.

Why will you do it over here, but not over there?
I assume you're well aware that people on CU are not really allowed to speak their mind about anything beyond rainbows and unicorns. Anything that smells remotely of scandal or discord is ruthlessly squashed, and far too often people lose their posting privileges there. Many here might not think that's a big deal, but there are still many there that enjoy the interaction and community.

I think it's wrong to not allow members to discuss a topic like this, but it's their private playground - they've consistently shown that they won't tolerate mud-slinging, especially when it concerns their big submitters, staff and shareholders. Better to get out in front of a situation rather than cover up and deny, imo.

[Joshchisox08]

Just to clarify, my name appears at the top of that post as I'm replying to Pete. I am not Pete...

I know I was using your quote.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This may be a mistake on the government's part. I thought that lot was consigned by JOHN Orlando a BoSox batboy?

Or a member of his family. I have it on good word that is not the Joe Orlando affiliated with PSA.

[ezez420]

For curiosity sake was there any shills done

[1880nonsports]

although that never stopped anybody. Unless I'm mistaken they have a rule that allows a consignor to bid on their own items as long as they pay the hammer.
The more I look into this mess and despite knowing this was likely going on, I'm quite sad about some of the people who will look you in the eye and tell you they have your best interests in mind - and are cheating the hell out of you behind your back. Complicity is equally distasteful.
Certainly a part of me hopes this whole debacle hopefully isn't over - as shining a bright light on the subject might lead to some oversight (although a witch hunt is unpalatable and not productive) - outfits like roaches corner are obvious bad guys - but when the "good guys" start to behave like bad guys something should be done - maybe now the fuse has been lit.
That Dave Forman has been exposed for allegedly shilling his own stuff - such a breach of trust is truly freaking vile. Along the way I think my TPG of choice has made some bad business decisions. This perhaps a game changer. It will certainly devalue the brand as trust is an important concept when farming out one's cards. Much sadness.

[PM770]

You see an owner?

Isn't PSA a publicly traded company?

While their stock holdings are likely too small to be reportable to the SEC so we could never know, isn't it likely that members of this so-called "Board of Experts" own some stock?

[slidekellyslide]

although that never stopped anybody. Unless I'm mistaken they have a rule that allows a consignor to bid on their own items as long as they pay the hammer.
The more I look into this mess and despite knowing this was likely going on, I'm quite sad about some of the people who will look you in the eye and tell you they have your best interests in mind - and are cheating the hell out of you behind your back. Complicity is equally distasteful.
Certainly a part of me hopes this whole debacle hopefully isn't over - as shining a bright light on the subject might lead to some oversight (although a witch hunt is unpalatable and not productive) - outfits like roaches corner are obvious bad guys - but when the "good guys" start to behave like bad guys something should be done.
That Joe Orlando and Dave Forman have been exposed for shilling their own stuff - such a breach of trust is truly freaking vile.

Not the PSA Joe Orlando. This has been discussed already in this thread.

[h2oya311]

Any other Net54 members want to come clean?

JC Clarke - multiple items consigned / all shilled by Jay Dyer
Kevin Struss - on the shill list once / but the victim far more often - any explanation?
...

[tazdmb]

Isn't PSA a publicly traded company?

While their stock holdings are likely too small to be reportable to the SEC so we could never know, isn't it likely that members of this so-called "Board of Experts" own some stock?

Yes, PSA is a subsidiary of Collector's Universe-a NASDAQ publicly traded stock that is up for the day

[slidekellyslide]

Any other Net54 members want to come clean?

JC Clarke - multiple items consigned / all shilled by Jay Dyer
Kevin Struss - on the shill list once / but the victim far more often - any explanation?
...

JC was already known as one of the Mastro shillers. The extent was not known though. I wonder who Jay Dyer is?

[1880nonsports]

I corrected my post. I was writing as it was posted.

[h2oya311]

JC was already known as one of the Mastro shillers. The extent was not known though. I wonder who Jay Dyer is?

But he isn't listed as a Shiller at all on the list...only a consignor.

[Dpeck100]

41 Apr‐07 1512 Joe Orlando (consignor) Bill Mastro and Andrew Filipowski (shill bidders) Rob Rosen (Winner) $85,245.00 (winning price) $19,099.00 (loss amount)

Now what do you say?


Nothing. Joe isn't the owner. If David Hall's name were on the list it would be a much different story.

While you are at it please post the item that he consigned.

Edit: And nice to see it wasn't him.

[1880nonsports]

to think the consignor was unaware of the shilling. Think that could only happen if the house had access to a maximum bid - which they apparently did - so I guess it's possible :-) Besides, I think husband of tammy copped to it.......

[Dpeck100]

Yes, PSA is a subsidiary of Collector's Universe-a NASDAQ publicly traded stock that is up for the day

The stock is currently up as you said. Let's face it if SGC were a publicly traded company the shares would have gapped down 40% on this news.

To the person who suggested employees may own shares. That is probably true. But just like I work for a bank and could own shares in it, I am not the principle owner and have no ability to control what goes on at the company.

A far cry from the actual owner of a private company who directly calls the shots.

[PM770]

To the person who suggested employees may own shares. That is probably true. But just like I work for a bank and could own shares in it, I am not the principle owner and have no ability to control what goes on at the company.

A far cry from the actual owner of a private company who directly calls the shots.

That makes your "See an owner?" comment inane. Of course not, they don't really have an "owner" in the sense you were talking. Just stockholders.

Is there a name related to PSA that would have bothered you?

[slidekellyslide]

But he isn't listed as a Shiller at all on the list...only a consignor.

It's pretty obvious if you are consignor and the shiller is the same guy on every one of your consigned lots that there is a conspiracy to shill by the consignor.

And I've now seen information that his shill bidder possibly works for another auction house.

[Dpeck100]

That makes your "See an owner?" comment inane. Of course not, they don't really have an "owner" in the sense you were talking. Just stockholders.

Is there a name related to PSA that would have bothered you?


David Hall, If his name was listed their stock would be down today for sure. Founder and president. Closest thing to the owner of SGC.

SGC is a private company. Much different corporate structure.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's pretty obvious if you are consignor and the shiller is the same guy on every one of your consigned lots that there is a conspiracy to shill by the consignor.

And I've now seen information that his shill bidder possibly works for another auction house.

He is listed on Huggins' website.

N. & Cent. Fla/S. Ga Rep:
Jay Dyer

[PM770]

David Hall, If his name was listed their stock would be down today for sure. Founder and president. Closest thing to the owner of SGC.

SGC is a private company. Much different corporate structure.

Beyond the stock being down, would it have bothered you.

[Stonepony]

http://m.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/mastro-auctions-ketap-company-drops-lawsuit-settles-dave-forman-article-1.121333

My brain is hanging upside down..

[Exhibitman]

Makes me want to open a pizza shop . It's kind of disturbing to the soul .

There is no need to drag pizza into this. After all, we are not animals.

http://images.hngn.com/data/images/full/137795/pizza-rat.png?w=650

[Dpeck100]

Beyond the stock being down, would it have bothered you.

Certainly. These revelations are not a positive for the hobby.

If you think I am happy that the owners of SGC are wrapped up in this scandal it couldn't be further from the truth.

The stock market takes no sympathy on anyone and shoots first and then asks questions later. The reality of it is that this type of news would be bad for any company and the market would price it in immediately.

[PM770]

Certainly. These revelations are not a positive for the hobby.

If you think I am happy that the owners of SGC are wrapped up in this scandal it couldn't be further from the truth.

The stock market takes no sympathy on anyone and shoots first and then asks questions later. The reality of it is that this type of news would be bad for any company and the market would price it in immediately.

Shouldn't it be bothering that members of a "Board of Experts" are involved in this? We aren't talking about one rouge grader.

Let's also not forget about the Wagner. Wasn't David Hall was involved in that?

[h2oya311]

to think the consignor was unaware of the shilling. Think that could only happen if the house had access to a maximum bid - which they apparently did - so I guess it's possible :-) Besides, I think husband of tammy copped to it.......

I never said that JC didn't know...I simply stated that he wasn't the one doing the shilling. It's pretty clear that he was in the know based on the number of times his name is associated with Jay Dyer (now working for Huggins & Scott) and Shane Mooney (anyone know who that is?).

And I missed those old posts from husbandoftammy where he fessed up. I was off the Net54 site for a long stretch during that timeframe.

[slidekellyslide]

I never said that JC didn't know...I simply stated that he wasn't the one doing the shilling. It's pretty clear that he was in the know based on the number of times his name is associated with Jay Dyer (now working for Huggins & Scott) and Shane Mooney (anyone know who that is?).

And I missed those old posts from husbandoftammy where he fessed up. I was off the Net54 site for a long stretch during that timeframe.

I believe they have testimony of Allen calling Clarke and asking if he wanted to "bump it" referring to upping the bid on one of his items. This came out a while back. I don't think Clarke has fessed up to it, but he never denied it when called on it a few times here in the recent past.

[vintagetoppsguy]

If you think I am happy that the owners of SGC are wrapped up in this scandal it couldn't be further from the truth.

Yes, I do think that. You ONLY come over here from across the street to either (1) bash SGC or (2) when there is controversy about a CU (of former CU) member. That's the only time you show up.

[midmo]

I ran across this article from 26 years ago while googling some of the names on the list...

http://articles.philly.com/1989-10-16/news/26115124_1_autographs-national-sports-collectors-convention-pete-rose-baseball-cards

One of the most revealing moments of the convention came at a seminar on ethics. In a convention that attracted 382 dealers and more than 37,000 collectors, eight people showed up to discuss moral issues.

"That pretty much tells you all you need to know about the ethics of this business," said dealer Stan Marks of Scottsdale, Ariz. "Nobody gives a damn."

[bobbyw8469]

There isn't one person on any of these boards that would have withstood the hazing I took and never once complained or went to the mods. I obviously have a set. Thank you very much.]

Uhmmmm.....you don't have the lock in that department Davey boy! Trust me. There was someone before you that was hazed and never went to the mods.

[h2oya311]

I'm shocked that Dave Forman's lawyer hasn't made a comment yet.

Good one!

[h2oya311]

Who's keeping a tally:

Peter Calderon from Heritage
PSA's "Board of Experts" + Authenticators
Dave Forman - Owner of SGC
Kevin Keating of Quality Autographs
Ken Goldin from Goldin Auctions
TJ Schwartz of SCD
Kevin Struss of Baseball Rarities
other Net54 Members (you know who you are)

Events leading up to "the list"...

REA president retires;
SGC moves to Florida;
Leon sells collection

Okay, the first and last ones are probably a stretch...just sayin'

[1952boyntoncollector]

Who's keeping a tally:

Peter Calderon from Heritage
PSA's "Board of Experts" + Authenticators
Dave Forman - Owner of SGC
Kevin Keating of Quality Autographs
Ken Goldin from Goldin Auctions
TJ Schwartz of SCD
Kevin Struss of Baseball Rarities
other Net54 Members (you know who you are)

Events leading up to "the list"...

REA president retires;
SGC moves to Florida;
Leon sells collection

Okay, the first and last ones are probably a stretch...just sayin'


I really see it as a conflict of interest for a grader to grade a card if that grader owns the same type of card and grade..

if POP is 1 on a card at a SGC 8 and carries a $1000+ price...I wouldn't want to see another of those cards achieve a SGC 8 for example which would double the POP and lower the value of my own card...

[Econteachert205]

I do not think it will effect clct collectors universe stock. It will not impact the core business of submissions or the registry. SGC is a different story. Anyone on the fence about which grader to use will move away from them. Maybe a small boost for beckett. The real losers will be the individual auctions involved and already mentioned.

[rsdill2]

Who's keeping a tally:

Peter Calderon from Heritage
PSA's "Board of Experts" + Authenticators
Dave Forman - Owner of SGC
Kevin Keating of Quality Autographs
Ken Goldin from Goldin Auctions
TJ Schwartz of SCD
Kevin Struss of Baseball Rarities
other Net54 Members (you know who you are)

Events leading up to "the list"...

REA president retires;
SGC moves to Florida;
Leon sells collection

Okay, the first and last ones are probably a stretch...just sayin'

I don't know who he is but John Reznikoff is listed on SGC webpage under the "our staff" section with his expertise listed as "historical & political"

He's all over the document listed as both a consignor and shiller

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't know who he is but John Reznikoff is listed on SGC webpage under the "our staff" section with his expertise listed as "historical & political"

He's all over the document listed as both a consignor and shiller

He is also a PSA expert.
http://www.psacard.com/Experts/

If you google him you will see he has had some controversy/mistaken authentications.

[The Nasty Nati]

Wow this could really hurt SGC. I'm a big fan of theirs but yikes.

[chaddurbin]

Wow this could really hurt SGC. I'm a big fan of theirs but yikes.

i fail to see how this will hurt sgc. you mean after reading this you're gonna send the n167 to psa or beckett instead of sgc? i wonder if mastro will give me an auction credit for the $506 i was shilled out of? too bad we don't have the whole history.

anyone remember wesley liu? he was shilled on only a few lots but the loss % is huge compared to the final prices.

[Bpm0014]

Peter, Greg...it's not an easy thing to do to admit that you were wrong and messed up. I don't know either one of you, but I appreciate you guys coming forward and at least explaining your side of the story. Would have been very easy to just lay low.

[ezez420]

Na

[conor912]

>25k

In the first 24 hours, that is.

[Brian Van Horn]

Who's keeping a tally:

Peter Calderon from Heritage
PSA's "Board of Experts" + Authenticators
Dave Forman - Owner of SGC
Kevin Keating of Quality Autographs
Ken Goldin from Goldin Auctions
TJ Schwartz of SCD
Kevin Struss of Baseball Rarities
other Net54 Members (you know who you are)

Events leading up to "the list"...

REA president retires;
SGC moves to Florida;
Leon sells collection

Okay, the first and last ones are probably a stretch...just sayin'

Add that Goldin acquired Legendary's intellectual property including Legendary's mailing list.

[RichardSimon]

If Peter Calderon for example shill bidded, does that mean Heritage Auctions shill bids in their auctions?

Heaven forbid.
I would think that an auction house that bars me from bidding, and from their website, for having my autograph opinions quoted in Nash's HOS (they said I worked for him, did not know giving opinions would be called working) would not also be a shill bidder.
fyi - I never bid with them on anything.

[packs]

Is the only tactic available to bidders to counter act this stuff placing straight bids only?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Wow. This quote was when this happened to me on a Pop 2 card with me owning 1. I can only guess who owns/owned the 2nd. Wow you couldnt have said it better. A very high profile card for that matter besides.

so my comments have been useful to the net54 community I take it...yeah others like to say I rattle on....

[jefferyepayne]

I have not won an item from Goldin auctions, but was watching stuff in the current auction. Does anyone think that his name being on the list will have negative results this weekend?

It should! I would demand an explanation before bidding further. In fact, I don't plan to purchase / bid in any auction affiliated with those on the shill list until the person involved comes on net54 to explain their actions.

As I've said in other threads before, the only way to clean up this hobby is for people to STOP SUPPORTING those who are dirty. Otherwise you only have yourself to blame for future abuse.

Jeff Payne

[slidekellyslide]

Heaven forbid.
I would think that an auction house that bars me from bidding, and from their website, for having my autograph opinions quoted in Nash's HOS (they said I worked for him, did not know giving opinions would be called working) would not also be a shill bidder.

Heritage has a Hall of Fame Library thief working for them...doubt they even care about this.

[ullmandds]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezez420
Wow. This quote was when this happened to me on a Pop 2 card with me owning 1. I can only guess who owns/owned the 2nd. Wow you couldnt have said it better. A very high profile card for that matter besides.
so my comments have been useful to the net54 community I take it...yeah others like to say I rattle on....


well...atleast that 1 comment...to that 1 person!:)

[howard38]

You know what is most infuriating about this mess?! Last spring I taught a card collecting class to my students. Many members on here donated cards/supplies to us and they LOVED it. It was collecting in its purest form and was great to see. I know there are thousands of honest collectors out there and I will convey that to these kids......but I do have a few questions:

How am I supposed to explain to them what this group of lying, cheating, SCUMBAGS managed to do to the hobby? I don't care if you are a member of this board or not......how am I supposed to explain to these kids that a bunch of greedy adults took one of the most wonderful hobbies in the world and turned it into something VILE and DISGUSTING?!
There probably isn't any reason to explain it to them. This barely made a peep in the mainstream media so unless the kids are following a forum like net54 they probably haven't heard about it.

[ullmandds]

I'm disappointed...I am...but in reality all aspects of life are filled with corruption. The best at a given skill/sport/vocation is almost always flawed in some way.

So we now all know for sure what we pretty much knew already. People will go to jail...some will leave the hobby...most wont. Many reputations will be trashed and ethics/morals questioned.

It seems to me the climate was/is that pretty much everyone is doing it...so if everyone is founds to be doing the same bad things...the repercussions wont be so bad as if it were just a few.

Hasn't something like this happened in just about every other type of collecting known to man.

I still love the cards...I always will. So now I know for sure what I pretty much already knew...I have been overpaying for my "stuff" for years.

[glchen]

Is the only tactic available to bidders to counter act this stuff placing straight bids only?

Unfortunately, I think the only tactic to counter this shilling going on is to only bid in the Net54 Live Auctions where you know all of the bidder names for every auction.

[Exhibitman]

Heritage has a Hall of Fame Library thief working for them...doubt they even care about this.

I didn't know library thieves had a hall of fame. Is it in Ohio and if so anywhere near the IX Center?

Sorry...resume witch hunt.

[ullmandds]

Unfortunately, I think the only tactic to counter this shilling going on is to only bid in the Net54 Live Auctions where you know all of the bidder names for every auction.

gonna be some slim pickins!

[Mark]

I'm disappointed...I am...but in reality all aspects of life are filled with corruption. The best at a given skill/sport/vocation is almost always flawed in some way.

So we now all know for sure what we pretty much knew already. People will go to jail...some will leave the hobby...most wont. Many reputations will be trashed and ethics/morals questioned.

It seems to me the climate was/is that pretty much everyone is doing it...so if everyone is founds to be doing the same bad things...the repercussions wont be so bad as if it were just a few.

Hasn't something like this happened in just about every other type of collecting known to man.

This sort of thing happens a lot in many places, such as Russia.

[rdwyer]

Heaven forbid.
I would think that an auction house that bars me from bidding, and from their website, for having my autograph opinions quoted in Nash's HOS (they said I worked for him, did not know giving opinions would be called working) would not also be a shill bidder.
fyi - I never bid with them on anything.

I was using Peter Calderon for an example. Others involved with AH's did the same thing. So does that mean those companies would also shill bid with their latest auction? The lesson I learned from all this, is not to trust any of the AH's.

[ullmandds]

This sort of thing happens a lot in many places, such as Russia.

ha...much worse happens in russia!

[slidekellyslide]

I didn't know library thieves had a hall of fame. Is it in Ohio and if so anywhere near the IX Center?

Sorry...resume witch hunt.

???

[Econteachert205]

In soviet Russia bids shill you!

[T206Collector]

In soviet Russia bids shill you!

Great post. :p

[Dpeck100]

Yes, I do think that. You ONLY come over here from across the street to either (1) bash SGC or (2) when there is controversy about a CU (of former CU) member. That's the only time you show up.

Bash SGC. Seriously.

Dude please. Bash Beckett, yes I have but my only experience with SGC was great.

In terms of Bobby W. The finale of that thread says it all.

[bobbyw8469]

Well said David James. I am glad someone besides me recognizes that.

[sbfinley]

In soviet Russia bids shill you!

Thank you sir.

[Dpeck100]

Well said David James. I am glad someone besides me recognizes that.


Is this the dude that got caught up in the from a sealed case fiasco with the wax tray's?

[bobbyw8469]

Is this the dude that got caught up in the from a sealed case fiasco with the wax tray's?

No? LOL....I have never even bought a wax tray or a sealed case. I once bought some unopened Fleer basketball from Huggins & Scott that PSA board members were no good, because I didn't buy them from BBCE. I promptly pulled about 5 Jordan cards from the packs....ROTFLMAO :D Does that count for anything?

[Dpeck100]

No? LOL....I have never even bought a wax tray or a sealed case. I once bought some unopened Fleer basketball from Huggins & Scott that PSA board members were no good, because I didn't buy them from BBCE. I promptly pulled about 5 Jordan cards from the packs....ROTFLMAO :D Does that count for anything?

Not you. I realize you are the guy with the lizard on his shoulder.

David James. Is he the guy that led the break of the 1980 Topps FASC wax tray?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Not you. I realize you are the guy with the lizard on his shoulder.

David James. Is he the guy that led the break of the 1980 Topps FASC wax tray?

Nope. Not me. Once again, you're wrong. But, hey, at least you're consistent.

[SAllen2556]

I have a few questions for veteran collectors and dealers, as I am just a simple business owner who collects but has never spent more than $800 on anything hobby related. And btw, I'm not, in any way, trying to mitigate was has happened. One of the names on that list makes me believe I was probably a victim myself once.

But as veterans of the hobby, when you placed bids on high profile stuff at major auctions, wasn't there a voice in the back of your noggins that told you it was very likely some sort of shilling was occurring, yet you bid anyway because if the price was what you deemed fair, you told yourself you could live with it? Don't even us amateurs believe that when we're bidding on ebay?

Are you veterans really shocked at all by any of this? If you're in this hobby to make a living, it's just way too easy to cheat, and I imagine for many it becomes almost a necessity for survival. The rewards far, far outweigh the punishment. And it's been that way for decades. And frankly, I don't see how this changes anything. So one or two high profile guys do a little jail time. Do you think for one minute that's going to prevent shilling in the future? I bet there are some who hope prices drop at the major auction houses just so they can swoop in for the bargains! And do veteran collectors with large holdings really mind if prices are artificially inflated? I wonder.

The people here are incredibly knowledgable about this hobby. This is an amazing website - it's one of the very few (but by far the best) places on the internet which acts as any sort of check to the rampant dishonesty in this hobby. Just reading the stuff here has saved me a ton of money, and I appreciate the efforts enough to buy many here an adult beverage if I ever ran into you! But should it come down to one free website run by people who care to police the entire industry? I just don't understand why no one has ever put together some sort of association that polices this hobby. It's way overdue, and obviously necessary.

[nsaddict]

This is just a 3 year window, no doubt there's much more. Wonder what will come out of all this after the fact? And what will the current companies do to those currently mentioned on the bad boy list. Example, will the CEO of PSA take action against the 3 autograph experts currently employed? And what will this do in regards to Forman, the other BIG company? Still a few others mentioned in the AH business that hasn't stepped forward. Will they lose business in form of bidders/consignors? Time will tell I guess. Quite disgusting to say the least!

[iwantitiwinit]

This is just a 3 year window, no doubt there's much more. Wonder what will come out of all this after the fact? And what will the current companies do to those currently mentioned on the bad boy list. Example, will the CEO of PSA take action against the 3 autograph experts currently employed? And what will this do in regards to Forman, the other BIG company? Still a few others mentioned in the AH business that hasn't stepped forward. Will they lose business in form of bidders/consignors? Time will tell I guess. Quite disgusting to say the least!

Relative to taking actions against those currently employed, if they want to regain any level of credibility there is only one thing to do. Something that I would think all our employers would do instantly upon proof of illegal or criminal action. The sooner the better. No tears.

[bobbyw8469]

David James was right. David Peck only comes over here for drama. And harassment. Well....I guess he found it in this thread. And since the PSA board has died so much, he wants to stir the pot here.

[Mark]

The people here are incredibly knowledgable about this hobby. This is an amazing website - it's one of the very few (but by far the best) places on the internet which acts as any sort of check to the rampant dishonesty in this hobby. Just reading the stuff here has saved me a ton of money, and I appreciate the efforts enough to buy many here an adult beverage if I ever ran into you! But should it come down to one free website run by people who care to police the entire industry? I just don't understand why no one has ever put together some sort of association that polices this hobby. It's way overdue, and obviously necessary.

Maybe the industry leaders should appoint a respected public figure to step in and clean up the auctions and 3rd party grading companies. You know, appoint a judge Landis figure to be Commissioner of Sports Collecting. Anyone who is banned for life could surreptitiously collect Black Sox memorabilia. Any suggestions?

[GasHouseGang]

I have a few questions for veteran collectors and dealers, as I am just a simple business owner who collects but has never spent more than $800 on anything hobby related. And btw, I'm not, in any way, trying to mitigate was has happened. One of the names on that list makes me believe I was probably a victim myself once.

But as veterans of the hobby, when you placed bids on high profile stuff at major auctions, wasn't there a voice in the back of your noggins that told you it was very likely some sort of shilling was occurring, yet you bid anyway because if the price was what you deemed fair, you told yourself you could live with it? Don't even us amateurs believe that when we're bidding on ebay?

Are you veterans really shocked at all by any of this? If you're in this hobby to make a living, it's just way too easy to cheat, and I imagine for many it becomes almost a necessity for survival. The rewards far, far outweigh the punishment. And it's been that way for decades. And frankly, I don't see how this changes anything. So one or two high profile guys do a little jail time. Do you think for one minute that's going to prevent shilling in the future? I bet there are some who hope prices drop at the major auction houses just so they can swoop in for the bargains! And do veteran collectors with large holdings really mind if prices are artificially inflated? I wonder.

The people here are incredibly knowledgable about this hobby. This is an amazing website - it's one of the very few (but by far the best) places on the internet which acts as any sort of check to the rampant dishonesty in this hobby. Just reading the stuff here has saved me a ton of money, and I appreciate the efforts enough to buy many here an adult beverage if I ever ran into you! But should it come down to one free website run by people who care to police the entire industry? I just don't understand why no one has ever put together some sort of association that polices this hobby. It's way overdue, and obviously necessary.

I was thinking the same thing Scott. It made me think of this scene in Casablanca. How is anyone really surprised?

[kailes2872]

Peter,

I am sure you don't care about this post. My inbox is full, so if you choose to reply, you can do it here. If you don't that is fine as well. In late, 2014, when I was having an admitted meltdown and several on the board provided positive feedback and counsel, you were snarky and mean in the post. You have that right. It is an embarrassing thread for me to go back and read in retrospect and I deserved every word.

I admired you and your knowledge of the hobby. I admired your collection. On June 4th, Brent from PWCC posted. You had some very pointed criticism about his business practices - up to and including comments about hidden reserves. I have avoided PWCC in recent months - primarly because of my respect for you and the feedback that you provided.

Perhaps there are shades of gray in the hidden reserve that you placed on the lot. I tend to disagree, but, as we have established, I am low-end post war guy with some drama queen tendencies, so my opinion doesn't matter. However, If I were Brent at PWCC, I would take issue with the way that you were quick to smoke out his perceived issues while quickly sweeping this under the rug.





http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=206854

reading this after the fact, has some irony.


In reply to post 26
Which auction houses still have hidden reserves?
(post 27)


From Post 125

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet another example of Hamlet's "the lady doth protest too much, methinks."


KEVIN AILES

[bcornell]

Are you veterans really shocked at all by any of this?

Not even the smallest bit. This hobby was loaded with bad actors when I got into it in the late 80's, the 90's were the same, and the 21st century has been no different. It's very unlikely to change even after this 'revelation', which really can't be surprising to anyone who was actively in the hobby during 2007-2009.

There is one very good thing to come out of this, that Bill Mastro has permanently exited the hobby. In my opinion, all of the other players combined can't compete with the damage he did by himself.

Bill

[gnaz01]

There is one very good thing to come out of this, that Bill Mastro has permanently exited the hobby.


Bill,

Not for a second do I believe Bill has exited the hobby. We may not see his name but it is my opinion (and it is just that, an opinion) that he is still "in the hobby" somehow.

[SteveMitchell]

Beastmode offers some good advice (see boldface and enlarged type for added emphasis). Perhaps not "never" but certainly "rarely" will one be a victim of shilling, if followed.

here's 25001.

I'm surprised so many folks are surprised. In-house proprietary auction houses make little sense from a financial perspective and can be easily manipulated by the ah. Shilling is probably still rampant on the ones that are left. You can't even see the bidders, which is the first clue as to what is going on there.

E-bay has already spent billions building this software platform; and they do all the maintenance, upgrading, hardware, security, power, cooling, etc; for pennies. Does e-bay have shilling? Of course. But at least i have some information to review in bid history to make my own assessment.

lastly, and it's been beat to death, stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again.

[xplainer]

Who's keeping a tally:

Peter Calderon from Heritage
PSA's "Board of Experts" + Authenticators
Dave Forman - Owner of SGC
Kevin Keating of Quality Autographs
Ken Goldin from Goldin Auctions
TJ Schwartz of SCD
Kevin Struss of Baseball Rarities
other Net54 Members (you know who you are)

Events leading up to "the list"...

REA president retires;
SGC moves to Florida;
Leon sells collection

Okay, the first and last ones are probably a stretch...just sayin'

Moving post this forward.

I know most of you guys have thousands, maybe hundereds of thousands tied up in your collection. But this hits us lower grade collectors too.

My $100 card is the same as your $1000 when you consider expendable income.

Personally, the SGC news bothers me most. They are who I use (I have a T206 sub there now). I'm kinda rattled with all this information that has come to light.
And, ironically, when I pulled this page up, an ad that said "Trust SGC" was at the top.:eek:

To the two that has come forward and told their story, I thank you. What you did was unethical, but you aren't running from it.

But, from what I've read, it's like being shown pictures of your wife in bed with another man, and being told:
I can explain.
It's not what it looks like.
It didn't mean anything.

Wrong is wrong and you have to pay the consequence. Whatever that turns out to be.

[boneheadandrube]

Moving post this forward.

I know most of you guys have thousands, maybe hundereds of thousands tied up in your collection. But this hits us lower grade collectors too.

My $100 card is the same as your $1000 when you consider expendable income.

Personally, the SGC news bothers me most. They are who I use (I have a T206 sub there now). I'm kinda rattled with all this information that has come to light.
And, ironically, when I pulled this page up, an ad that said "Trust SGC" was at the top.:eek:

To the two that has come forward and told their story, I thank you. What you did was unethical, but you aren't running from it.

But, from what I've read, it's like being shown pictures of your wife in bed with another man, and being told:
I can explain.
It's not what it looks like.
It didn't mean anything.

Wrong is wrong and you have to pay the consequence. Whatever that turns out to be.


You'll be over all this in a month.

[steve_a]

An xls version of the Govt's Exhibit for those looking for an easier format

[pokerplyr80]

Beastmode offers some good advice (see boldface and enlarged type for added emphasis). Perhaps not "never" but certainly "rarely" will one be a victim of shilling, if followed.

[/size][/b]

The main point I have seen others try to make is that even when following this advice, one can still be a victim of shilling if what they end up paying is higher than it would have been without the shilled bids. Just because you are willing to pay that amount, or would have paid more, doesn't mean you're not a victim. Plus the bar is set that much higher the next time the same card comes up for sale.

[Fred]

Great spread sheet. It only makes me sicker to be able to sort this and see the involvement of each individual.

I wonder how many shill bidders will show up to the next National.... probably all that can because they'll have no remorse or some story indicating their innocence.

[Fred]

I'm hoping someone compiles a list of all these butt heads that shilled and their current affiliation in the hobby with an auction house and business. I can see a few prominent auction house names in there. I guess I shouldn't be so surprised. :eek:

[conor912]

But, from what I've read, it's like being shown pictures of your wife in bed with another man, and being told:
I can explain.
It's not what it looks like.
It didn't mean anything.

Wrong is wrong and you have to pay the consequence. Whatever that turns out to be.

You can rest assured that if I ever sleep with any of your wives, I won't be able to explain and it'll be exactly what it looks like :D

[yanks12025]

It should! I would demand an explanation before bidding further. In fact, I don't plan to purchase / bid in any auction affiliated with those on the shill list until the person involved comes on net54 to explain their actions.

As I've said in other threads before, the only way to clean up this hobby is for people to STOP SUPPORTING those who are dirty. Otherwise you only have yourself to blame for future abuse.

Jeff Payne

I only saw Kens name as a consignor not a shill person.

[nolemmings]

The main point I have seen others try to make is that even when following this advice, one can still be a victim of shilling if what they end up paying is higher than it would have been without the shilled bids. Just because you are willing to pay that amount, or would have paid more, doesn't mean you're not a victim. Plus the bar is set that much higher the next time the same card comes up for sale.

Exactly. It should not be that hard a concept to understand. That being said, I do not get very bothered if I win an auction at or below what I was willing to pay, even if shilling is shown. That does not mean I find it acceptable behavior to shill, however--far from it.

[xplainer]

You'll be over all this in a month.

No sir, I won't. Some, maybe most, might be. But the memory remains.

[xplainer]

You can rest assured that if I ever sleep with any of your wives, I won't be able to explain and it'll be exactly what it looks like :D

No humor allowed. Post reported. :D

[Stonepony]

You can rest assured that if I ever sleep with any of your wives, I won't be able to explain and it'll be exactly what it looks like :D

"Wives"? You mean there's no limit??

[earlywynnfan]

If Peter Calderon for example shill bidded, does that mean Heritage Auctions shill bids in their auctions?

Remember, HA has clearly stated that they reserve the right to bid up auctions if they feel the price isn't high enough. They may even just win the item themselves if they feel they can sell it directly for more. This was per Chris Ivy.

Ken

[4815162342]

In soviet Russia bids shill you!

Great post. :p

Thank you sir.

Best post ever. Because of this great post, I read all subsequent posts in a Russian accent. The humor has made all this a tiny bit easier to stomach.

[Buythatcard]

I have a feeling that this thread is going to be one of the most visited threads of all time.:eek:

As I mentioned in Post # 15.

[Buythatcard]

All these shills bother me especially the one done against me. But the one that really bothers me is T.J. Schwartz. He was the only reason that I kept subscribing to SCD. Always enjoyed his column "On Your Side". Or should it now be called "Shill You". I just sent off a check on Weds to renew that publication. If I only knew, I would have not renewed.

Moving forward, I think one way to stop some of this shilling would be if an AH put out a list after each auction showing the same type of info that was used in Mastro's case. Knowing that your name will be put out there might make you think twice about shilling another auction.

[Brian Van Horn]

Not even the smallest bit. This hobby was loaded with bad actors when I got into it in the late 80's, the 90's were the same, and the 21st century has been no different. It's very unlikely to change even after this 'revelation', which really can't be surprising to anyone who was actively in the hobby during 2007-2009.

There is one very good thing to come out of this, that Bill Mastro has permanently exited the hobby. In my opinion, all of the other players combined can't compete with all of the damage he did by himself.

Bill

Bill,

If the guy used shill bidding to boost his profits, what makes you think when he gets out he wont shill his advice?

[ElCabron]

Can we please put an end to this stupid "stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again." argument? It's complete BS.

If there's an item that you are willing to pay $5,000 for (with that being within your budget) but legitimate bidding goes no higher than $2,000, you should win the item at he next increment above that. Just over $2,000. If you are shilled (and I'm not talking about placing a max bid) up to or near your max, you will still win the item for an amount that was within your budget. But the market has determined that it's a $2,000 item. You'll find that out when you go try to sell it and lose $3,000. Because you were a "victim" of dirtbags who got rich by stealing from many of us in the hobby.

If that situation happens in a private sale or at a show, it's on the buyer. If someone is selling a $2,000 item for $5,000 and you buy it, it's your own fault. In an auction, it shouldn't be unreasonable to assume that you are bidding against a legitimate buyer. Unfortunately, we all know that with very few exceptions, that is not a safe assumption.

It's stupid and incorrect to assume that anyone who was shilled was desperate or caught up in the moment with no self-control. It's equally false to assume that you can only be shilled if you set a max bid. I do not set max bids because I've always believed it was an invitation to be shilled. Which it clearly is, with certain auction houses. So there are plenty of us on that list that were victims in spite of your guarantee that we couldn't be shilled in those circumstances. So let's stop with that, k?

-Ryan

[AGuinness]

I just sent off a check on Weds to renew that publication. If I only knew, I would have not renewed.

You could cancel the check. Tell him to "shill off."

[Jeff_cvc]

It should! I would demand an explanation before bidding further. In fact, I don't plan to purchase / bid in any auction affiliated with those on the shill list until the person involved comes on net54 to explain their actions.

As I've said in other threads before, the only way to clean up this hobby is for people to STOP SUPPORTING those who are dirty. Otherwise you only have yourself to blame for future abuse.

Jeff Payne

+1 your almighty dollar will speak volumes. Where you decide to spend your money is the best way to make a statement.

[bcornell]

How do I know Mastro is out of the hobby? Of course, I don't, although he and his lawyer did tell a judge that before he was sentenced. You never can count anyone out of this hobby...

It's well worth re-reading this thread (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=210035) for a reminder of Mastro's dishonesty. The shill bidding was his idea, he promoted it within his company, and he altered items in order to defraud collectors.

Bill

[Bugsy]

Bill,

Not for a second do I believe Bill has exited the hobby. We may not see his name but it is my opinion (and it is just that, an opinion) that he is still "in the hobby" somehow.

In the past year, I had a red infield B18 listed for sale on eBay. A person named Bill Mastro made me a low ball offer on it. I'm dead serious.

[gnaz01]

How do I know Mastro is out of the hobby? Of course, I don't, although he and his lawyer did tell a judge that before he was sentenced. You never can count anyone out of this hobby...

It's well worth re-reading this thread (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=210035) for a reminder of Mastro's dishonesty. The shill bidding was his idea, he promoted it within his company, and he altered items in order to defraud collectors.

Bill

Thanks Bill, I know that thread well, and I meant nothing bad by what I wrote. It's just like "mob" guys that go to jail, they're still deep in it while behind bars :p

Greg

[xplainer]

Can we please put an end to this stupid "stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again." argument? It's complete BS.

If there's an item that you are willing to pay $5,000 for (with that being within your budget) but legitimate bidding goes no higher than $2,000, you should win the item at he next increment above that. Just over $2,000. If you are shilled (and I'm not talking about placing a max bid) up to or near your max, you will still win the item for an amount that was within your budget. But the market has determined that it's a $2,000 item. You'll find that out when you go try to sell it and lose $3,000. Because you were a "victim" of dirtbags who got rich by stealing from many of us in the hobby.

If that situation happens in a private sale or at a show, it's on the buyer. If someone is selling a $2,000 item for $5,000 and you buy it, it's your own fault. In an auction, it shouldn't be unreasonable to assume that you are bidding against a legitimate buyer. Unfortunately, we all know that with very few exceptions, that is not a safe assumption.

It's stupid and incorrect to assume that anyone who was shilled was desperate or caught up in the moment with no self-control. It's equally false to assume that you can only be shilled if you set a max bid. I do not set max bids because I've always believed it was an invitation to be shilled. Which it clearly is, with certain auction houses. So there are plenty of us on that list that were victims in spite of your guarantee that we couldn't be shilled in those circumstances. So let's stop with that, k?

-Ryan

So, you are on the list too? Victims, that is.

[Brian Van Horn]

Thanks Bill, I know that thread well, and I meant nothing bad by what I wrote. It's just like "mob" guys that go to jail, they're still deep in it while behind bars :p

Greg

Egad! Does this make Mastro the Godfather? Worse is will we hear the Mazurka when he leaves prison?

[bn2cardz]

I only saw Kens name as a consignor not a shill person.

What are you implying with this comment? Are you stating the only unethical people on the list are the shillers and not the consignors?

The consignors' items were shilled because they wanted it shilled and worked with someone else to get it shilled (just as Peter described).

[gnaz01]

egad! Does this make mastro the godfather? Worse is will we hear the mazurka when he leaves prison?

lol😂

[AGuinness]

Can we please put an end to this stupid "stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again." argument? It's complete BS.

If there's an item that you are willing to pay $5,000 for (with that being within your budget) but legitimate bidding goes no higher than $2,000, you should win the item at he next increment above that. Just over $2,000. If you are shilled (and I'm not talking about placing a max bid) up to or near your max, you will still win the item for an amount that was within your budget. But the market has determined that it's a $2,000 item. You'll find that out when you go try to sell it and lose $3,000. Because you were a "victim" of dirtbags who got rich by stealing from many of us in the hobby.

If that situation happens in a private sale or at a show, it's on the buyer. If someone is selling a $2,000 item for $5,000 and you buy it, it's your own fault. In an auction, it shouldn't be unreasonable to assume that you are bidding against a legitimate buyer. Unfortunately, we all know that with very few exceptions, that is not a safe assumption.

It's stupid and incorrect to assume that anyone who was shilled was desperate or caught up in the moment with no self-control. It's equally false to assume that you can only be shilled if you set a max bid. I do not set max bids because I've always believed it was an invitation to be shilled. Which it clearly is, with certain auction houses. So there are plenty of us on that list that were victims in spite of your guarantee that we couldn't be shilled in those circumstances. So let's stop with that, k?

-Ryan

Nicely said.

Price gouging, whether it's your local gas station, a contractor or otherwise, is basically the same thing. Ripping people off. Illegal, too.

[xplainer]

Thanks Bill, I know that thread well, and I meant nothing bad by what I wrote. It's just like "mob" guys that go to jail, they're still deep in it while behind bars :p

Greg

Wow. Peter's remarks are, well wow. You read them and decide.

[ElCabron]

So, you are on the list too? Victims, that is.

I've known for years. But yes, on the list. Not the Douchebag side of it. The other side.

-Ryan

[xplainer]

I've known for years. But yes, on the list. Not the Douchebag side of it. The other side.

-Ryan

Gotcha Ryan.
But you said, you've known for years? If you care to explain, how did you know?

[ElCabron]

Gotcha Ryan.
But you said, you've known for years? If you care to explain, how did you know?

I'll send you a private message later.

[glchen]

Can we please put an end to this stupid "stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again." argument? It's complete BS.

If there's an item that you are willing to pay $5,000 for (with that being within your budget) but legitimate bidding goes no higher than $2,000, you should win the item at he next increment above that. Just over $2,000. If you are shilled (and I'm not talking about placing a max bid) up to or near your max, you will still win the item for an amount that was within your budget. But the market has determined that it's a $2,000 item. You'll find that out when you go try to sell it and lose $3,000. Because you were a "victim" of dirtbags who got rich by stealing from many of us in the hobby.

If that situation happens in a private sale or at a show, it's on the buyer. If someone is selling a $2,000 item for $5,000 and you buy it, it's your own fault. In an auction, it shouldn't be unreasonable to assume that you are bidding against a legitimate buyer. Unfortunately, we all know that with very few exceptions, that is not a safe assumption.

It's stupid and incorrect to assume that anyone who was shilled was desperate or caught up in the moment with no self-control. It's equally false to assume that you can only be shilled if you set a max bid. I do not set max bids because I've always believed it was an invitation to be shilled. Which it clearly is, with certain auction houses. So there are plenty of us on that list that were victims in spite of your guarantee that we couldn't be shilled in those circumstances. So let's stop with that, k?

-Ryan

+1, I completely agree with this.

[xplainer]

I'll send you a private message later. That is fine. If you'd like. Thanks.

[drcy]

Ryan, of course, is correct. That if you bid within your budget or "the maximum you're willing to pay" you can't be cheated out of money is an argument that dumb people make.

[RGold]

I was the consignor of a 1955 Red Man set in the August, 2007 Mastro Auctions which appears on the list being discussed. It is the only item where my name is listed as consignor and Peter Spaeth as the bidder.

Peter has already related the facts and expressed views as I see them. People may question my ethics but I ask that they at least acknowledge that this was the lone entry on a very long list, and that this one transaction was much different than many of those listed. I have had many private transactions with people on this board and as a seller and buyer on eBay, and I hope my past dealings are at least considered before passing judgment.

I made the decision to consign this set with Mastro Auctions despite the fact they would not use a reserve or high starting bid. They told me that they would allow me to select one bidder to place what constitutes a hidden reserve, as long as I understood that if that bid was the winning bid, I would have to pay a buyer's premium on that amount.

I assumed this was an acceptable practice as I was told this was done on other Mastro auction lots. At that time I believe Mastro Auctions was considered the premier auction house in our hobby.

I have been a member on this board for about 8 years, and have read the many discussions regarding shill bidding. My understanding and views have evolved over that time like I am sure it has for many other members. I understand and agree that using a hidden reserve in the way Mastro Auctions suggested is wrong. I only ask that the members here consider that this was done in 2007, that it was recommended by the leading auction house, that it was done once, that the hidden reserve was a fraction of the value of the lot, and that the buyer's premium was paid by me.

There was no intent to deceive anyone. This set was #1 on the PSA Registry by a very large margin. Every card was the highest graded at that time and almost half of the 50 cards were the only ones graded at that level. Any one interested in Red Man cards could see that I retired the set before the auction and then re-registered the set after the auction showing that the set had not changed hands.

Finally, and most importantly, I want to clarify the record. Peter is a good friend and wrote his explanation in such a way as not to distance himself from me, but the fact of the matter is that he did not place these bids, I did. He did know what I was doing because we discussed how I had been instructed to proceed by Doug Allen, and he does not deny that, but he was not an active participant in the bidding. The worst part of this whole affair is that an honest, good guy is being hurt for doing me a favor.

[steve_a]

Can we please put an end to this stupid "stay within your budget and be patient, and you will never be a "victim" of shilling again." argument? It's complete BS.

If there's an item that you are willing to pay $5,000 for (with that being within your budget) but legitimate bidding goes no higher than $2,000, you should win the item at he next increment above that. Just over $2,000. If you are shilled (and I'm not talking about placing a max bid) up to or near your max, you will still win the item for an amount that was within your budget. But the market has determined that it's a $2,000 item. You'll find that out when you go try to sell it and lose $3,000. Because you were a "victim" of dirtbags who got rich by stealing from many of us in the hobby.

If that situation happens in a private sale or at a show, it's on the buyer. If someone is selling a $2,000 item for $5,000 and you buy it, it's your own fault. In an auction, it shouldn't be unreasonable to assume that you are bidding against a legitimate buyer. Unfortunately, we all know that with very few exceptions, that is not a safe assumption.

It's stupid and incorrect to assume that anyone who was shilled was desperate or caught up in the moment with no self-control. It's equally false to assume that you can only be shilled if you set a max bid. I do not set max bids because I've always believed it was an invitation to be shilled. Which it clearly is, with certain auction houses. So there are plenty of us on that list that were victims in spite of your guarantee that we couldn't be shilled in those circumstances. So let's stop with that, k?

-Ryan

I'll stick my hand up to disagree. In your example there is 3k of room between the underbidder and the buyers max price. The buyer isnt "entitled" to all of that cash. I have no problem being shilled in that case. No problem w Peter or anyone else who bid blind on their own consignments and paid the bp. Mastro is in jail for bidding with knowledge of max bids, completely different.

[AGuinness]

I'll stick my hand up to disagree. In your example there is 3k of room between the underbidder and the buyers max price. The buyer isnt "entitled" to all of that cash. I have no problem being shilled in that case. No problem w Peter or anyone else who bid blind on their own consignments and paid the bp. Mastro is in jail for bidding with knowledge of max bids, completely different.

This is foolish logic, I believe. There not need to be knowledge of max bids for a shill bid to occur. Any attempt for the purpose of inflating the price of an item is a shill bid.

Simply put, an auction is designed to let the market set the final price, and the market usually finds an appropriate one. But the market is falsified when shill bidding is introduced, pitting an unaware bidder versus the seller (or seller's proxy).

Like I noted before, it's similar to price gauging (gas, etc.). If you're fine with being gauged, then that's your prerogative. It still doesn't make it legal or morally acceptable.

And as they say, a fool and his money are soon parted.

[drcy]

I'll stick my hand up to disagree. In your example there is 3k of room between the underbidder and the buyers max price. The buyer isnt "entitled" to all of that cash. I have no problem being shilled in that case.

What cash? The cash concocted through illegal activity?

The arbiter should be that it's illegal. As in against the law. That's enough for me.

[AGuinness]

I appreciate the fact that people named on the list have stepped up and offered their side of the story for all this.

I believe it was wrong and that people should have known better, but I still appreciate their contributions to the conversation and that this board has welcomed a difficult topic.

If there's any lesson reinforced for me, it's that there are shady people out there and when I encounter somebody like that or a deal that I'm uncomfortable with, walk away. There's always tomorrow.

[Bliggity]

I'll stick my hand up to disagree. In your example there is 3k of room between the underbidder and the buyers max price. The buyer isnt "entitled" to all of that cash. I have no problem being shilled in that case. No problem w Peter or anyone else who bid blind on their own consignments and paid the bp. Mastro is in jail for bidding with knowledge of max bids, completely different.

Since you have no problem with shilling, please let me know your eBay handle so I can make sure never to bid in your auctions. Because I do have a problem with being illegally shilled, and yes, I would be entitled to every cent that I was fraudulently induced to spend.

[AGuinness]

The arbiter should be that it's illegal. As in against the law. That's enough of a line in the sand for me..

No kidding. The US District Court of Northern Illinois, Eastern Division is taking shill bidding very very seriously. The argument of "I'm fine with it" seems pretty silly to me.

[sreader3]

The buyer isnt "entitled" to all of that cash.

Agree with Ryan and others.

The buyer is "entitled" to expect that other bidders will follow laws set by legislatures and rules set by auction houses. So if a statute and/or auction house rule forbids shill bidding, the buyer is in fact "'entitled' to all of that cash."

For example, eBay explicitly forbids shilling.

http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/seller-shill-bidding.html

I'm sure most auction houses do as well.

When a potential buyer puts in a $5000 max bid on an item, and state law and/or an auction house rule prohibit shill bidding, part of what goes into the bidding calculus is that the potential buyer may actually get the item for less. In other words, he or she is not bidding "$5000," he or she is bidding "one increment above whatever the next highest legitimate bid is, up to $5000."

[RichardSimon]

I was the consignor of a 1955 Red Man set in the August, 2007 Mastro Auctions which appears on the list being discussed. It is the only item where my name is listed as consignor and Peter Spaeth as the bidder.

Peter has already related the facts and expressed views as I see them. People may question my ethics but I ask that they at least acknowledge that this was the lone entry on a very long list, and that this one transaction was much different than many of those listed. I have had many private transactions with people on this board and as a seller and buyer on eBay, and I hope my past dealings are at least considered before passing judgment.

I made the decision to consign this set with Mastro Auctions despite the fact they would not use a reserve or high starting bid. They told me that they would allow me to select one bidder to place what constitutes a hidden reserve, as long as I understood that if that bid was the winning bid, I would have to pay a buyer's premium on that amount.

I assumed this was an acceptable practice as I was told this was done on other Mastro auction lots. At that time I believe Mastro Auctions was considered the premier auction house in our hobby.

I have been a member on this board for about 8 years, and have read the many discussions regarding shill bidding. My understanding and views have evolved over that time like I am sure it has for many other members. I understand and agree that using a hidden reserve in the way Mastro Auctions suggested is wrong. I only ask that the members here consider that this was done in 2007, that it was recommended by the leading auction house, that it was done once, that the hidden reserve was a fraction of the value of the lot, and that the buyer's premium was paid by me.

There was no intent to deceive anyone. This set was #1 on the PSA Registry by a very large margin. Every card was the highest graded at that time and almost half of the 50 cards were the only ones graded at that level. Any one interested in Red Man cards could see that I retired the set before the auction and then re-registered the set after the auction showing that the set had not changed hands.

Finally, and most importantly, I want to clarify the record. Peter is a good friend and wrote his explanation in such a way as not to distance himself from me, but the fact of the matter is that he did not place these bids, I did. He did know what I was doing because we discussed how I had been instructed to proceed by Doug Allen, and he does not deny that, but he was not an active participant in the bidding. The worst part of this whole affair is that an honest, good guy is being hurt for doing me a favor.

I don't know this individual but do want to ask one question.
When Mastro refused to take the set with a high minimum or reserve why would you not search for another auction house that would take it. The competition among auction houses is fierce and I am sure you could have found one of the leading auction houses who would have taken it under your terms.

[MRSPORTSCARDCOLLECTOR]

As a newbie a few questions I like to ask is does anybody think this news will affect the market for Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle card or other similar much sought after cards?
Do some of these high sought after cards have artificial higher value because of this?

[RGold]

I have not consigned many items but every auction house I have talked to does not like high starting bids because it looks bad to have unsold items. Also, there were not as many auction houses in 2007. Today, I see some of the newer and smaller auction houses using high starting bids, and I agree it is a bad look to see many lots unsold.

I am not sure why more auction houses will not use reserves except most buyers do not like participating in them.

[AGuinness]

I don't know this individual but do want to ask one question.
When Mastro refused to take the set with a high minimum or reserve why would you not search for another auction house that would take it. The competition among auction houses is fierce and I am sure you could have found one of the leading auction houses who would have taken it under your terms.

Especially for one that was #1 on the PSA register by a large margin...

[D.P.Johnson]

The odds must be astronomical that the one and only time two people conspire to shill at auction they both get caught...bad luck I guess...

[swarmee]

As a newbie a few questions I like to ask is does anybody think this news will affect the market for Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle card or other similar much sought after cards?
Do some of these high sought after cards have artificial higher value because of this?
So that is a great question. But you won't get a good answer until three years down the road and see how it affects future bidding. If the next three high grade '52T Mantles all go for $400-500K, then that's the "true value" of the card in that grade. If it sells for $370, then $340, then $300, then people bidding are showing that they've been affected by this news and are no longer willing to set records with that card.

[bobbyw8469]

I have not consigned many items but every auction house I have talked to does not like high starting bids because it looks bad to have unsold items. Also, there were not as many auction houses in 2007. Today, I see some of the newer and smaller auction houses using high starting bids, and I agree it is a bad look to see many lots unsold.

I am not sure why more auction houses will not use reserves except most buyers do not like participating in them.

With the advent of VCP, I don't mind a high starting bid as long as it is under what the average selling price. It is when the starting bid is higher than the average selling price, and then you have to pay an exorbitant buyer's premium is what turns bidders off. With all the info that is available, it is easy to see if you are getting ripped off or not.

[drcy]

I never considered a single sale a determination of market value anyway. The $3 million for the Mark McGwire ball was just what one idiot with money to burn was willing to pay. Even though someone paid $3 million, the ball was never worth $3 million. Didn't matter what it sold for. Prices often go down drastically when one big spender leaves the market or the two people who want the card the most get theirs. Good statistical analysis usually starts by throwing out the highest and lowest numbers.

[Huck]

I made the decision to consign this set with Mastro Auctions despite the fact they would not use a reserve or high starting bid. They told me that they would allow me to select one bidder to place what constitutes a hidden reserve, as long as I understood that if that bid was the winning bid, I would have to pay a buyer's premium on that amount.


Why not make the "hidden reserve" the first bid? Bidders could then decide to pay more or not bid at all. Dollar wise, you had an idea as to what the set should fetch, open the bidding with said figure, and let it ride.

[Prince Hal]

I don't personally know any of the folks on the "shill" list. If the information as presented is true, Ronald Goldberg and Peter Spaeth and all the others thus far identified are crooks. I'm sure you are not bad people and you're not Isis. But anyone who manipulates the market is a crook. You enter an item for the market to decide and you win or you lose. That's your gamble. Forget the shill moniker it's too misleading. You are just common, but repentant (sort of), crooks. Everyone is sorry or has an excuse when they get caught and the prisons are full of innocent people. Mia culpa all you want. You can't unring a bell. Very sad. Duncan MacKenzie

[Shoeless Moe]

Bill,

Not for a second do I believe Bill has exited the hobby. We may not see his name but it is my opinion (and it is just that, an opinion) that he is still "in the hobby" somehow.

He is, well as of about a year ago he was, I sold him something, on here I want to say.

[RCMcKenzie]

Not only is 'not offering to pay more than you are willing to spend' not "dumb", it's a tautology. Be careful out there, gang.

[Shoeless Moe]

As a newbie a few questions I like to ask is does anybody think this news will affect the market for Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle card or other similar much sought after cards?
Do some of these high sought after cards have artificial higher value because of this?

uh......yah!

[Kenny Cole]

I have tried to stay out thus far. I am now unsuccessful. I am not on either list simply because I didn't' win one of those auctions. I was probably one of those legitimate bidders who bid Ryan up at the same time the auction house or consignor/friend was doing that. We have similar interests. Even by losing, I screwed my friend.

I get all the stuff about altering the price point of the PSA 8 card and whatnot. Blah, blah, blah. Its wonderful to have the best card ever and I am certain that getting that 8.5 so you can drop that ratty 8 is exhilarating. Its just the shits when you find out you paid substantially more than you would have had things been honest. Yawn.

But to me, it is much more basic. Ryan won a lot we probably both bid on. It cost him more than it should have, because neither one of us knew we were both being cheated to begin with. I probably beat him on one of the other auctions that have no bidding records that was also shilled.

Peter, you were absolutely wrong. I get the reasoning though. There is a long list of people, myself included (on multiple occasions), who do things for friends while knowing that they are ... wrong. The fact that you did it for a friend doesn't make it less wrong, it just makes it more understandable. Been there, done that. Can't really shoot at you too hard.

That list makes me sick. I hope that its wrong while I know it probably isn't. What a betrayal. I'm historically an SGC guy, but probably no longer. Just a sad revelation all around.

[Shoeless Moe]

Leon, ban these son of a bitches!!!! They come back under an assumed name owe well, they wouldn't like that anyway, they have to big of egos and want the world to know them, well who gives a rats ass about them, BAN 'EM ALL!!!!!! Judge Kennesaw Mountain Luckey!!!!

[Huck]

[QUOTE=botn;1497093

At no point did we ever conspire with anyone at Mastro on those bids. We never knew who was bidding on our items or what their bids were. I have no recollection which of our consignments I was the one to place a bid and which my former business partner bid on but since he is no longer here I have to take responsibility for our actions. Sometimes a top all would be placed and other times we would bid incrementally so as to not open ourselves up to being shill bid, as ironic as that might sound. In each instance our bids were made with the intent to buy back the item and a willingness to pay the buyer’s premium, as we did each time we bought back a lot. It did not feel right doing this but I never thought of it as being illegal.

[/QUOTE]


Incremental bidding -

Example 1: Lot A, you the cosigner think the lot should sell for $2,000.

Did the bidding go like this?

Bidder 1: $650.00
You: $750.00
Bidder 1: $900.00
Bidder 2: $1,000.00
Bidder 1: $1,200.00
You: $1,400.00
Bidder 3: $1,600.00
You: $1,800.00
Bidder 3: $2,000
You - See that is the rub, did you stop or keep pushing?

[vintagetoppsguy]

I don't personally know any of the folks on the "shill" list. If the information as presented is true, Ronald Goldberg and Peter Spaeth and all the others thus far identified are crooks. I'm sure you are not bad people and you're not Isis. But anyone who manipulates the market is a crook. You enter an item for the market to decide and you win or you lose. That's your gamble. Forget the shill moniker it's too misleading. You are just common, but repentant (sort of), crooks. Everyone is sorry or has an excuse when they get caught and the prisons are full of innocent people. Mia culpa all you want. You can't unring a bell. Very sad. Duncan MacKenzie

I disagree. Sure, they got caught, but they owned up to their mistakes. Do you remember the Joe Pankiewicz threads? He was caught multiple times shilling his own consignments with Probstein...even accused of doctoring cards to get grade bumps. Probstein was made aware of Joe's actions and did absolutely nothing. And when Joe finally responded, of course he denied everything and told us how honest he was, blah, blah, blah. Heck, he even called for an apology to Rick. All the proof was right there, but he still denied it. Peter and Ron have admitted their mistake and take responsibility for their actions. To me, that says a lot about their character as opposed to people like Joe Pankiewicz or Rick Probation.

I wonder if those with the pitchforks have bought anything from Probstein since that mess a couple years ago? I'd be willing to bet so. You'll buy from a guy that allows shill bidding, but you're so quick to condemn here. I made a vow at that point to never buy anything from Probstein again AND I HAVE NOT! And it wasn't because of the shilling in his auctions, it was because he turned a blind eye and LET IT CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. So again I ask, how many of you pointing fingers here have bought from Probstein since then? Post your eBay IDs and let's find out.

[ElCabron]

Kenny,

Your bids on the particular lot I won that is on this list didn't affect the price at all. You didn't drive me up. You were probably the 3rd high bidder. Had you been the underbidder, it wouldn't list my name in the "victim" column. You bidding against me is just healthy competition. Nothing wrong with that. But after you had maxed out (if you were even bidding on this lot), I was shilled up another $2,000+ of pure shill bids that had nothing to do with you.

I'm just happy the list is now public because I should be receiving a check any day now from Doug Allen as restitution, right? Yep.

Also, the main reason all these scumbags on the list aren't responding in this thread is that they're too busy spending everyone's money they made, consequence-free, from all of this. I'm guessing quite a few of them made deals to tell the truth about Mastro and Allen that got them off the hook, but also keeps them from posting here about any of it. This is especially true of the employees of Mastro and Legendary that many of us know well and consider to be friends. They haven't posted here because they are guilty.

The real lesson here is that crime absolutely does pay, and pay very well. So, congrats to all you silent scumbags who are reading this in your huge houses bought with money you stole. Sleep well tonight, douchebags!

-Ryan

[Robert_Lifson]

The consignors' items were shilled because they wanted it shilled and worked with someone else to get it shilled.

My one and only post about this at this time: The above statement is not accurate in all cases. It may be the case with virtually all of the 2463 auctions listed in the document, but it is definitely not the case with the one lot in which I am listed as the consignor. That lot is listed because there was shill bidding on this lot. But I (as the consignor) had nothing to do with the shill bidding, did not work with anyone to get my lot shilled, and most certainly did not want my lot shilled. There is much additional fascinating information about this lot and the case in general which I choose not to share here (as this is not the time and place) but I will add this: The consignor-portion of the funds stolen by Mastro Auctions via shill bidding against the high left bid on this lot were sent to me against my wishes and were immediately returned by wire (as opposed to check as my attorney said he was concerned they might just not cash the check) and the FBI was given all information, and this played a significant role in launching the entire investigation. As I have said, there is much additional information, but please excuse that I will not be posting more about this right now. I just felt that it was important to clarify this.

Sincerely,

Robert Lifson

Robert Edward Auctions, LLC

[Klrdds]

I have not read each and every post on this topic but I have read about 3/4 ths of them so forgive me if this topic has been addressed already.
A lot of us old time / veteran collectors have to wonder how long has the Mastro shill bidding been actually occurring ? Since only a few years of results are available one must ask how long did this go on ?
Does it go back to Mastro - Steinbach auctions ?
Does it go back to mergers with Oregon Trading , which later did business for a time as Mastro West, and with Ron Oser and their merger into a bigger Mastro Auction company ? No harm is meant to Ron Oser with this comment.
Does this prove an old adage of that " as long as there are auctions there will always be a phantom ( shill ) bidder " that I heard as a warning years ago when phone and fax bids were accepted as the auction business began in lieu of live auctions .

Also to digress was a greater scam attempted when Bill Mastro came out with an attempt to sell shares in his auction house to a select few collectors and bidders and customers . I was offered shares but turned them down as overvalued and a bad long term investment with little prospect of an adequate ROI. Does any one remember this ? Looking back now it seems like a Ponzi scheme was attempted .

[drcy]

No doubt lots can be shilled without consignors' knowledge. The auction houses get a percentage of the final bids and would like all boats to rise, and some outside collectors like their investments to maintain their market value. Some collectors are willing to buy cards just to 'protect' the market value of the copies they already own. Of course there's nothing errant with honestly (I said honestly, as opposed to a miscalculated shillingly) buying the cards, other than it may be seen as a dubious investment strategy.

[prestigecollectibles]

There were more than 80 lots consigned by Hal Lewis where Stephen Spector was listed as the shill bidder including the T-206 Wagner I won. It seems in many cases two people were working together. Does anyone know if these are real people or just made up names used by Mastro?

[drcy]

Hal used to be a regular board poster.

[jason.1969]

I assumed this was an acceptable practice as I was told this was done on other Mastro auction lots.

Evidently it was! :-)

[ElCabron]

There were more than 80 lots consigned by Hal Lewis where Stephen Spector was listed as the shill bidder including the T-206 Wagner I won. It seems in many cases two people were working together. Does anyone know if these are real people or just made up names used by Mastro?

Hal is real. A real scumbag, that is. You might remember him from such hits as "Henry Reccius Honus Wagner." A quick search should tell you all you need to know about Hal. Hope you're reading this, Hal.

-Ryan

[bcornell]

Hal is real. A real scumbag, that is. You might remember him from such hits as "Henry Reccius Honus Wagner." A quick search should tell you all you need to know about Hal. Hope you're reading this, Hal.

-Ryan

Hal Lewis and Stephen Spector are both attorneys in Tallahassee. I'm on the list of their shill bids, although I'm not a "victim".

I'll gladly second what Ryan said about Hal. He had no idea what he was collecting (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=76870) and no integrity. Good riddance.

[whiteymet]

I just started to take a look at the list and found two items that were curious.

The first is from Auction 41 April 07 Lot # 829 Consigned by Dan Knoll, Shilled by Dennis Beechy, won by DOUG ALLEN for $862 and the loss amount was $44! This is not like other lots where the shill won the lot, this appears that Doug wanted the lot. See:

http://legendaryauctions.com/_The_Eyes_Behind_the_Brawn____1930_Hack_Wilson_New-LOT69974.aspx


The second item also from the April 07 Auction Lot #671 Consigned by Gilbert Proter, shilled by Andrew Filipowski, won by Tony Arnold for $60,717 the loss amount was $ 4,424,

However if one looks at the listing below it shows the lot did not sell. Wonder what happened?

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=69816

[mickeymao34]

The statement that "just because they are consignors doesn't mean they are part of the scam" is true theoretically. But if it has a the one and the same shill bidder consistently throughout 30-40 consignments the pointing of finger seems justified. And WTF is Darryl??

[cardaholic]

There's one sure-fire way not to be shilled: Never bid over the minimum bid. :D

[mickeymao34]

there's one sure-fire way not to be shilled: Never bid over the minimum bid. :d

true dat! Lmfao

[BBSD]

Curious if Peter and Ron would fess up to anyother sketchy situations that they were involved with?

[scooter729]

Curious as to what people would think of this hypothetical situation, if it were possible for it to happen....

Two friends (A and B) both are interested in an item that doesn't pop up often, but typically would sell for around $500. But since it doesn't come up for sale often, both are willing to pay $1,000+.

In talking, they both realize they are likely going to bid each other up on the item, so they come to an agreement to have Friend B stay away from bidding on this item and let A get it for ~$500, and B will be able to get the next one that comes available for ~$500.

Is this scenario wrong? Seems like the buyer's version of shilling - wouldn't be illegal but is it ethical?

[Stonepony]

Curious as to what people would think of this hypothetical situation, if it were possible for it to happen....

Two friends (A and B) both are interested in an item that doesn't pop up often, but typically would sell for around $500. But since it doesn't come up for sale often, both are willing to pay $1,000+.

In talking, they both realize they are likely going to bid each other up on the item, so they come to an agreement to have Friend B stay away from bidding on this item and let A get it for ~$500, and B will be able to get the next one that comes available for ~$500.

Is this scenario wrong? Seems like the buyer's version of shilling - wouldn't be illegal but is it ethical?

I have no problem with this. There was no price manipulation and the item sold for what it typically would bring. There's nothing unethical about not bidding.

[Joe_G.]

Reading this thread with interest. I feel for those who were taken advantage of.

The second item also from the April 07 Auction Lot #671 Consigned by Gilbert Proter, shilled by Andrew Filipowski, won by Tony Arnold for $60,717 the loss amount was $ 4,424,

However if one looks at the listing below it shows the lot did not sell. Wonder what happened?

http://legendaryauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=69816

Those cabinets were auctioned individually and as a whole with the break-up total of $73,010 receiving a higher total than the whole. I remember watching that one with interest, some absolutely great NY cabinets within.

[wolf441]

So this thread is now #7 all time in number of replies and #9 all time in number of views. I feel like I did when Bonds was chasing Aaron...

I'm predicting that it lands at #2 on both lists by the middle of next week.

Frank, the "What's Your Monster Number?" thread is safe...for now! :D

[trobba]

I made the decision to consign this set with Mastro Auctions despite the fact they would not use a reserve or high starting bid. They told me that they would allow me to select one bidder to place what constitutes a hidden reserve, as long as I understood that if that bid was the winning bid, I would have to pay a buyer's premium on that amount.


This to me is the heart of the "crime" of shilling in several of these Mastro lots.

Not holding the shill bidder responsible for paying for the lot, rather just the buyer's premium, truly removes most of the risk of this practice. If the shill bidders had to pay for the lot as well, I am sure there would have been a lot less of it.

While it is publicly described in this instance, I assume it was common practice for numerous other lots as well. Mastro colludes with a consignor allowing them to have a friend bid up the cards and they wont be held responsible for the final price, just the buyer's premium...extremely bad ethics and once again provides the market with completely inaccurate data and not only inflated prices, but in reality, not even prices paid at all.

Rob G$theil

[earlywynnfan]

There's one sure-fire way not to be shilled: Never bid over the minimum bid. :D

Don't know if this is exactly true. As in the Peter case, if I bid the minimum, a "protector" of the lot would outbid me. So a little later, I'll try to bid one higher, and be in the lead, only to have them respond. So I guess the only sure-fire way to not be shilled is to only place the opening bid, and if you don't win, walk away.

[Eric72]

Curious as to what people would think of this hypothetical situation, if it were possible for it to happen....

Two friends (A and B) both are interested in an item that doesn't pop up often, but typically would sell for around $500. But since it doesn't come up for sale often, both are willing to pay $1,000+.

In talking, they both realize they are likely going to bid each other up on the item, so they come to an agreement to have Friend B stay away from bidding on this item and let A get it for ~$500, and B will be able to get the next one that comes available for ~$500.

Is this scenario wrong? Seems like the buyer's version of shilling - wouldn't be illegal but is it ethical?

Hi Scooter. You pose an interesting question. Please know that my answer is not an attack, snarky response, or anything of the sort. I am just joining in the conversation.

As it pertains to the scenario above, wouldn't this be an example of bidder collusion? I very well could be mistaken; however, think the practice actually is illegal. At the very least, it artificially suppresses the price of the item. It could likely also be argued that the consignor suffered economic harm because of the bidders' agreement.

For the purpose of full disclosure, I never participated in Mastro auctions.

Best regards to all. Happy collecting.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Hi Scooter. You pose an interesting question. Please know that my answer is not an attack, snarky response, or anything of the sort. I am just joining in the conversation.

As it pertains to the scenario above, wouldn't this be an example of bidder collusion? I very well could be mistaken; however, think the practice actually is illegal. At the very least, it artificially suppresses the price of the item. It could likely also be argued that the consignor suffered economic harm because of the bidders' agreement.

For the purpose of full disclosure, I never participated in Mastro auctions.

Best regards to all. Happy collecting.

Eric in theory you are right, buyers cannot lawfully collude to suppress price any more than sellers can collude to inflate it. Basic antitrust law. Of course, as a practical matter, it's going to be viewed as less important than seller price-fixing.

[swarmee]

Eric in theory you are right, buyers cannot lawfully collude to suppress price any more than sellers can collude to inflate it. Basic antitrust law. Of course, as a practical matter, it's going to be viewed as less important than seller price-fixing.

And almost impossible to prove, since they're not going to discuss their lack of additional bids with anyone else, including the auctionhouse...

[Peter_Spaeth]

And almost impossible to prove, since they're not going to discuss their lack of additional bids with anyone else, including the auctionhouse...

Yes, but that can be true of seller collusion as well, sometimes there are smoking guns but often it has to be proved circumstantially.

[T206Collector]

On day 1, Zues created auction houses.
On day 2, Hades created shill bidding.

If you participate in bidding at auctions against strangers then shill bidding in one form or another is a significant and predictable risk. Too easy to call a friend and have him place a bid for you. It's unethical and illegal. But, very hard to police. So I accept it as a hobby hazard.

Having said that, once in awhile the rock is lifted, the sun shines on the mud beneath and the bugs scatter. And we can see you all very clearly now. You were betting we wouldn't ever see you. Oops.

[batsballsbases]

I was the consignor of a 1955 Red Man set in the August, 2007 Mastro Auctions which appears on the list being discussed. It is the only item where my name is listed as consignor and Peter Spaeth as the bidder.

Peter has already related the facts and expressed views as I see them. People may question my ethics but I ask that they at least acknowledge that this was the lone entry on a very long list, and that this one transaction was much different than many of those listed. I have had many private transactions with people on this board and as a seller and buyer on eBay, and I hope my past dealings are at least considered before passing judgment.

I made the decision to consign this set with Mastro Auctions despite the fact they would not use a reserve or high starting bid. They told me that they would allow me to select one bidder to place what constitutes a hidden reserve, as long as I understood that if that bid was the winning bid, I would have to pay a buyer's premium on that amount.

I assumed this was an acceptable practice as I was told this was done on other Mastro auction lots. At that time I believe Mastro Auctions was considered the premier auction house in our hobby.

I have been a member on this board for about 8 years, and have read the many discussions regarding shill bidding. My understanding and views have evolved over that time like I am sure it has for many other members. I understand and agree that using a hidden reserve in the way Mastro Auctions suggested is wrong. I only ask that the members here consider that this was done in 2007, that it was recommended by the leading auction house, that it was done once, that the hidden reserve was a fraction of the value of the lot, and that the buyer's premium was paid by me.

There was no intent to deceive anyone. This set was #1 on the PSA Registry by a very large margin. Every card was the highest graded at that time and almost half of the 50 cards were the only ones graded at that level. Any one interested in Red Man cards could see that I retired the set before the auction and then re-registered the set after the auction showing that the set had not changed hands.

Finally, and most importantly, I want to clarify the record. Peter is a good friend and wrote his explanation in such a way as not to distance himself from me, but the fact of the matter is that he did not place these bids, I did. He did know what I was doing because we discussed how I had been instructed to proceed by Doug Allen, and he does not deny that, but he was not an active participant in the bidding. The worst part of this whole affair is that an honest, good guy is being hurt for doing me a favor.

I to usually dont like to comment anymore on these posts but felt that the comments here needed it. So if I am reading this right Doug Allen was the one who told you to use a "hidden reserve" to protect your investment. So if Doug Allen told you to shoot someone with a BB gun instead of a 45 that the hole would be smaller would you do that? Bottom line is what you did was a shill weather it was in 2002 2005 2007 or 2016. Also if Im reading it correctly you say your friend (Peter) didnt bid so does that mean you took his account and his password from your own computer went in and placed the bid where you wanted it? Dont you think there is something wrong with that? So in other words if you say what is true (Peter your friend) didnt bid so that would mean you my friend shilled your own auction. So then lets ask another question suppose there was another bid placed on your item and someone won it, would you have told him ? As for Peter (A Lawyer) Im sorry and yes he fessed up but I really wonder if either of you would have come clean if this docuement hadnt come to light with your names there. As for Peter Im also sorry but you are a lawyer sir , you are held to a higher standard than others and you of all people should know what was done either by you or Ron was wrong. I to have been on this board for a long time so my comments arenot just off the cuff. Sorry but I probably would never deal with either of you and Im sure others would feel the same way. Also as was pointed out by another board member you did have an option to use another AU but you elected to stay with a thief! So in my eyes you sir are no better than they were.
Al S!m@on@

[ullmandds]

the fact that there are a number of lawyers on the list is a bit disconcerting to me...but again...not too shocking.

sorry if this comment offended any of the "other" lawyers on the board...as I know there are a bunch.

you'd never see dentists doing this kinda shit!:p

[Stonepony]

the fact that there are a number of lawyers on the list is a bit disconcerting to me...but again...not too shocking.

Sorry if this comment offended any of the "other" lawyers on the board...as i know there are a bunch.

You'd never see dentists doing this kinda shit!:p

lmao!!

[mickeymao34]

I have not won an item from Goldin auctions, but was watching stuff in the current auction. Does anyone think that his name being on the list will have negative results this weekend?

All depends on the actions of Darryl Abramowitz tonight.

ALWAYS LOOKING FOR COMPLETE TOPPS 60-70 NBA SETS THAT ARE IN GOOD TO EXCELLENT CONDITION.

[mickeymao34]

Darryl Abramowitz?

Tom C

exactly WHO da F**k is dat? and even bigger question is will he be participating in tonights auction!

ALWAYS LOOKING FOR COMPLETE TOPPS 60-70 NBA SETS THAT ARE IN GOOD TO EXCELLENT CONDITION.

[mickeymao34]

+1 There is at least one board member that appears as a consigner for many lots that is not in the list of shill bidders.

appearing as a consignor is one thing, especially if you are a true consignor with zero intent to shill. But if you appear as a consignor and consistently have the same exact specific named shiller, then there is more than enough justifiable reasons than not to be leery and suspicious.

J.Micah W

ALWAYS LOOKING FOR COMPLETE TOPPS 60-70 NBA SETS THAT ARE IN GOOD TO EXCELLENT CONDITION.

[Dave Grob]

Very interesting to see this, especially when we have a consigner listed dozens of times and the shill bidder was always the same person, and that shill bidder is not show as shilling on anyone else's lots. Draw your own conclusions. Just an observation.

Dave Grob

[jboosted92]

I see some where (For example)


Consignor: John Doe

Shill Bidder: Paul Smith

Winnnig: Paul Smith


how does that qualify as shill if he won it?

[mickeymao34]

I see some where (For example)


Consignor: John Doe

Shill Bidder: Paul Smith

Winnnig: Paul Smith


how does that qualify as shill if he won it?

the purpose of the shill bid is to move the increment up a notch or two and generate a higher (real) bid. Sometimes the shill fails and the shiller or consignor wins they're own lot back. Or possibly the consignor feels item is simply going for too low and wins item back rather than lose out $$ wise.

[jason.1969]

I see some where (For example)


Consignor: John Doe

Shill Bidder: Paul Smith

Winnnig: Paul Smith


how does that qualify as shill if he won it?
The plan backfires sometimes.

[mickeymao34]

This practice, i'm sure, is still happening and so common. I'm sure Houses believe this is just "part of the business".

[Mark]

I see some where (For example)


Consignor: John Doe

Shill Bidder: Paul Smith

Winnnig: Paul Smith


how does that qualify as shill if he won it?

The FBI may have discovered that even though Smith bought the item, Doe went on to auction the same item at a later auction.

[jason.1969]

Wow, even pols are weighing in.

http://www.cnn.com/palin-blames-obama-for-sports-bidding-fraud-trump-agrees.html

[mickeymao34]

Very interesting to see this, especially when we have a consigner listed dozens of times and the shill bidder was always the same person, and that shill bidder is not show as shilling on anyone else's lots. Draw your own conclusions. Just an observation.

Dave Grob

great observation

[jason.1969]

great observation
Crazy that the AH couldn't figure that out.

[UnVme7]

Very interesting to see this, especially when we have a consigner listed dozens of times and the shill bidder was always the same person, and that shill bidder is not show as shilling on anyone else's lots. Draw your own conclusions. Just an observation.

Dave Grob

My thoughts exactly, Dave. One can say the consignor had nothing to do with it, but if that was the case, why is the same shill name coming up for all of 1 consignor, which is exactly your point.

[batsballsbases]

the fact that there are a number of lawyers on the list is a bit disconcerting to me...but again...not too shocking.

sorry if this comment offended any of the "other" lawyers on the board...as I know there are a bunch.

you'd never see dentists doing this kinda shit!:p

Peter,
Dentists drill deeper to get to the root of the problem Lawyers just touch the surface trying to cover the surface with Fluff... ;);)

[trobba]

I see some where (For example)


Consignor: John Doe

Shill Bidder: Paul Smith

Winnnig: Paul Smith


how does that qualify as shill if he won it?

When the AH says you don't have to pay for the lot if you win it.

[ullmandds]

Peter,
Dentists drill deeper to get to the root of the problem Lawyers just touch the surface trying to cover the surface with Fluff... ;);)

I like that Al!!!!

[iwantitiwinit]

When the AH says you don't have to pay for the lot if you win it.

Exactly and I'm guessing that is the case in every situation and why the AH has to be in on every senario. Hey u bid this up, u end up winning it no harm no foul. Every consignor has to be in on it also otherwise he'd expect the funds when the shiller ending up winning. Despicable and I'm no fan of anyone involved whether they confessed in a courtroom or owned up here. Bottom line it harmed either the eventual buyer or the marketplace in general by communicating erroneous price information and everyone of us that has ever bought a card or collectible has been impacted. Either you have items you paid too much for after buying them for an auction house or have items you paid too much for from other sources because the true market is lower.

[jboosted92]

the purpose of the shill bid is to move the increment up a notch or two and generate a higher (real) bid. Sometimes the shill fails and the shiller or consignor wins they're own lot back. Or possibly the consignor feels item is simply going for too low and wins item back rather than lose out $$ wise.


That logic is crazy....so they pay for it twice?

If i have an item that i paid $1000.00 for, but i want to sell it for $10,000.... and it reaches only $7,000...why the F would i pay 7k, only to hope it sells for 10k later?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Incremental bidding -

Example 1: Lot A, you the cosigner think the lot should sell for $2,000.

Did the bidding go like this?

Bidder 1: $650.00
You: $750.00
Bidder 1: $900.00
Bidder 2: $1,000.00
Bidder 1: $1,200.00
You: $1,400.00
Bidder 3: $1,600.00
You: $1,800.00
Bidder 3: $2,000
You - See that is the rub, did you stop or keep pushing?


If you are willing to pay 20% BP when winning your own auction I don't see a big problem with it..but its hard for me to believe that the people winning their own auctions as a hidden reserve are really paying that BP....most people think the auction house is waving it..or at best reducing it down .to lets say 5%...if you are paying a reduced buyers premium than that's bad as well because its not at even playing field with the real bidders who have to pay 20% BP

[1952boyntoncollector]

I have no problem with this. There was no price manipulation and the item sold for what it typically would bring. There's nothing unethical about not bidding.

In addition, when the first guy buys the card at the discount...theres no real agreement the first guy cant bid full on the next card....the second guy could get screwed and have to pay more than what he thought....and yes there no price manipulation....

the problem with shilling as well..is you feel if you bought a card..you at least should be able to sell it the next week for a 20% loss..but if they were shill bids than maybe you overpaid by 50%...if there not really a legit underbidder...these fake bids make it seem there is legitimate interest out there....when you pay a BIN or know of a reserve..then you know you may be paying easily over 20% what the card would go for on the open market the next week and you are fine with it..

[batsballsbases]

That logic is crazy....so they pay for it twice?

If i have an item that i paid $1000.00 for, but i want to sell it for $10,000.... and it reaches only $7,000...why the F would i pay 7k, only to hope it sells for 10k later?

Well thats not how it works sometimes If you read What Ron Goldberg and Peter Spaeth did if I read it right ,the auction house cut a deal with him that he only had to pay the auction house fee not the cost of the item.

[slidekellyslide]

the fact that there are a number of lawyers on the list is a bit disconcerting to me...but again...not too shocking.

sorry if this comment offended any of the "other" lawyers on the board...as I know there are a bunch.

you'd never see dentists doing this kinda shit!:p

Dentists are masochists...they like to kill things. Especially big game in Africa.

Minnesota dentists are the worst at this...or so I've heard. :D

[Dave Grob]

When you have the suspected shiller as the winner of the lot (no one chased them higher), you can always still look at invoicing and payment documents to see if the lot was actually paid for and by who. When you find that the suspected shiller has won lots, not paid for them themselves (and often by the consigner and NOT in the full amount), this tells you something.

In addition when you see this type of non-payment activity and the auction house continues to let the same bidder continue to bid, this is equally telling, as it suggests the non-payment for the lot in full is not an issue for the auction house. Assume what you want about the related consigner, especially if an exclusive pattern exists.

The damage does not end there, since in any number of cases, the final shilled bid (no real sale) is promoted as a genuine "price realized" and this in fact skews the perceived market valuation.

Dave Grob

[batsballsbases]

Dentists are masochists...they like to kill things. Especially big game in Africa.

Minnesota dentists are the worst at this...or so I've heard. :D

Dan,
That comment might be the shot heard round the world!!:D:D

[iwantitiwinit]

When you have the suspected shiller as the winner of the lot (no one chased them higher), you can always still look at invoicing and payment documents to see if the lot was actually paid for and by who. When you find that the suspected shiller has won lots, not paid for them themselves (and often by the consigner and NOT in the full amount), this tells you something.

In addition when you see this type of non-payment activity and the auction house continues to let the same bidder continue to bid, this is equally telling, as it suggests the non-payment for the lot in full is not an issue for the auction house. Assume what you want about the related consigner, especially if an exclusive pattern exists.

The damage does not end there, since in any number of cases, the final shilled bid (no real sale) is promoted as a genuine "price realized" and this in fact skews the perceived market valuation.

Dave Grob

Agreed, it clouds transparency in the market.

[batsballsbases]

When you have the suspected shiller as the winner of the lot (no one chased them higher), you can always still look at invoicing and payment documents to see if the lot was actually paid for and by who. When you find that the suspected shiller has won lots, not paid for them themselves (and often by the consigner and NOT in the full amount), this tells you something.

In addition when you see this type of non-payment activity and the auction house continues to let the same bidder continue to bid, this is equally telling, as it suggests the non-payment for the lot in full is not an issue for the auction house. Assume what you want about the related consigner, especially if an exclusive pattern exists.

The damage does not end there, since in any number of cases, the final shilled bid (no real sale) is promoted as a genuine "price realized" and this in fact skews the perceived market valuation.

Dave Grob

Dave, Good points but also back to another problem I found about " reserves"
I had consigned a few very high ticket items (Not Legendary) and I also wanted a reserve (sorta high) placed on the items. I was told that most auction houses dont like reserve because if the reserve on that item was possibly put to high then all the work that the AH did for you I.E. photos taken , descriptions written by staff, room taken up in the catalogue etc. would be lost if the item or items didnt sell. I found out that they would rather make something in and out (buyer ,seller) than nothing... on your dime!!

[Leon]

Wow, even pols are weighing in.

http://www.cnn.com/palin-blames-obama-for-sports-bidding-fraud-trump-agrees.html


guess it got taken down?

[jboosted92]

When you have the suspected shiller as the winner of the lot (no one chased them higher), you can always still look at invoicing and payment documents to see if the lot was actually paid for and by who. When you find that the suspected shiller has won lots, not paid for them themselves (and often by the consigner and NOT in the full amount), this tells you something.

In addition when you see this type of non-payment activity and the auction house continues to let the same bidder continue to bid, this is equally telling, as it suggests the non-payment for the lot in full is not an issue for the auction house. Assume what you want about the related consigner, especially if an exclusive pattern exists.

The damage does not end there, since in any number of cases, the final shilled bid (no real sale) is promoted as a genuine "price realized" and this in fact skews the perceived market valuation.

Dave Grob


Thats EXACTLY where i was leading..... i bet no one paid for a single one....

[jboosted92]

guess it got taken down?



I think it was a joke....just look at the URL :)

[1952boyntoncollector]

Dave, Good points but also back to another problem I found about " reserves"
I had consigned a few very high ticket items (Not Legendary) and I also wanted a reserve (sorta high) placed on the items. I was told that most auction houses dont like reserve because if the reserve on that item was possibly put to high then all the work that the AH did for you I.E. photos taken , descriptions written by staff, room taken up in the catalogue etc. would be lost if the item or items didnt sell. I found out that they would rather make something in and out (buyer ,seller) than nothing... on your dime!!

well heritage lets you do a reserve but you pay them a percentage or something if card doesn't sell.....some auction houses make you pay 20% on the highest bid if card doesn't sell...that way you wont have an unrealistic reserve and waste their time..

[frankbmd]

Let's say Mr. Goldbrick consigns an item with mr maestro, who wants a lower minimum bid than Goldbrick is comfortable with. Mr All-in suggests that a friend could bid to the minimum in Goldbrick's comfort zone. A bid in the name of mr spacecadet is then made.

Mr. Spacecadet then wins the auction. Spacecadet then pays mr maestro for the item with fees. Then Spacecadet returns the item to mr Goldbrick, who reimburses him for his costs and thanks him.

Mr All-in is IMO guilty by suggesting the scheme. Mr Goldbrick is perhaps negligent in retrospect for playing along. Mr Spacecadet is not guilty. The outcome pleases all parties. No names ever appear on a "shill" list nine years later.

I would suggest that this scenario occurs more frequently than many of us would imagine. This scenario would also fly under the radar and would be deniable by all concerned.

[batsballsbases]

well heritage lets you do a reserve but you pay them a percentage or something if card doesn't sell.....some auction houses make you pay 20% on the highest bid if card doesn't sell...that way you wont have an unrealistic reserve and waste their time..

You may be correct now but back lets say several years ago most auction houses frowned upon reserve...

And also if you were one of the ones on the "Special Packages" list I bet you didnt have to pay a dime!

[egbeachley]

That logic is crazy....so they pay for it twice?

If i have an item that i paid $1000.00 for, but i want to sell it for $10,000.... and it reaches only $7,000...why the F would i pay 7k, only to hope it sells for 10k later?

The $7K goes right back to you, the consignor, You lose the $1.4K AH fee but may get $3K more later.

[ElCabron]

It's still shill bidding if you pay the BP and buy your own item back. It seems like you're all saying it's not.

-Ryan

[edjs]

For those that are wondering why anyone would buy their own card rather than it selling low, here is how it works. You bought a card for $1000, and now you feel it is worth $10000. You decide to send it to an auction house. Many auction houses will waive the consignor fee on high profile items, and will offer to share a percentage of the buyers premium with the consignor as well, for ease of math, let's say half. So the auction is closing, and your card is going to close low, so you buy it through your buddy at $5000. You now pay the house $6000, and they cut you your consignment check for $5500. You now have a total of $1500 invested in the card. Had you not bought the card and it sold to someone else for $5000, you would have made a profit of $4500. You didn't let it sell, so you consign it a couple months later, this time it sells for $7000 (same terms). You get a check for $7700, a profit of $6200. That is why people buy their own consignments instead of letting them sell low. I have never consigned a card, I don't have any of the big dollar collections, but I can figure out the "why" of it. This is in no way meant to condone any practice, I am just trying to clear the reasoning up. It is purely based on profit margins. I am also sure that, as an apprentice collector, I still don't understand or explain here all the nuances involved in the business end of this (I haven't even mentioned how setting historical sales records come into play as a reason for buying your own card), but I think my example paints a fairly accurate picture. Please correct me if I am wrong. No opinions of anyone listed in my post, per the rules. :)

[1952boyntoncollector]

It's still shill bidding if you pay the BP and buy your own item back. It seems like you're all saying it's not.

-Ryan

if the BP is 20% and the shiller is paying that I have ZERO problem...20% is going to prevent a lot of shilling..plus if someone is willing to pay 20% to keep a card...it must be going very under market price...I would bid at AHs with no problem if they said 'Shillers welcome but they must pay the 20%' BP

so if I bid 1000 and I get beat out at 1010 and that guy keeps his card but has to pay $200 to keep it..good for him...

if someone wins their own 1952 Topps PSA 8 Mantle..and they think 375,000 is too low and want 425,000 for the card..let them pay 375,00 to keep the card and pay a 70,000 BP...good luck to them there as well....I just don't seem them shilling that mantle that high..they would have to stop at at about 275,000...

the problem is when they don't have to pay a BP or its 5 percent etc

[glchen]

if the BP is 20% and the shiller is paying that I have ZERO problem...20% is going to prevent a lot of shilling..plus if someone is willing to pay 20% to keep a card...it must be going very under market price...I would bid at AHs with no problem if they said 'Shillers welcome but they must pay the 20%' BP
...


You don't know this though. For AH's may give a portion of the BP back to the consignor (as well as waive the seller's commission) for large/loyal consignors. So for all we know, these consignors may only have had to risk a 5% effective (complete guess) BP through their shilling.

[esd10]

So does Mastro and his cronies have to pay restitution to these customer who where shill bid against? This really weakens my faith in these auction houses and the bottom line is they make money off the juice from these sales.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Right my scenario is if 20% is paid.....I would bid at AH's that say 'shilling Is allowed subject to 20% BP if win item'

[ElCabron]

Right my scenario is if 20% is paid.....I would bid at AH's that say 'shilling Is allowed subject to 20% BP if win item'

Which ones are those?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Which ones are those?

I talking about now and the future...if an AH was to say that I would bid with no problems... I already said the problem with the people saying in the past they would pay the BP if theywon their own card is that may only be a paying a few percent BP if that on their own cards..they think the fact they paid BP absolves them.....if it was 20 percent I would tend to agree...but I know its unlikely....but for the future if an AH makes you pay 20 percent I am fine with 'shilling'

[Rich Klein]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/yankees-owner-victim-mastro-auctions-shill-bidding-article-1.2514664?utm_content=bufferb50da&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[Rich Klein]

I hope dentists where you practice are better than Dallas Dentists

http://interactives.dallasnews.com/2015/deadly-dentistry/part1.html

This is must reading for anyone with kids who need to go to a dentist

Rich

[ullmandds]

Thats a terrible story, Rich. I'd avoid going to a general dentist who took a weekend class on sedation offering coupons.

[Rich Klein]

I was lucky, when I was at Beckett, most of us went to a specific dentist. That dentist ran into some real problems.

I somehow avoided him and ended up with one of the best perios in Plano,.

And then when I had to get to a general dentist as well, I gave him the list of the then approved dentists from my insurance company and he told me whom to go as; He's a decent dentist and the best of this bunch. Perios usually know whom the good dentists are because of all the work they do on gums.

Rich