Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog
Imagine if Gary didn't have money owed to him by Mastro and actually came out against them because of the obvious fraud they were committing against everyone and not just him. I guess in that case he'd just get attacked and told that his criticism was tiresome and that no one wanted to hear it anymore.
Moral of the story: Net 54 members will support the outing of an auction house engaged in obvious fraud as long as said Net 54 members are not major consignors and making money off the auction house.
|
Not being a major consignor to any auction house, I had to read this several times before realizing you were actually referring to me. I have not consigned to any auction house in this hobby more than once, so I think it would be difficult to characterize me as a "major consignor" to any of them. I probably have only consigned items four or five times in 25 years in the hobby. So this has nothing to do with me making money on anything. Am I now on your conspiracy radar? You couldn't hold back, even when I was supporting the same types of criticisms you have levied. The difference is, in Gary's case, irrefutable proof was presented. In many of the cases you presented, allegations were made based on circumstantial evidence - much of which was shown not to support your suggested conclusions when bidders and underbidders came on to present facts rather than innuendo. I have no problem with outing fraud. I have a problem with potentially damaging someone based on a hunch. If you want to talk about the appearance of impropriety, how about a lawyer continually bashing an auction house on a public forum only to find out months later that he is actually defending a client in a civil suit against that auction house.
JimB