Quote:
Originally Posted by Hankphenom
That does seem to be the case more often than not, but how does that make them look good when they're the ones making the inaccurate estimates in the first place? And how does that make buyers feel, now that they have paid more than the "experts" predicted the item would go for? How can that not have at least some depressing effect on the bidding when it's close to or past the high end of the estimate and bidders are trying to decide whether they should go another bid or not? I'm still struggling to understand the benefits of this common practice.
|
Most seasoned collectors will pay what they will based on experience and how badly they want the item. I pay very little attention to estimates. I have seen item estimates that were $500-$800 go for 15k, and not as bad the other way, but still quite far off. I think it does allow the auctioneers to say they beat the estimates. As a practice we don't do that in our auctions but I understand the philosophy. Kind of like the "best offers" being discussed on the other thread, just not that big of a deal.