[Peter_Spaeth]

Finally, while Bill certainly profited from his offense, he was motivated less by greed
than unhealthy competitiveness and a misguided sense of “‘duty’ to protect sellers from bids that
were ‘too low’ for the ‘real value’ of their items.” (Defendant’s Version at 5). This is
corroborated by the fact that the total amount of unexecuted final ceiling bids (that is, where the
buyer purchased an item for less than his ceiling bid) was nearly $14 million—dwarfing the
agreed-upon estimated loss figure here by an order of magnitude. Had Bill been motivated
purely by greed, nearly $14 million of ceiling bids would not have remained unexecuted. Of
course, Bill’s crime is not mitigated by the fact that he did not commit a more severe one, and he
was wrong to artificially increase the prices paid by any buyers. But he did not act primarily out
of a desire to enrich himself—to the contrary, as several character witnesses attest, Bill gave
away much of his net worth, and certainly any financial profit that he personally derived from
this scheme, to others in need.