View Single Post
  #68  
Old 06-25-2016, 02:55 PM
glchen's Avatar
glchen glchen is offline
_G@ґy*€hℯη_
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by botn View Post
And once again, which is falling on many deaf ears, the first hand information I have is that the government really made their case against Mastro Auctions for the artificial bidding which took place by those bidders who did not even know what the high bids were and who even paid the BP when their bids did not get topped. The house had a policy, like Brent does, to not allow it, but did nothing to stop it, just like Brent is doing.

Now some of the same people on this thread who were furious that the shill bidding in Mastro distorted actual market value and posted about it constantly are now ok with the "pushing". What a difference a day makes, eh? What took place at Mastro pales in comparison to what is going on with the "pushing".
There is no comparison at all between market pushing and what happened with the shillers at Mastro. The consignors and bidders in the Mastro lots knew each other. Nothing arms length about that at all. Do not try to justify what those named on the Mastro list did with market pushing. It makes what happened at Mastro worse.

Last edited by glchen; 06-25-2016 at 02:56 PM.
Reply With Quote