its not the auction houses fault its the bidders

[sflayank]

i dont care if every auction house is involved in shill bidding
its upto the bidder to place an initial bid so they can bid at the end....and when the auction is near the end bid the next interval up
ALL THE BIDDERS WHO PUT IN A MAX BID ARE MORONS...OBVIOUSLY THE AUCTION HOUSE CAN SEE YOUR MAX BID AND IF THEY CHOOSE CAN PUMP YOU UP....JUST BID THE NEXT INTERVAL, IF YOU GET OUTBID AND YOU WANT TO BID MORE BID THE NEXT INTERVAL AGAIN...while shill bidding is illegal and unscrupulous..the bidder can easily stop it...whether its mastro or ebay or REA
so while auction houses may screw the bidders, ultimately its the bidders fault...if u bid 5000 on item thats at 2000 so u can goto sleep ...dont be surprised if u end up winning it for 5000

[tiger8mush]

but what if you bid $2k, then the auction house shills it up to $2.2k, then you bid $2.4k, then the auction house $2.6k, all the way up to your intended max of $5k? you are ok with that?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sflayank

.OBVIOUSLY THE AUCTION HOUSE CAN SEE YOUR MAX BID AND IF THEY CHOOSE CAN PUMP YOU UP....

With regards to this statement you are absolutely wrong. I don't believe REA can see up to bids and I know that B & L has never seen an up to bid, ever. I can prove it if I need to. If you get your facts straight then your story might sound better. That being said if you don't care if you get shill bid then that is your prerogative. Most people prefer that would not happen. Some of your other diatribe makes some sense and I would agree it's a little bit on the bidder to be smart. Regardless of that there should not be fraud involved in the bidding so it shouldn't need to be a worry. It's that easy.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by sflayank

i dont care if every auction house is involved in shill bidding
its upto the bidder to place an initial bid so they can bid at the end....and when the auction is near the end bid the next interval up
ALL THE BIDDERS WHO PUT IN A MAX BID ARE MORONS...OBVIOUSLY THE AUCTION HOUSE CAN SEE YOUR MAX BID AND IF THEY CHOOSE CAN PUMP YOU UP....JUST BID THE NEXT INTERVAL, IF YOU GET OUTBID AND YOU WANT TO BID MORE BID THE NEXT INTERVAL AGAIN...while shill bidding is illegal and unscrupulous..the bidder can easily stop it...whether its mastro or ebay or REA
so while auction houses may screw the bidders, ultimately its the bidders fault...if u bid 5000 on item thats at 2000 so u can goto sleep ...dont be surprised if u end up winning it for 5000

You sound like you'd be a great addition to Doug Allen's legal team. Hope he can afford you.

[sflayank]

as to the 1st reply if you bid 2000 the auction house will not shill bid you to 2200 if they dont know youre willing to pay 5000
if you put in a 5000 max then they know...as for the 2nd reply...im not implying any auction house shills...just showing how easy it is if you put in a max....all im saying is stay up and bid the next interval....and if you put in a maximum bid...dont be surprised when you wake up and you win it at your max...also EVERY auction house CAN see your max bid..the honest ones and the dishonest ones... dont let anyone tell u otherwise

[3-2-count]

This post makes no sense what so ever. If I'm being taken advantage of and there's wrong doing going on, should it really matter how one bid's.
Why the heck should that fall back onto me as my fault?

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by sflayank

ultimately its the bidders fault...if u bid 5000 on item thats at 2000 so u can goto sleep ...dont be surprised if u end up winning it for 5000

Winning an item for the max amount is one thing, however why wouldn't I care that I am ultimately bidding against the auction house? If I could have won an item for 2k and end up winning it for 5k based on the unethical practices of an auction house, how is that really the bidders fault?

[sflayank]

all im saying is the bidder can prevent it by being smart
i agree 100% that shill bidding should be stopped and prosecuted if necessary
however the bidder needs to be smart...if you call the auction house and say im willing to go upto 10000 on that lot..they may cheat you but whose fault is it?

[teetwoohsix]

I do not bid in auction houses' (yet),I've only bid on Ebay,and not in awhile.One thing I think you are forgetting is some of the reasons people place max bids.For instance-there is an item I've been after for a long time,and it's up for auction.But I have to put in a 12 hour shift at work,and won't be home when the auction ends-I put in a max bid,and hope it doesn't hit max-but if it does-that's ok-UNLESS THE HOUSE SHILLS ME UP TO MY MAX.
There are many scenarios for why people place max bids-placing a max bid doesn't mean HEY!!!!RIP ME OFF PLEASE!!!!!

[sflayank]

a max bid doesnt say hey rip me off...but it does give them the opportunity to do so
from the greek...let the buyer(bidder) beware

[Peter_Spaeth]

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. There is something to the poster's point -- to leave a top all with an auction house knowing or suspecting it will shill you to your max bid is not smart. Does that excuse it? Of course not. But buyers have to protect themselves too.

[botn]

Made the point yesterday in the Legendary thread that buyers do not seem to want to mitigate their damages. Much could be prevented if each of us took the time to look out for ourselves. On the other hand if you leave the door to your house unlocked that does not mean it is ok for someone to come in and rob you.

And as to the author's point as to auction houses being able to see Top All bids, my limited knowledge on this is that if push comes to shove that info is easily made accessible. This is software we are talking about, not physical bids which are left on pieces of paper and protected by the Pentagon.

[barrysloate]

Sflayank- it's fair to say a bidder should be responsible for his actions, that is true in all aspects of life. But what you are doing is blaming the victim. Probably not the best way to look at shill bidding.

[teetwoohsix]

I agree with you Peter-I also felt Rob G. made a great point.
In all of the threads going about auction houses,there are a few auction houses(from what I've read) that seem to be "on the up-and-up".

I think more people who have had positive experiences should let everyone know about them,as to not let the "crooked" auction houses cast a shadow on the ones who are doing people right.

Seems as though I've read good things about B&L,REA,and Huggins & Scott--if I missed any others,it wasn't intentional.

[sflayank]

im not blaming the victim...simply stating if bidders are smart they wont become victims...if you send your account #s to someone in nigeria and expect that million $ return...whose fault is it? youve been warned and still do it...its your fault
if u suspect an auction house shill bidding dont put in a max bid
thats all im saying...if you do you have no right to complain

[DanP]

As someone who wrote software for over 20 years, here's how easy it is to see the max bid.

Let's assume that the max bid is an encrypted field (similar to passwords).
No doubt, it can be proved that virtually no one can "figure out" what the
true value in the field is. That's why if you lose your password they always
ask you to create a new one.

However, with just 1 or 2 lines of "hidden" code someone can take the value entered in the online screen and store it in another field, let's say the field is
called: User Comments. With a little more code they can move some #'s around so it's not so obvious that it is really the max bid (maybe even store it in another database).

Now if auditors come in to review the code you could easily copy the original (non-tampered with) program object code back to "production". So when they review it, everything looks perfect. The auditors I've worked with would not known how to look for stuff like this and even if they did, it's so easy to move programs around with no audit history of what happened.

I find it hard to believe that this couldn't happen in any environment. Unless the programs are stored in a 3rd party environment (i.e. the auditors) and they are responsible for releasing programs to production (even then unless they're programmers they may not know how to look for "hidden code").

I would never trust a MAX BID because I really believe if any of these companies wanted to know bad enough, they could find out what they are.

Dan

[barrysloate]

I would hope that an auction house could be held to a higher standard than some scammer from Nigeria.

[3-2-count]

Barry you beat me to it. My sentiments exact!!

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I would hope that an auction house could be held to a higher standard than some scammer from Nigeria.

Um, look at some of the heads of auction houses. Their resumes indicate that they could teach classes to some of the Nigerian scammers.

[Mr. Mitt]

I think I understand what sflayank is trying to say as I've bid this way since auction houses have been online. I don't show my hand by inputting a maximum bid, in any auction, regardless of reputation. If I'm the high bid at $2k, and that's my highest bid, the auction house takes on the risk by outbidding me. They have no idea if I or any other bidder will emerge to top them. I could be willing to pay up to $5k on the item, but if I bid incimentally, on my own and not via an automatic bid, they assume the risk that I may not return to top them if they shill and outbid me.

I have nothing against any auction house, but my perception of each and every one of them is the same - they will do anything to make an extra buck, so don't trust them. Seems that the general perception of Mastro/Legendary has drastically changed over the past few years. Five years ago, no one would have dreamed to question their ethics. Who's to say that in five years time we're not having the same discussions about a currently reputable business. In the end, each bidder has to be comfortable with themselves. Some will bid with a particular auction house, others won't. Some will utilize the maximum bid feature, others (like me) won't. It's not a perfect world, gentlemen. Unfortunately you have to take precautions and look over your shoulder, even if everything appears to be on the up and up.

[barrysloate]

Jerry - your point could be well taken, but you are missing something critical.

Suppose a card has a fair market value of $2000 and it is sitting at $1400 late on the final night. The auction house then places the next bid of $1500. Sure, they run the risk of buying it, but at that level they may be glad to do so.

I think with some auction houses the policy is they will not let anything go cheap, even if they have to buy it themselves. And had they won that $2000 card for the $1500 bid, they would just hang onto it for a bit and resell it for a profit down the road. So they really risked nothing.

[Mr. Mitt]

Absolutely, Barry. I completely agree with you. Given current economic conditions, your arbitrage scenario is realistic. If the $2k value is firm, the item should not sell below $2k because whoever buys it (auction house or other collector) immediately generates a profit. Given the current state of affairs of falling prices, however, the auction house may need time to unload it at $2k. An auction, by definition, sets the price in a market economy. If the item sells for $1500, that's its true value, not $2k anymore. Sure, given time the buyer may get $2k for it, but again, they assume the risk as it may fall further in price the next time it is offered.

My argument, and I believe sflayanks' point, was more geared toward items where a premium is being bid into the price. If the item in question is valued at $2k and my current, maximum bid is $2k, the auction house runs the risk of purchasing the item above market value if they shill me. They don't know my circumstances nor what premium I place on the item. I may be willing to pay $5k for it (for whatever reason), but why show my hand? I could put in a $5k bid and it goes to that level because the auction house is unscrupulous. I truly don't know if they are or if they're not, but I'm sure as hell not going to believe them simply because they say they're honest. I'd rather bid on the item incrementally, each decision to bid above the item's perceived $2k value is mine, and mine alone. Say it goes back and forth from $2k to $2800. If they are shilling me and its supposed value is only $2k, perhaps they stop there and call it a victory. Sure, I got screwed out of $800 because of illegal shilling, but it's a lot better than paying the full $5k I was willing to spend.

[sflayank]

thanks matt
thats exactly what im trying to say
if you bid incrementally the auction house takes the risk of winning it back if it bumps u up
if you make a max bid you take the risk that the auction house is honest

[Mr. Mitt]

It's Mitt... Mr. Mitt

[bobfreedman]

I currently run the software for Legendary Auctions and at their request we have disabled anyone from Legendary Auctions the ability to view any of the Max bids. They do not ask me or anyone within my company to view or manipulate any bids whatsoever. This has been the case since they began using our software.

This will probably not satisfy some cynics but I thought that at least the facts be known.

Bob Freedman
CEO, SimpleAuctionSite

Our clients cannot turn this feature on or off.

[Jim VB]

Did you have the same agreement with Mastro, or were they able to view the bids?


And, would you be able to tell us if that's how it works with each and every one of your auction house clients?

[Mr. Mitt]

Thanks Bob... I'm not here to start a pissing match, but I bid the way I do, incrementally without using the "max bid" feature, because if viewing maximum bids must be disabled, then there is a way of enabling it. I'm not saying you or your clients misuse this feature, but I feel more comfortable with straight bids. Just a personal preference that I'm entitled to.

[barrysloate]

Hi Bob- hope you are well. For the record, Bob did my software too during my last few years of doing auctions. But he did not do Mastro's software, that was a different company.

In my case I did have access to max bids, but I never considered it an issue, since I never fooled around with them.

[oriolesbb6]

I guess anything can happen at anytime with an auction, It comes back to using your own judgment and only paying what You deem to be the price. I work with various auction houses on the local level-antiques/estates, etc. Each house has there own policies-where to open an item, reserve/no reserve, dealers prohibited from bidding on their own items, etc. I have seen shill bidding take place(I don't buy there) and I have not seen it. Is there an ultimate solution? The only one is to bid what you are comfortable, if you are not sure of a company then don't bid.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

I currently run the software for Legendary Auctions and at their request we have disabled anyone from Legendary Auctions the ability to view any of the Max bids. They do not ask me or anyone within my company to view or manipulate any bids whatsoever. This has been the case since they began using our software.

This will probably not satisfy some cynics but I thought that at least the facts be known.

Bob Freedman
CEO, SimpleAuctionSite

Our clients cannot turn this feature on or off.

Bob, I hate to be a cynic but I do have a simple question: does your software allow the customer, i.e. the auction house principal, to have access to the bidders' passwords?

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Bob, I hate to be a cynic ...

Sure you do.

[Rich Klein]

This is a quote from MVSNYC

"i agree, some very strong prices, but there were also some deals to be had...i was watching that Elberfeld, but forgot to bid, as i was out the other night...looks like someone did get a great deal on it."

You realize; if he had put in a max bid in advance of let's say 60 percent of the current price; he might have the card right now. And if he were "Shilled" to that level; but had put that bid in earlier; he might be the winner of that card at a nice price point lower than current market levels. So, is not putting in a max bid ever the answer. I'd say no. because if something comes up and you can't bid on an item during the conclusion of an auction, well then,... you have not allowed yourself the back-up and am marrying yourself to having to sit at the screen all night.

So, by not putting in a max bid; he actually cost himself a decent card at a good level -- so I don't know if not putting in a bid is always the answer either.

Regards
Rich

[barrysloate]

Jeff- I can answer your question since Bob did my software: yes, I had access to bidders' passwords. Now that doesn't mean it is impossible to implement a different system, but I can't speak for Bob.

[benjulmag]

It's not that simple to simply refrain from leaving a max bid. In the case of many whales/recognized collectors, certain auctions houses simply know that these collectors have a way to go before they have reached their max. In some cases, these auction houses have over the years been asked to be on the lookout for certain cards/memorabilia items in the hopes of doing a private transaction. In other cases, these auction houses simply know the collecting habits of their well-healed collectors so well that they know with a high degree of confidence what these collectors will spend. So when such an item finally should appear in an auction, all the auction house needs to do is call up a friend or two (or maybe a silent minority owner of the auction house), "suggest" that this is a good investment item up to a certain level (just below the level the auction house knows that the whale/recognized collector will bid), and bingo, the item will almost always reach that stratospheric level. I have reason to believe the FBI has been tipped off to this practice, as well as the risk that certain auction houses will out of desperation seek ways to alter their bidding records in ways undetectable to law enforcement. It is my understanding the FBI has tremendous expertise/experience in computer-record-alteration, and feels highly qualified to detect it should it occur.

[sflayank]

very good point
that is why i have 3 different accounts with most auction houses
different names and addresses so they dont know its me who is bidding

[Mr. Mitt]

Do you consign as well, sflayank?

[sb1]

might as well address this now. We have no way to view your password or max bid. We cannot place bids for you placed via phone, email or fax.

The system is totally automated on a secure server only accessible by the administrator which is neither Leon nor I. Once the auction starts it's on autopilot til the the 15 minute period ends.

Scott

[Matt]

Jeff - good question on having bidders passwords. Here is another one - Bob said the house can't see the max bids - can they see who the high bidder is before the auction ends?

[sflayank]

i very rarely consign anything
im a collector once in awhile ill have an upgrade of something then ill consign my doubles

[barrysloate]

I had many old time collectors on my mailing list who did not use computers at all, and they would call and ask me to bid for them. They would even leave ceiling bids and ask me to place them on their behalf. I don't believe Scott and Leon take telephone bids so they are able to lock certain parts of their software that I couldn't.

I would be less concerned with the capabilities of the software and more concerned with the integrity of the auction house.

[oldjudge]

Scott--So if a bidder's computer crashes on the night of the auction there is no way for them to bid? I assume that if a collector does not own a computer they cannot bid in B&L at all.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Jeff- I can answer your question since Bob did my software: yes, I had access to bidders' passwords. Now that doesn't mean it is impossible to implement a different system, but I can't speak for Bob.

Barry, give Bob a break. I'm sure the software has changed since then because what would be the point of locking out viewing max bids of bidders if the auction house could access the bidders' passwords -- and check themselves? As noted by Corey, such a possibility would be a bit unnerving. I'm sure Bob will acknowledge shortly that the software has been improved since your last auction.

[sreader3]

It shouldn't be terribly hard to come up with a reasonable set of verifiable industry standard rules and require auction houses to agree to them to obtain a certification--similar to what Underwriters Laboratories (UL) does in the lighting industry. These rules would prevent, among other nefarious practices, shill bidding. The certifying organization would verify that the auction house software and personnel comply with the rules. The readers of Net54 are well suited to promulgate the rules and solicit certifications. Software gurus like Trae Reagan could probably do code verification.

[Mr. Mitt]

Originally Posted by sflayank

i very rarely consign anything
im a collector once in awhile ill have an upgrade of something then ill consign my doubles

Just to play devil's advocate, you could bid up items you've consigned via one or two of your three accounts with the auction house. Not saying you do so, but if opening three accounts with the same house is that easy, I'm sure others have found a way to circumvent the system for their own benefit. Isn't this just as bad as the auction house shill?

[barrysloate]

Doesn't the auction house have a responsibility to make sure bidders don't open multiple accounts? I would not have allowed that. Often bidders registered twice because they either forgot they were registered or thought they had to do so for each auction. In that case, I would accept the most recent one and delete the older one. Only one account per bidder was permitted.

[benjulmag]

I think Barry hit the nail on the head -- the most important thing is the integrity of the auction house. Without it, there will always be the significant risk of bidding irregularities.

[sflayank]

the 2 extra accounts are in friends names in other parts of the country altogether...I cant see other peoples max bids so how can i shill my own items without risking buying them back...i would have to be willing to lose money on the sellers premium and the buyers premium...the other accounts are to protect myself from auction houses knowing who is bidding so they cant jack me up...ill even bid on the 1st day on 50 lots, knowing i wont win them at minimums, just so they dont know which ones i really want...the reason i started this thread is to show that you can control your bids without fear of being shilled just by being a smart bidder...its the bidder who provides the auction house with the ability to shill....they should be prosecuted for shill bidding....but if the bidders would stop giving them the opportunity...bidders could probably stop 90% or more...

[Leon]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Scott--So if a bidder's computer crashes on the night of the auction there is no way for them to bid? I assume that if a collector does not own a computer they cannot bid in B&L at all.

Jay- knock on wood but that (a bidder's computer crashing) hasn't happened to us yet. We did have one west coast collector call and ask to raise a ceiling bid. I had our software company do it. It is my understanding that we can in fact bid for a bidder but I don't think we have done it yet, I know I haven't. What we can't see are any max bids. We do see the bids and bidders otherwise. So, to answer your question, yes, we could bid for a bidder if that happens. regards

edited to add...not sure if it was mentioned but we can not see our bidder's passwords.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Bob, I hate to be a cynic but I do have a simple question: does your software allow the customer, i.e. Legendary Auctions, to have access to the bidders' passwords?

I'm sure that some of the cynics on the board believe that Bob hasn't answered this question yet because, in fact, his software does not prevent his customers from learning the passwords of the bidders in their auctions and, thereby, learning all of their bids. I would rather believe that he has just been super-busy on this holiday and stuff.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

Did you have the same agreement with Mastro, or were they able to view the bids?


And, would you be able to tell us if that's how it works with each and every one of your auction house clients?

Jeff,

In defense of Bob, I asked a question about 4 minutes after his post and he hasn't responded yet. You'll have to wait.

Bob has a history of coming on the board briefly. Defending one of his paying customers and then disappearing again for long periods of time.