Mastro Auctions Mastro's Stuff?

[David Atkatz]

I'm sure he did "win" the items. Think all the bids were counted?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

I'm sure he did "win" the items. Think all the bids were counted?

Don't they publish final prices? So if someone had bid higher but not won wouldn't that have come to light?

[David Atkatz]

I know of at least one item for which that was the case. I sold a 1929 Yankees signed ball through Mastro a number of years ago. A friend wanted it, but did not win. He noticed that he had entered a higher bid than the winner, and was told his had inadvertently not been counted. When he (an attorney) threatened legal action, the sale was nullified, the ball returned to me, and he was banned. (Surprise, surprise.) I know of this case because it was my item. Do you think it's the only one?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Well of course I would be speculating as to whether there were other instances or it was just a mistake, but that is troubling.

[calvindog]

Mastro's "rules" are somewhat laughable as anyone who has ever consigned with them surely knows. The rules are the rules until they are not the rules - and the rules often change on the fly. Peter are you suggesting that Mastro employees were allowed to bid on their own items during an auction while they also learned who else had bid on the lots and what those bids were? Jeepers, that would make me mighty red in the face if I were an honest Mastro bidder.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If that happened that would not be a good thing. All I was saying is that I could envision a scenario where an employee genuinely tried to win an item consigned by a third party.

[Orioles1954]

I can only speak for the auction house I work for. Sometimes, the same item has been auctioned twice due to non-payment in the first auction. We then will go to the consignor and either A.) return the item or B.) run the lot again a second time.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If that happened that would not be a good thing. All I was saying is that I could envision a scenario where an employee genuinely tried to win an item consigned by a third party.

The "employee" happens to be the boss.

[Peter_Spaeth]

David, was Bill the winning bidder on your Yankees ball?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

I can only speak for the auction house I work for. Sometimes, the same item has been auctioned twice due to non-payment in the first auction. We then will go to the consignor and either A.) return the item or B.) run the lot again a second time.

What if there are hidden reserves which are not met and the items are then given back to the consignor with false sales recorded? Does that ever happen?

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by calvindog

What if there are hidden reserves which are not met and the items are then given back to the consignor with false sales recorded? Does that ever happen?

I have never participated in such action. If I was asked to participate or knew of such actitivity happening I would resign immediately.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

I can only speak for the auction house I work for. Sometimes, the same item has been auctioned twice due to non-payment in the first auction. We then will go to the consignor and either A.) return the item or B.) run the lot again a second time.

I will also add C.) If one of us pesky writers accidentally messes up an item and we accept it as a return from the winning bidder (doesn't happen often).

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

David, was Bill the winning bidder on your Yankees ball?

I have no way of knowing that. All I do know is that many of the items now being offered as coming from his collection were last seen being "sold" in a Mastro auction.

[Shoeless Moe]

I just hope it goes to a jury trial, and then the jury has 20 minutes increments to deliberate and cast a not guilty vote and then deep in the night once there are 20 minutes without a not guilty vote they can vote Guilty and call it a night!

[autograf]

+1..........funny

[Exhibitman]

I don't have a problem with an auction house employee winning an item offered in the auction; the more legit bidders, the better for the consignor [assuming arguendo that the consignor is actually paid for his lot ]. I can see, though, how allowing the auctioneer to bid could allow the auction house to shill bid the item, so unless a third party is administering the auction in a manner that somehow prevents the auctioneer from seeing the max bids of the bidders, it would be problematic to allow the bidding.

[iggyman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I don't have a problem with an auction house employee winning an item offered in the auction; the more legit bidders, the better for the consignor [assuming arguendo that the consignor is actually paid for his lot ]. I can see, though, how allowing the auctioneer to bid could allow the auction house to shill bid the item, so unless a third party is administering the auction in a manner that somehow prevents the auctioneer from seeing the max bids of the bidders, it would be problematic to allow the bidding.

It's big-time "problematic," could lead to a bunch of bad scenarios. For instance, what if employee "X" sees an E224 Honus Wagner in the upcoming auction. Well, employee "X" already owns an E224 Wagner, but alas, he is considering parting with it. What is to prevent Mr. "X" from shill bidding the Wagner all the way to the max bid and therefore probably benefiting when the time comes to sell his own Wagner. Another scenario is where you have two employees that have become the best of buddies (BFFL). Employee #1 consigns a lot to the auction house, employee #2 is a good guy and helps the lot along with some timely bidding. Luckily, stuff like that does not happen anymore .

Lovely Day...

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by iggyman

It's big-time "problematic," could lead to a bunch of bad scenarios. For instance, what if employee "X" sees an E224 Honus Wagner in the upcoming auction. Well, employee "X" already owns an E224 Wagner, but alas, he is considering parting with it. What is to prevent Mr. "X" from shill bidding the Wagner all the way to the max bid and therefore probably benefiting when the time comes to sell his own Wagner. Another scenario is where you have two employees that have become the best of buddies (BFFL). Employee #1 cosigns a lot to the auction house, employee #2 is a good guy and helps the lot along with some timely bidding. Luckily, stuff like that does not happen anymore .

Lovely Day...

Iggy, comeon, obviously "Mr. X", when he's not saving the children or being an all-around great guy who has always treated me well, would never knowingly steal from his friends or violate federal laws. You're acting as if people in this hobby would violate the laws of our country as easily as they'd change their underwear. Sorry but you're just a bit too sarcastic and cynical for me today.

[brian1961]

I share the feelings of those who said that they are saddened by the news that Bill Mastro is selling his collection. That is life. Happens to all of us, sooner or later. I guess the empathy stems from my own strong feelings for the items I have worked hard to collect and thoroughly enjoy. As a collector, it is hard to say "good-bye". Since Bill is only in his mid-late 50s, I would imagine it is tough. However, our feelings can change for the items we own. That has sure happened to me. But all of them at once? No way.

My first recollection of Mr. Mastro was watching him drop any and all bidders for items he wanted at the huge 1972 Midwest Sports Convention in Troy, Michigan. The auctioneer would start the bidding for most of the items, all considered very choice today, at a dollar or two. The bidding would hit three bucks, then Bill would loudly call out "TEN", in a defiant and powerful East Coast dialect. Further bidding ceased. No one wanted any part of trying to go head-to-head with him. Lionel Carter commented about that auction, "Bill is quite a showman". I agreed. I found it quite comical and entertaining. Then again, I was at my first adult show and not bidding against him. Of course, no one was forced to stop bidding. Bill did not threaten anyone, or put a gun to someone's head and suggest they cease bidding. He just blew them away with convincing bids, and like Keller and Keller, he meant business.

Most of my dealings with Bill were very positive. Some of the finest pieces in my collection I will point with pride that I got them from Bill Mastro. As I understand it, for a time he was one of the key consignors of choice items to Alan Rosen's quarterly SCD auctions. He bought collections and sold them. Sometimes he kept an item or two that particularly struck his fancy. His taste was impeccable. From his consultant position at Sotheby's for the auction of the Copeland Collection in 1991, the rest is history. I should think that any of the items on that list in the Legendary article will draw several very serious combatants and receive sufficient bids to garner a befitting price. They're certainly all genuine. If I wanted something on that list, I would be a chump to avoid it. Legendary will give the pieces a deluxe treatment in the catalog. Hopefully, they will do the same with mine. Usually they get it right and do it justice.

Whatever the outcome of the proceedings, I feel very tired and depressed about the matter and what it has done to our hobby, and the way the general public thinks about it. When wrong is done, yes, it should be exposed and dealt with. Hopefully, you or I will never step out of line. Just think, the five Girl Scout leaders that embezzled five grand from the yearly cookie sales got caught. It happened in Florida, and made the front page in my local South Bend Tribune. The guy in charge of the South Bend crime-watchers reward fund turned himself in to the police station, having confessed to embezzling 100 grand. So, watch your own step; it may be "A LULU".

Be that as it may, some of you sit there and beat your breasts with dozens of denouncements. Are you really that happy that he might just really "get it!" Then what if most all the prospective new collectors and dare I say investors decide, "oh brother, this hobby is all just a bunch of crooks. Better choose something else to enjoy."


Furthermore, let us say for the sake of the discussion that shill bidding indeed took place. What if the interpretation of that finding by John Q. Public, including all well-heeled newer collectors is that ALL OF OUR CARDS AND MEMORABILIA IS NOW WAY OVERPRICED BECAUSE THE FBI FOUND SHILL BIDDING? Every current value becomes suspect as people throw the 'ol baby out with the bathwater. You could put on a brave face and say, "I collected these because I loved them so much. I do not care what they are worth." Yeah, sure. No one, and I mean no one, wants their 500-dollar item to become a 150-dollar item in two weeks. If the value of your prized item dropped by over half, you will not be able to look at it with the same enjoyment again. In the end, I hope the findings are nowhere near as bad as some of you proclaim. If so, we will all have to help pick up the pieces.

Oh yeah, I suppose I better mention the whole reason I stuck my nose in this thread. Go to the Robert Edward Auction website, click on "LINKS", then go to the listing for the New York Daily News "I-Team Blog". From there scroll down to the article Michael O'Keefe penned on September 1, 2010 entitled, "Tumult continues in memorabilia world". Read it very carefully and scrutinize the quotes. One observation I had is that there was none of the usual parting shots from Mr. O'Keefe. Somehow, I would not be surprised if by reading it, a few of you will place a bar of soap in your mouth, and even delete a few comments.

It is still a free country, kinda, sorta. Perhaps Leon could enlighten us as to the extent that we are free to rip someone up one side and down the other.

Hopefully, your spare hour of reading this long harangue was worthwhile.

Hang in there. Respectfully, Brian Powell

[glchen]

I don't know what to say, and I'm a relative newcomer to the hobby. However, I equate shill bidding and the like to PEDs in baseball. If you're caught, you should be banned, and if you're tainted, no Hall of Fame (or "Most Prominent Collectors in the Hobby") for you. Just like Bonds and Clemens sit in isolation, Mastro should do the same. There's little sympathy for people who could have had it all. The sport is bigger than Bonds/Clemens, and the hobby is bigger than Bill Mastro. Saying that seeing people facing justice for these crimes brings shame to the hobby and will drive away new collectors is something I disagree with. Just like cleaning up baseball is something that needs to be done, same thing with the hobby. When people feel more comfortable that the hobby is not full of crooks, it will continue to grow.

[HRBAKER]

I'm not sure why it is "sad" when anyone decides to sell their collection.

[calvindog]

Brian, you have an interesting take on the Mastro investigation. You primarily believe that the federal investigation of Mastro will be bad for our investments if the public learns that Bill Mastro is a crook. (Yes, that's probably true -- and it most certainly will cost me money if collectors who might be buying my cards in the future believe that they're overvalued due to such news.) So the alternative is that the laws of our country should not be applied to Bill Mastro and Doug Allen because such an application will cost all of us money? Apparently you and some other Net 54 members believe that. I don't. I'd rather live in a country where the laws are applied equally to all. If that means I'll lose some money, well, I'll be pointing a finger not at the federal government who is enforcing those laws but at the people who violated the laws. And take this from someone who earns a living fighting the government.

If charges of fraud are made and proven, yes, we'll have to 'pick up the pieces' as you say but perhaps it will be a first step in ridding our hobby of the rampant fraud which infects it. Imagine a hobby where you know that when a lot sells in an auction it really sold for that price, that you weren't defrauded along the way. Imagine a Net 54 where people with financial interests tied to wrongdoers won't contort themselves in all kinds of positions in an effort to divert and stifle criticism of the wrongdoers. I can. And at least until I'm banned from here I'll keep speaking out about these issues.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

I'm not sure why it is "sad" when anyone decides to sell their collection.

My condolences and prayers to anyone who has recently decided to sell his collection.

[Rich Klein]

And if somone could find this post; it's in my memory but I could not figure out how to find this specific post.

My old friend Brett Domue, posted a whole bunch of years ago about noticing the exact same description in Mastro auctions a few years apart. I think the 1st item was from a Mastro/Steinbach catalog and the next one was about 3-4years later

Just an interesting take on the matter

Rich

[Peter_Spaeth]

Agree with Gary and Jeff. IF people in the hobby committed fraud, we should be concerned about seeing that they are brought to justice and that restitution is paid to their victims, and not about the values of our own collections.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

I'm not sure why it is "sad" when anyone decides to sell their collection.

In my opinion, and because I am a die hard collector myself and enjoy the hobby so much, I know it will be sad when I sell my collection (regardless of the reason). That is why it is sad to me.

[sago]

I hope Bill got a good deal on the commission.

I can't wait to see the descriptions. Is it going to be vintage Bigelow, or more the Don West approach?

I'd speculate that this was worked out over 3 years ago that when the time came, Doug would get the collection.

Anything but that would have been a large slap in the face, and potentially disastrous for Legendary. Afterall, why would anyone consign there if the former owner, that left on good terms wouldn't? (former owner, who left on good terms? I should write their press release)

[Orioles1954]

Good grief. Collecting baseball cards is a fun hobby and I enjoy make my living in them. However, at the end of the day it's just that....a nice diversion. If we understand that everything we own is on temporarily loan to us, we won't need to get emotionally attached and ascribe silly emotions (IMHO) such as "sad" to parting with them.

[barrysloate]

You can't generalize whether it's a sad event if someone sells his collection. If you're about to foreclose on your house and you have to sell your collection to save it, it very well may be sad. But if you are just tired of collecting and don't get the excitement from it you once did, then selling it is just the next step in your life. Just about everybody sells his stuff at some point, for any number of reasons.

[HRBAKER]

That was what I meant. I can understand when Leon says he would be sad to sell his collection but I found it odd that others mentioned their "sadness" at Bill selling his. Life moves on.

[calvindog]

I think it's always a bit sad when a collector sells his collection. Especially if he's doing so in order to remain one step ahead of the posse.

[barrysloate]

Well, Bill may be selling his collection to pay his legal bills. I'm sure they will be astronomical.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by brian1961

Oh yeah, I suppose I better mention the whole reason I stuck my nose in this thread. Go to the Robert Edward Auction website, click on "LINKS", then go to the listing for the New York Daily News "I-Team Blog". From there scroll down to the article Michael O'Keefe penned on September 1, 2010 entitled, "Tumult continues in memorabilia world". Read it very carefully and scrutinize the quotes. One observation I had is that there was none of the usual parting shots from Mr. O'Keefe. Somehow, I would not be surprised if by reading it, a few of you will place a bar of soap in your mouth, and even delete a few comments.

Thank you for pointing this out. Very enlightening, especially the last paragraph of the statement:

"There exists a small group of self-serving retailers, chat room participants and media reporters, with their right to free speech, who insist on initiating unwarranted, reckless and exaggerated rumors intended to strike an unnecessary offensive blow to our beloved industry. With the emergence of the Collectible Trade Association of America, these critics can now expect an appropriate and powerful response."

And a shortcut to the full article for anyone else interested:
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...emorabili.html

[calvindog]

Tim, that last paragraph is actually unintentionally ironic and hilarious at the same time.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Tim, that last paragraph is actually unintentionally ironic and hilarious at the same time.

WOW! That is little critical of you!

You can now expect an appropriate and powerful response.

[Leon]

We aren't chat room participants, we are a forum. Nothing to worry about guys...Nothing to see...move along now.

My only issue with some on our board is that they seem to take our opinions on issues as we are defending fraudulent activity. That is the farthest thing from the truth. No where and no time have I ever condoned fraudulent activity or said that perpetrators of said fraud should not be punished. No one on this board will get banned for leading the charge against fraud. However, just like I was quoted a few years ago in the newspaper article I do like to put things in perspective. If ALL I do is agonize over the hobby then it's probably not the place for me. If I can mostly have fun and still be looking out and reporting the bad stuff, then that is ok. To each their own though and I guess if someone wants to continually agonize over their hobby it's their right to do so. Rebuttal embellishment may start now........

ps...as for the "trade association"......the way it was trying to be done is silly on so many levels.

[calvindog]

Agonize? Does it seem like I'm agonizing over Mastro and Allen being investigated for their rampant fraud? In contrast, every day is like a party! In fact, I spend my days holding my sides in while laughing so hard -- like Felix the Cat.

Rebuttal embellisment [sic] concluded.

[iggyman]

Leon, can you kindly direct me to the "chat room participant board" Marshall was referencing??? I'm sorry, but it's plain as a pikestaff. I'm sure some Armani wearing association attorney is taking down notes as we speak. But not to worry, it is only done to ensure the integrity of this great industry.

New Net54 logo:
bull.jpg

Lovely Day...

[ElCabron]

It's clear that Jeff is ready to fight....for his right....to paaaaaaaaaaaartyyyyyyyyyy!!!!

-Ryan

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Agonize? Does it seem like I'm agonizing over Mastro and Allen being investigated for their rampant fraud? In contrast, every day is like a party! In fact, I spend my days holding my sides in while laughing so hard -- like Felix the Cat.

Rebuttal embellisment [sic] concluded.

here he is

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Agonize? Does it seem like I'm agonizing over Mastro and Allen being investigated for their rampant fraud?

Yes. That is all you seem to think about. Or am I not allowed to have an opinion in the "Lichtman Universe". Look, if they committed fraud then they should pay their just dues, just like you or I. Can I make that anymore clear for you counselor?

[iggyman]

Felix from the Topps 1972 in-action subset!

Lovely Day...

[martyogelvie]

"Is this where the LINE STARTS for the Collector's Trade Association???"

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Leon

Yes. That is all you seem to think about. Or am I not allowed to have an opinion in the "Lichtman Universe". Look, if they committed fraud then they should pay their just dues, just like you or I. Can I make that anymore clear for you counselor?

How about I get to determine what my own thoughts are? And it's not my universe, this is yours. You get to do whatever you want, including threatening to ban me. I don't have that great luxury. Not that I'd want it, obviously.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

How about I get to determine what my own thoughts are? And it's not my universe, this is yours. You get to do whatever you want, including threatening to ban me. I don't have that great luxury. Not that I'd want it, obviously.

Just being a total pain in my rear won't get you banned from the board. Getting way too personal and not stopping will, which you don't do. I have no problem with you leading the charge and of course, you can think whatever you want to. There has probably been less than 1 person a year banned and they went way overboard, personally.

[iggyman]

Ring-a-ding-ding! While you guys have been chatting away, Bruce just scored another item for his collection.





And another!


Lovely Day...

[calvindog]

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jeff, you are no Peter Chao or Marshall Barkman.

[teetwoohsix]

Is the fraud that is referred to in the hobby mostly directed at memorabilia, and not so much with cards? It seems like when I read about fraud, it seems to be mostly about sigs, jerseys, bats, balls, etc..

I know alot of people have said there are trimmed cards in high grade TPG holders, but other than that I don't seem to hear too much about "fraud" when it comes to cards. Am I wrong on how I'm reading all of this?

Thanks-Clayton

[docpatlv]

Clayton,

I think the reference is to fraud in the way some auctions are run (i.e. shill bidding).

Mike