As a regular card buyer the only thing these "shill" threads has taught me is I will now NEVER buy from a consigner. I have in the past bought from Probstien, PWCC, ect...and now I just won't do it and have blocked all ebay accounts that take consignments. I do know what I want to spend on any given card as I do my homework, but why mess with this BS. So if those that take consignments continue to ignore these issues...the only reason I am even posting is to let them know there are folks out there that read this...and stop buying. Address the issue...or continue to let good customers simply go away.

Here again - "Buy the card not the slab". I have seen tons of cards from Rick that look absolutely spot on for the grade (along with some that make you scratch your head). When I bid in an auction - 9 times out of 10 I will bid the max amount that I am willing to pay for the card - as my 1st bid. If I win then great - if not I don't normally get caught up in any bidding wars. To make a "blanket" statement that you won't buy from this or that person - is pretty much throwing in the towel. If a graded card looks like the grade to me - then I am good to go. Just my .02 worth..............

My point is: where did these numbers come from? if they come from him, i would seriously start doubting the validity of the math.

Kevin

Unfortunately, with the invention of "photoshopping", the old theory of "buy the card not the slab" doesn't always work anymore. Sellers are manipulating the scans and most sellers will not accept returns on graded cards...

I also don't ever recall retracting a bid in my 14 years of eBay activity.

Consign some cards, it's never too late.

If every auction from every auction house reached the max bid of the highest bidder every time you would see a bunch of records get broken. The mere fact that these types of numbers come from this same seller over and over tells me quite a lot.

IMHO he should start a strict policy that shill bidding will not be tolerated and that bids at his auctions are not allowed to be retracted without his consent. Not even sure if Ebay is capable of this or would want to be. But it would greatly reduce the problem if not totally eliminate it.

Tom C

I've never bought or understood the semi-regular posted argument that "If you bid at what you are wiling to pay then there is nothing to be concerned about. You got the card for a price you were willing to pay."

Lat's say, for an example, you place a maximum bid of $400, the $400 being a price you are willing to pay for the card. If you win at and pay $300 when you would have paid $200 without the shill bidding, you are beating cheated out of $100. I'm not a lawyer, but if if shilling is illegal (and I would guess it is), you are being illegally cheated out of $100. And this is an example where your winning bid is $100 under your maximum.

Irrelevant to if you were willing to pay even $1,400 more for that card, having the price artificially (and perhaps illegally) raised by $100 by fictitious bidders is most definitely something collectors should be concerned and complain about. At the very least, what collector wouldn't prefer to use that $100 on the purchase of another card?

I’ve never understood that mentality either. If the item is shilled, but doesn’t go above the maximum that someone is willing to spend, they don’t care? I don’t buy that. The mindset “As long as it doesn’t exceed my maximum” is not logical. It’s basic human nature to try to get things as cheaply as possible.

If you go to the car dealership with your mind made up that you’re not going to spend over $30K and the car you pick out has a sticker price of $29,995, do you still not haggle and try to get them to come down from the sticker price? Sure you do.

Normally sellers shill in order to make sure they get every last penny that you are willing to pay. If they try to get more, they end up selling to their own shill i.d.

But in the case of a few famous/infamous ebay auctioneers, I believe the shilling actually creates a feeding frenzy, resulting in prices that are sometimes higher than market value. Over time a feeling grows in the collector community (among some, but not all) that the auctioneer in question has superior goods, which only exacerbates the 'problem'.

Not sure what ill-advised aberration of a human trait causes some people to participate in such schemes, but it's proven to be an effective business models. Given that ebay gets a cut, I would not expect it to ever stop;if anything, ebay will simply implement additional policies to cover up our ability to prove that anything illegal is going on.

I think there are a few people who thought it was an effective model that wish they hadn't. Hopefully there will be more that wish they hadn't also.

David and David, everyone cares about getting cheated out of money, but since we are certain it occurs with many/most auction houses, then we have two choices: we put in the bid that we are willing to pay, and if we pay less, that's great, and if we suspect there are issues, we let them know. Or we refuse to bid with any auction house that we suspect shills.

I have elected to put my bid in and not worry too much about it unless I see evidence of a problem. There is only one auction house where I have recently been paying my high bid for every single item. Because of this, I might very well quit doing business with them. I contacted them about the issue and did not get a straight-forward answer, but I really didn't expect to. I just wanted to let them know that I felt I was possibly getting screwed. I will probably throw a few bids in for odd items in their next auction, and then report the problem here on this forum if the evidence is compelling. If either of you have a better idea, please let me know - I'm all for helping wiping out auction corruption.

This is the perfect recipe for shilling auction houses and card doctors: resignation/complacency on the part of collectors (and I do not exempt myself); omerta amongst the guilty; and the hope that it's too difficult/not worth it for law enforcement to nail them.

That's a rational thought, but often times a collector's emotions will dropkick his rationale and leave it for dead during the auction process.

My post was only a response to those who on occasion post "I have no problem with with me being shilled, because I got the card within my price range."

John, I do the same thing. This means it potentially takes me longer to find items I want, but I'd rather wait than even deal with this BS.

2 retractions in 10+ years each retraction was because of my clumsy typing i.e. entered 1000.00 vs. 100.00 or something. After each retraction I reentered my bid on the item….

But Al, it may mean little to you as a buyer from a practical standpoint, but potentially a lot from a monetary standpoint.

I think one big problem is that all too often stuff trumps everything else. If you've been looking for a specific card for a long time and it finally shows up, I suspect there is a tendency, at least on the part of some people, to bid on the card, try to win it, and then bitch about being cheated after they've filled their want list.

That tendency is an epidemic in this hobby (me included).

shilling
 

This is a good reason to disregard VCP prices. They are a joke. Pay what you think the card is worth and that's all!!!!

None for me in 13 years, but I did once bid $900 instead of $90. Luckily no one else accidentally bid $800.

Another bidder with mistake prone fingers, I guess.

Bid History: Details


Bidding Details

Bidder Information
Bidder: j***a( 203)
Feedback: 100%Positive
Item description: Item Title: 1954 Dan-Dee Potato Chips Mickey Mantle PSA 8 NM-MT (PWCC)
Bids on this item: 2
30-Day Summary
Total bids: 174
Items bid on: 41
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 45%
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 13

Interesting that you will see more of these people with lot of bid retractions in the big auction going on eBay now. Just put a "Buy it now" & take offers rather then shill bidding.
It's frustrating with no real end in site.

1960 Clemente PSA 7
 

PSA 7 1960 Clemente - a $125-$150/card shilled up to $400+

http://i526.photobucket.com/albums/c...ps48740b4d.png

Intended or unintended, this is the pun of the day (well, the previous September 4th).

I think this one shattered a world record.

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=141072272076

No bid retractions here
 

I mever nake mistakes.

LOL, PROBSTEIN strikes again ! why do legit bidders still bid on his auctions ?

this is exactly why he stays in "business". I put the word business in quotes , because he doesn't run it like a business should be run. If it was his primary source of income and he depended upon it he would make damn sure no shill bidding took place. there would be no need to question how he could possibly track all those bidders, because it would be part of his business plan. he would have employees and measures in place to track all auction activity ALL the time. has anyone ever contacted the prosecutor in the county where he does business ? I would be curious to hear about anything like that happening and any results of such conversations.
( this is assuming he is an honest businessman)

Rick Probstein
 

I will vouch for Rick's character here. I have consigned many items with him and have been paid promptly and in full for every auction.

What benefit is it for him to have things shilled if he ends up winning things accidentally?

I would say to those doubters that you should use his service first before criticizing.

Devil's advocate here. How does being paid on time vouch for his character? I mean, if there IS shill bidding going on, that should not impact on how he pays his for the items consigned to him. In fact, when you think about it from the BIDDING side, his model would HAVE to rely on keeping consignors happy, since that provides MORE opportunity to make MORE money from shill bidding.

How does he win things accidentally? What about the constant bid retractions? The shills retract until the non-shill wins. So how does he end up winning the item??? Even if he did, it's his cost of doing "business". Sometimes you lose, but most times you win. And enough to cover any "losses".

Again, CONSIGNMENTS to him have NOTHING to do will shill bidding (if that is going on). But I'm sure there are consignors that don't care about shill bidding since THEY make more money too. Not saying YOU do, just saying...

DISCLAIMER: I am NOT claiming that this is being done, just pointing out how vouching as a consignor doesn't PROVE anything is on the up-and-up when it comes to bidding.

Lost a customer in me...
 

x

3-More than "X" number (2,3,5?) bid retractions gets you banned from future bidding.

Mike Q. you are way OUT of the loop here! No doubt you get paid in a timely fashion, but that has NOTHING to do with this thread. However, I'm not suggesting Rick shills himself, but does very little to combat the problem. Please explain why a high percentage of his auctions have bidders bidding almost exclusively with him, many that have low feedback with high retractions. Also he doesn't get "stuck" winning items. You need to go back and read the facts here. If you don't get it you never will.

an example... http://tinyurl.com/mna8w3m check bidder with 641 feedbacks

edited to add:
Bidder Information
Bidder: a***c ( 641Feedback score is 500 to 999)
Feedback: 100% Positive
Item description: 2009 Bowman Chrome BLUE Refractor Mike Trout RC 150/150 BGS 9.5 w/ 10 AUTO
Bids on this item: 4

30-Day Summary
Total bids: 167
Items bid on: 72
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 53% Help
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 93

Doesn't everyone have 93 bid retractions in the last 6 mos.? I actually think this is almost one for law enforcement. It is that over the top.

To Richard L; not sure where you are coming from re "not getting it".

I have been to Rick's office to drop off items and if you saw the operation in action, you would realize that the guy doens't have time to micro manage bidding action on every lot.

This is more of an eBay problem than a seller issue.

I want to trust Rick too...but how do you explain not taking action against someone that bids over 50% of their bids, on your items, with 93 bid retractions in the last 6 months? Is that the behavior of an honest person?

You're wrong, dude! When the seller is made aware of it and does nothing about it, it's definitely a seller issue. The fact that Rick had been made aware (twice now) of Panky shilling his own auctions and does nothing about it speaks volumes of Rick's character.

Edited to add: Not only does Rick do nothing about it, he still lets Panky continue to consign with him.

Mike, you really can't speak for his entire operation? And I disagree it's only an ebay issue. There are other prolific sellers on ebay that have cancelled bids with low feedback or high retractions, perhaps you could mention this to Rick? Could you post the items you consigned in the last 90 days? Do you happen to know Joe Pankiewicz?

Interesting thread.
I have bought an item or two from Rick and didn't feel I was shilled, but others experience obviously differs.

My point to responding was to the discussion about how having a max bid in mind and using a snipe does in fact work, to a degree, to protect bidders from shilling.

My understanding of the most common way a shill works is that they bid up an auction to see where another bidders top bid is and then retract to just below it. If I place my max bid 10-20 seconds or less from the end there is really no time for a shill to bid me up to my max. If the winning bid is below my max I win, if not I won't, but there isn't really way, in this model, for a shiller to get me to pay more.
Another shill model, is to bid until they hit an amount and force people to bid above that amount. In a sense, this creates a hidden reserve amount. Well, in this case, if I am willing to pay $500 for something and a shill bids it to $200 right at the beginning I can still choose whether I want to pay the $200 or not. While it might've sold for less without the shill, it also might've not been for sale if the consignor wasn't guaranteed they were going to get the $200 or it would've started with a $200 reserve/opening bid to begin with. While starting with an opening bid of $200 would be more transparent and/or ethical, the net result is pretty much the same. I put a snipe of $500 with 5 secs to go and I either win it for over $200 or I don't.

If you believe that Rick is either complicit in the shilling or is implicitly approving of the misbehavior by inaction, certainly you can voice your opinion, by not supporting his auctions. That being said, my experience is that stuff trumps all. I think Kenny's quote sums it up perfectly.
"I think one big problem is that all too often stuff trumps everything else. If you've been looking for a specific card for a long time and it finally shows up, I suspect there is a tendency, at least on the part of some people, to bid on the card, try to win it, and then bitch about being cheated after they've filled their want list."
I also don't think Sports Memorabilia is alone in this quagmire. I think it's very a common pattern of behavior in any collectible arena.

What's the deal with bidders who bid excessive amounts of times? I saw one auction recently that had something like 33 bids but the high bid was something like $25. Why?

I'm not sure sniping eliminates shill bidding. I hear others say that, but I'm not so sure it's true. There are also snipe shills (or is it a shill snipe?) that you have to consider.

Let's say a seller has a card and they really don't want to take less than $100 for it. They start the auction at $.99 and let it run. With a couple hours left in the auction, it's only at $30 and the seller starts to get nervous. The seller places a snipe of $99.99 with one of their other accounts and that ensures that it won't go for less than their desired amount. Well, let's say you have a snipe of $95, but you lose to the snipe shill of $99.99. You got shilled and never even knew it.

It's a snipe, but it's also a shill. Too many people focus on the shill during the auction and not the snipe shill at the end of the auction which happens way too often.

Seems like you are either apologizing for, or just ignoring the aspect of shill bidding, as you are ignoring the proof provided of Rick's knowledge of this. (see Panky thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=174608, among other examples provided)

Or, just a thought as to another possibility..... You DO get it, but as a consignor, simply enjoy the "fruits of shilling", whether doing it yourself or not?

Nothing motivates people more than a vested interest.

agreed...if i were a consigner i probably wouldn't have a problem with more $$$$ in my pocket either?! how'd u feel as a buyer?

Shilling
 

David---I snipe but would not say shilling does not impact me. Someone can run up the price of their card during the auction or at the end with their own snipe and I pay a higher price if the shill is above other bids against me.

But if I get the card at my snipe price then to my way of thinking it does not matter from a practical bottom line standpoint whether the seller set his price by a BIN, a reserve, a minimum bid, or a shill. The ethics are sure different and I try to avoid auctions where regular shilling occurs, but if I need or want a card,I just set my snipe at what I am willing to pay for it...and let go.

I understand others disagree and I respect their views. I am only speaking for myself after years of buying on ebay and from auction houses

ah yes, the sad plight of many: "I'm too busy counting my money to care how it is I'm making it". Really tugs at your heartstrings, doesn't it?

That can be a function of eBay mobile on an iPhone. It sets up the bid automatically at the next increment but you have to specially type in any other bid. I've often been bidding from a place where typing in a bid isn't convenient so I've just tapped the mobile next number repeatedly until I either top or hit where I'd like to stop.

One thing that doesn't get discussed much is how shill bidding negatively affects other SELLERS as well.

Unlike Leon and other deep pockets who can pay anything (just kidding, Leon), many of us have a budget.

So for example, let's say I have a $500 budget. I am looking at Bob's item A (auction) and Joe's item B (fixed price $300). My main goal is item A, but will buy item B if I still have enough left in my budget. I put in a max bid of $300 for item A (up front or snipe, doesn't matter). If item A gets shilled to over $200, then Joe doesn't sell item B. So Bob's shill bidder just cost Joe a sale. How do you think Joe, as a SELLER, would view this?

This IS different than losing out to non-shill Sam bidding over $200 on item A (and then Joe not selling item B), which is letting the market determine the actual value of Bob's item, and to what extent Joe can compete in a "free" market.

(I'm sure someone could come up with a better example of adverse effect on the seller than this)

+1

I appreciate that shilling is illegal and wrong and if the seller wants a minimum or reserve just set it, but it is less evil than the chip and retract strategy used to 'out' max bids in the netherworld of eBay consignment sales. The only way to participate in the eBay system with any semblance of security is to use snipes to hide my max bid and to try and force the shillers into setting de facto reserves that I can decide whether to meet when i set my snipe rather than throwing down a max bid that the shillers can chip away at until they hit it only to retract to the next lowest level.