From my understanding each HA person bidding, and winning, has to pay all BP.
They have profit centers, ya' know. And yes, I guess it does help consignors. Bummer....
I have won plenty of items from HA since selling my collection. I am at a loss in thinking why anyone would expect a bargain at an auction. But it seems as though some feel they are entitled to them. Hey, I like a great bargain too, I just don't feel entitled to them.

The HOUSE does not pay BP, or if it does, it pays it to itself.

I never said they're not entitled to make a profit, or that I expect a bargain from an AH. I still bid with Heritage despite this policy, as it sounds like many others around here do.

It actually makes sense to me, as the buyers in this hobby, and probably any hobby for that matter, tend to follow the auctions with the best stuff. When deciding where to consign, a policy that offers a bit of insurance against an item falling through the cracks and closing well below market value might be the deciding factor in where to send it.

Certainly disclosure goes a long way toward addressing notions of unfairness. I do not believe disclosure, though, to be an end in and of itself, as in the real world many bidders do not read auctions rules. So in those instances when the rule varies significantly from industry norm, I question whether an AH should not do more than bury the disclosure in the fine print.

In the case we are discussing with Heritage, almost certainly they do factor in the forgone BP when deciding how high to bid. If they win the item, at say $1,000 where the underbid is $950 and the BP 20%, the price they "paid" was $1,190.00, where $190 of that is the BP on the underbid which they chose to forgo. The price to you at the $1,000 hammer would have been $1,200, so in this example you would have been at a $10 disadvantage (less than 1%).

Yes they do. They forego the BP that the underbidder would have paid.

Not saying the practice is right, but they do indirectly pay the BP.

I see the point you and Corey are making about the economics. But I continue to think the concern about the house competing with its customers is a valid one from an optics viewpoint.

It's more than just optics. Too much bad can go wrong. Some random thoughts that come to mind:

• Joe average bidder has to add a 20% premium
• HA employees have to add a 20% premium if they are bidding for their own collection
• The AH can bid on the same item at a 20% discount, which reduces the corporations profit for shareholders
• 20% profit for many business is a reasonably good markup on a wholesale price
• There is no wholesale price, as there is no "cost of goods" to the AH
• Using these rules, too many nefarious opportunities can exist for the auction house, such as:
  • Descriptions can be written to limit maximum bids, if the AH really wants to up the item
  • Descriptions can be written to limit maximum bids, if an employee collector really wants to up the item
  • Scans can be tweaked, the scanner glass not cleaned and leave a spot, or other games can be played with the item
  • No "purple sticker" (or type of equivalent) would be given to an item that may deserve one
  • Once the AH owns the item, improved descriptions can be written, or the item can be saved for, say, a "Platinum" type of auction.

I am in no way saying this happens at HA, but it certainly opens up too many possibilities for profiting at the consignor's expense at any AH.

Bottom line, if you are an AH, take the consignment, promote the sh*t out of it, and sell it to the highest bidder on the open market. That is your job. It is not to undermine a lot to resell it or undersell it when you don't own it.

This is my last comment on this issue, and I will not be taking any more questions.
:mad:

BP
 

When the auction house purchases an item, the auction house TEMPORARILY forgoes the BP, until they place it for sale again, and when it sells, they will regain the BP.

Are you freaking kidding me?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some guy comes on here to throw his crap around, basically saying that they can rip off the collectors you supposedly care about, and me responding to it makes ME the bad guy?????????????????????? What the hell fantasy world do you live in, Leon????????????? Since you personally attacked me, I'll return the favor, you feeble-minded moron. Ball up your fist, grease it up real good, and shove it straight up your f_cking a_s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My point proven. Thanks for blanking out part of the f bomb so I didn't have to. :)

Please welcome our new mascot:

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...poo%20toss.jpg

But I digress.

Corey has it spot on: the AH foregoes the BP it would have made otherwise, so while there is no money exchanged it effectively loses the BP on the sale if an item is picked up for the house. And as anyone who has tried to profit from flipping knows, there are no guarantees. I do my best to find bargain lots I can flip. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose. It isn't an exact science. HA also has to pay to store, insure and then for staff time to relist an item. They are slow as molasses to work a consignment through anyway, so those costs are real, even if they are hard to isolate.

As for the optics, I don't see the problem. I find HA to be one of the more consistent auctioneers. HA tells you exactly what to expect right up front in its rules. Whenever I bid on their site I have to tick a box acknowledging the auction terms, which are linked right there, so there is no reason to cry foul when they do what they say they are going to do and give you the chance to read their rules every time you bid. If I don't agree i can skip their auction. If enough people skip their auctions, maybe they change the rules. But the vitriol here, come on guys, we are better than that; it's just a hobby. It isn't supposed to be a cause of stress.

This is why we don't allow employee bids. (Or "Auction house" bids)

Perfectly said.

Scott, I can only go from my experience with HA, but they have always allowed me to review the copy on my consignments and they have never rejected an edit I suggested. I write that review provision right into the terms of my consignment. I am sure they would veto it if I wrote something completely out of left field, but I wouldn't expect any AH except eBay to put up with that.

Yet again, if what Heritage does is fine, why doesn't any other auction house bid on its own lots, competing with its customers?

And to the folks who are good with Heritage's bidding practices, what do you think they should do when they learn (as with the Bobby Hull) that they've auctioned an altered card?

The internet lynch mob wants to know. :)

:D:D:D:D:D

No, I'm not. When I was in hot and heavy acquire mode, I would never pay 25% vig to anyone anytime to buy from them EVER for anything PERIOD what a total JOKE.

To think they would answer is foolhardy. THEY are in on it and don't give a flying F... But you knew that, that's why you asked twice. The silence should tell everybody everything they need to know about them.

The Hull is just one of 100,000's of thousand these scabs are selling. They all cater to the trimming crowds o what would you expect? Them to care :D:D:DThey are laughing all the way to the bank like so many others

If they won't answer maybe the people vouching for them will answer? It's a simple enough question, it's now been established they sold a butchered card for 70K or whatever it was. What should they be doing about it? And if they aren't doing anything, is that deserving of criticism?

I kinda remember when Huggins auctions was outed as allowing employees to bid on their auction items...they changed their policy.

Personally I think this practice is BS and I will never bid in an auction where this is permitted let alone stated in their "rules."

As one of the "biggest and best" auction houses on the planet...Heritage obviously should do the right thing regarding the Hull card.

Will they? Who knows?

lynch mob member #2

Have you tried emailing or calling Chris Ivy? That is what he said to do with further questions.

I'm not sure they should be doing or saying anything publicly about it unless the buyer of the card made a public complaint. Maybe the new owner of the card is fine with it. Or perhaps he is already in talks with heritage or PSA. I would hope they would do something for the buyer if a request is made. But I don't think we should expect auction houses to monitor online forums and notify customers that they may own an altered card.

I do not understand what difference the buyer’s premium would make to the buyer. Whether it is 10% or 25%, I would assume that a buyer takes that into consideration and if he wants to bid a total of $100 all in, he would bid $91 with the one auction house and $80 with the second to come up with that number.

If anything, the buyer’s premium should matter more to the seller since his proceeds are calculated on the hammer price. I think that when buyer’s premiums are high that the seller is receiving part of it.

Chris did say he and the employees do pay the bp and sales tax.

I would imagine if employees are in the business of buying and selling, they could easily incorporate, fill out resale certificates and not have to pay sales tax.

The small costs of incorporating and maintaining a business could be far smaller than the sales tax Chris mentioned that he and the Heritage employees pay.

But when Heritage the company, buys an item, I would imagine they are not paying sales tax (because the item would be for resale), and if they are writing a check to Heritage or a BP, then the BP fee is a wash since they are writing the check to themselves.

Should we expect auction houses not to take consignments from known card doctors, or is that also asking too much of them?

I'm not playing by his rules. Anyhow, I'm pretty sure I know the answer.

As far as I know, it's almost impossible for a consignor to get a crack at some of the BP.

In very rare circumstances, perhaps a Mantle Rookie Card (8, 9 or 10) or a T206 Wagner card consignment could bring an opportunity for an AH to offer a percentage of the BP.

Very good point...if Newport Beach is telling owner of said altered card in their holder to go back to seller then he’ll yeah it shouldn’t be asking to much for them to not take consignments from known doctors.

I find this very interesting.....a couple thoughts come to my mind....

How can any auction house have any confidence in PSA?

It doesn’t seem to stop any of them from submitting cards to PSA for their clients to have in their up coming auctions.

The most important thing for all seems to maximize the value of their said card......until Market Share has exponentially declined I see nothing changing just more submissions to NB

This has come up before. Who determines what people are known card doctors? What prevents their wife, family member, or friend from submitting on their behalf? I'm not sure that's the solution.

On another note, heritage has vintage and collectible guitar auctions.

That market has gone way down in the last 10 years. I keep track of those sales, and unlike sports memorabilia, most of the guitar consignments do very poorly in the Heritage auctions.

This is not a reflection on Heritage, but more so the state of that market place.

So these Heritage Guitar auctions are a great place for buyers and not great for consignors. I guess sports memorabilia is way too hot a collectible segment and it's a shame for sports collectors that buyers compete with so many others and the AH's and their employees.

If I were a lawyer I would say non-responsive. :D

I can't believe I agree with Jesse :D but he's right w/r/t the Hull: it all comes down to the buyer. First of all, we don't know what is going on with the buyer or behind the scenes; a refund may be in the works. Second, if there is no complaining victim then, frankly, it is not anyone else's place to be indignant on behalf of that person. To take the most extreme example, Ken Kendrick owns a Wagner that was sheet cut and then trimmed and has said that he is aware of the card's history and is happy to own it regardless. What is the seller supposed to do with that, try to force him to accept a refund? If the purchaser of one of the Frankencards doesn't care, we are wasting our time complaining for him. At this point we don't know one way or the other, so all we really have a nice juicy story to gossip about.

Again I hate to agree with some folks here, but the more appropriate target of the lynch mob on the Hull card is the idiocracy at PSA who validated the card. Those incompetent buffoons have blown it on an ungodly large number of allegedly high grade cards. That's the really awful story for collectors, not that some slab-collecting nitwit spent a ridiculous amount for the flip of a hockey card.

Adam....

100% in agreement with your statement....

hate to agree with some folks here, but the more appropriate target of the lynch mob is the idiocracy at PSA who validated the card

Lol, well add "no, however" to the beginning of my comment and hopefully that will qualify as responsive.

I would expect an auction house that sold a 70k card, and learned after the fact it was hacked, at least to inform the buyer. Nobody is saying they should force the buyer to give it back, that's a complete red herring.

Much better, though of course we disagree.

Didn't PSA say in regard to the outed PWCC cards that the card owners should look to PWCC for restitution and return the cards to PWCC? If that is what PSA said, I suspect their rationale is their viewpoint that PWCC was complicit in the fraud (by working hand in hand with the card doctor(s)) and therefore should bear responsibility before PSA.

In the case of the outed Bobby Hull 8 recently sold by Heritage, I doubt anyone could credibly argue Heritage was complicit in the doctoring/regrading of the card. Accordingly, because the Hull case on its facts appears to differ significantly from the outed PWCC cards, I wonder what PSA's position will be if/when the card is returned to them? In such an instance, the card owner should have no problem establishing damages, as selling an outed "8" is a lot different than selling a non-outed "8". To go even further, IMO the owner when trying to sell the card will have a duty to disclose to any prospective purchasers the card has been outed. Good luck trying to get your 78 grand back in that instance.

So what will PSA do? I would think the dumbest thing would be to try to pin the mess on Heritage. Putting aside the legal creativity needed to come up with a theory that could even survive pretrial motions, from a purely business perspective IMO it would be insanity. The value of the PSA brand hinges directly on the cards' marketability. Think of the impact on this marketability if PSA by trying to shift liability to the AHs make AHs worry about their legal exposure if PSA cards they sell are subsequently outed. What might happen? Probably something along the lines of AHs putting in large red print in their terms and conditions that they make no opinion as to the accuracy of PSA grading and that such cards are sold "as is" at the sole risk and expense of the winning bidder. (As an aside, IMO AHs current terms and conditions almost certainly suffice to shield them from liability. But that will not help them in the court of public opinion, and that likely will be their main concern.)

So let's suppose AHs do respond along such lines. Talk about giving a poison pill to the marketability of the PSA brand. After all, how many authenticators get singled out in bold red print in AHs' terms and conditions?

This situation with outed cards and the current questions swirling around PSA is very fluid, and I wonder how carefully PSA has thought about where it could lead. By their public statements, they are trying to give the impression they are not worried. But as I try to show by discussing the 8 Hull, there are a lot of moving pieces. If/when the 8 Hull is returned to PSA, I think the smartest move for PSA is to not look to involve Heritage and instead promptly and without hassle refund the owner the $78k he paid for the card. And if the card owner comes first to Heritage, if I was them I would on behalf of their customer return the card to PSA and put their muscle behind the demand that PSA make full restitution.

Peter I see what you're saying and don't disagree completely. It would certainly be nice of them to notify the buyer, especially given the value of the card.

But again I don't think we can expect that, and wouldn't want to be the one to decide where to draw the line.

As to Adam and others who agree despite disagreements in the past I appreciate that. My defense of Heritage in this case is not much different than my less popular opinions. I think the focus should be on how these cards got into the incorrect holders. Not who is selling them.

No, they are likely too busy monitoring new consignments to see what they want to bid on.

Why would they have to incorporate?
I had a tax number for a while, no incorporation, and all I had to do was fill out a form online. Totally free except for the effort to track that I had exactly 0 in-state sales over 2-3 years.

I cannot believe it is even open to debate that someone who sold an altered 70k card should inform the buyer.

As for accepting consignments from card doctors, would you be OK if an AH took a consignment from Gary now?

We can agree they should notify the buyer. Assuming they're aware of the situation it would be the right thing to do. But I don't think they should be compelled to do so. Or that we should expect it, or a public statement.

As for Gary my guess is many auction houses are accepting consignments from others on his behalf without their knowledge. I doubt any would knowingly accept one directly at this point. I would prefer not to bid on items he consigned.

Agree that this is an absolute no-brainer. With all due respect to Jesse and Adam, why are you assuming the buyer of the altered Hull Card knows about its tainted history? How would he know, unless he frequents these forums? Of course the person should be notified.... immediately.

Most collectors do not read (and are not even aware) of these forums. If Heritage fails to notify the buyer, who will? Nobody else has his contact info.... only Heritage does. LOTG and REA would contact all parties involved without hesitation... so should Heritage.

Provide the Buyer with the card's history/info, and let him decide if a refund is warranted. Assuming he wants recourse/restitution, it should come from PSA (who's oversight on this obvious re-coloring is inexcusable).

As for the consignor of the card... Law Enforcement should definitely be made aware. Let the Feds decide if the consignor's story is credible.

If we ever had visibility into who is consigning to some of these auctions...

No matter how many years this stuff goes on, or what is revealed, some people's instincts to defend and excuse never seem to change. Oh well. Santayana surely was right.