|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm going to a flea market this weekend and I'm "optimistic" I'll soon have a green Cobb available. Can I list it on ebay now? |
Quote:
. |
Cards
There is probably a good reason they have handled it this way. Guessing:
1) They know the party that took them is and have sufficient confidence they will get them back. 2) If some have been sold, they didn't want the auction down for the investigation while they try and retrieve. 3) Short of the thief freaking out and throwing them in the trash (which is highly unlikely); the cards are probably under someone's bed until they figure out what the heck they got themself into. We're all extremely hopeful they will be found and you'd think that's going to happen. |
.
|
Additionally.....
Quote:
For ML, Ryan and all other affected consignors and winning bidders, I am very sorry to hear about this and hope the thief is caught and cards recovered. To all those who are offering could have, should have and would have scenarios I remind you that hindsight is 20/20 and "easy" to see looking back. As previously mentioned it sounds like this was standard business practice with little or no historical problem(s) and was covered by insurance. I suspect that practice will be scrutinized and possibly modified moving forward. While I understand the question of running the auction with the knowledge that the cards weren't available, I also understand that it really was the best way to establish current fair market value for insurance purposes. I have and know of others that in the past had issue with Fedex stealing cards and hope they are being investigated here as well. I think their $1,000 cap on "collectible" claims (it's in the fine print) leaves them ripe for incidents like this. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk |
Quote:
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk |
The Con is the continued theft that has recently occurred on-site at these major card shows. At every major show, you hear from dealers being theft victims of multiple expensive cards/many graded. The people doing this are not heroin junkies….they seem to know what they're doing…does not appear to be rank amateurs with little to no knowledge of the value and workings of this industry.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You don't have a collector who suffers flood damage to his collection say, "Gosh, my high-end cards are ruined. I'd better find an AH that will run phantom auction listings for me so I can determine what they were worth... " |
Quote:
|
Not so simple...
Quote:
2) I think it is quite an exaggeration to call the auction "make believe". The auction was real. The cards are real. It is not a simple situation with no easy answers. 3) "To maximize their own insurance recovery" - this is really the most perplexing part of your comment - First and foremost - the insurance company needs substantiation of current market value for a claim. The Ty Cobb shown in this thread and presumably some of the other cards involved have very few and/or current sales - running the auction was really the best way to assess current fair market value - as an example the aforementioned Cobb sold for about $7K less than the last time it sold 3 years ago, indicating a lower current fmv than the last sale and reducing the amount that might otherwise have been claimed - in fact, lowering the insurance recovery. Up or down - the auction best reflects current fmv. While ML may get to keep whatever % they were entitled to on the sales, the lion's share of the proceeds I presume will be used to compensate consignors. |
Well there you have it
Quote:
:) |
I learn a lot from card land. Now I can add that auctioning off items you don't have and cannot deliver on to my list of things that are actually okay!
I would think it is basic common sense that mailing $2M of fairly small and easily stolen product to a hotel to then hold for you is a bad idea. I would think it is common sense that then selling items you do not have and cannot deliver on is pretty sleazy at best. If I went on the BST and auctioned a nice card, waited for it to end, and then said "Hey, this card was actually stolen from me before this and I said nothing. Thanks for the bids, I just wanted to price it for insurance" would this board say I handled the situation in the best possibly way? Hell no, I would get roasted for days at best :rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
Too good to take a backpack on a plane.
|
Quote:
|
Memory Lane is in a tough spot and doesn’t want to do anything to jeopardize their insurance. My personal opinion is to support Memory Lane and unite against the thief.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
It seems to me that liability would be with the hotel, who had to have agreed to hold the package while they waited for ML to check in a few days later. I feel it was poor judgement, at best by those at ML, who decided it was a good idea to do this. I doubt the hotel had the means to adequately protect the contents of the box.
I simply do not see a scenario where ML's ins carrier would cover the loss. It was delivered and signed for and it was delivered to someone who was not an agent of the company. Seems like an easy denial. And although it is entirely at the bidders expense, letting the auction go seems to be the best approach to making sure you have a value on the loss. Hopefully the auction was run clean and there was no shill bidding on those lots. Nobody wins here but this was easily avoidable. |
Quote:
If insurance companies did this, pretty soon reputable AHs will start advertising their auctions as "Guaranteed Phantom-Free" |
All collectibles insurance policies have caps on the amount they will pay out for a claim for items shipped via FedEx et al. These limits are relatively low with respect to one's overall policy coverage limits. It's also why other auction houses use armored trucks to deliver high valued packages. I'd be surprised if ML is in fact covered should they indeed have to file the claim.
|
Quote:
|
Three issues pop out to me: 1) who is responsible/liable for the loss, i.e. which insurance policy(ies) is/are in play; 2) what is the extent of coverage under the policies-- not so much monetary amounts but the extent that exclusions apply; and, 3) what is the amount of monetary damage.
As for the last of these, it seems reasonable to have conducted the auction to establish current value, especially if many of the cards had not been in the market recently. I highly doubt any insurance company insisted on this format because value could be established in other ways. Rather it was in ML's best interest, as well as those who would receive compensation, to have the most recent pricing data available for the insurance claim. And it is just that-- a claim-- which the insurance companies can and (gasp) do dispute. They will no doubt investigate the bidding to look for irregularities or other signs of skullduggery, but assuming all went forward on the up and up, the final hammer prices are excellent evidence of value. |
Quote:
|
Full names please
One word of caution in this thread. The standard rule is going to apply. It's right above on every page. Be prepared to put your name or edit your post if it doesn't conform. Or you can edit out your comment, if you don't want to put your name next to it.
If you fail to, it will be edited and/or your name will be put under your id. Thanks for everyone's understanding. If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I would expect to see some of these being cracked out and sent for grading.
Slowly, and through different companies if they're smart, all at once and through the same company if they're not. |
Quote:
And how honorable is it to let the stolen card lots continue as if the cards were still legitimately being auctioned? At some point before the auction end these lots should have been closed when they hadn't been recovered. As others have mentioned value could have been determined by other methods rather than an integrity challenged phantom auction. Perhaps out of my financial collecting universe, but I think a common sense perspective...my 2 cents from a guy who owns multiple cards worth 2 cents. brianp(arker)-beme |
Quote:
|
I think you’d have to let the auctions run for the benefit of the consignors no? Otherwise what do you pay them? I wouldn’t necessarily want the AH to decide what my card might have sold for.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I know my answer would be 'less trust' and I suspect yours would be as well. Without having access to the actual policy itself, the best we can do is speculate and estimate what the likelihood is that an insurance company would actually pay out on such a claim. Perhaps Jeff has already read the policy and is the one representing them though? Because otherwise, I can't figure out why he'd be so confident that ML is in fact covered should the cards never surface. |
Quote:
But then again, this parallels how most practices only get changed after something catastrophic occurs. As I learned last semester in my Human Nature 101 class. brianp(arker)-beme |
Since most auction houses are not capital intensive and the cards are not recovered, ML will probably only have 2 routes to compensate consignors, insurance recovery or sue Best Western for failure to protect the cards once they were in possession of the cards, which they clearly did not. This is a clear responsibility under state's bailee laws. And I agree the limit under the transit portion of their policy would be lower than at the original location. I had nearly 30 years in the insurance industry and that is the normal procedure.
I say all of this because it is a distinct possibility that paying out their own pocket could bankrupt ML. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Any concern with the the lag time between when the cards were stolen and when you were notified? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Again, to me this keeps coming back to horrible judgement by the auction house. And just because they did it without incident 20 times does not mean they should have ever done it at all. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Just maybe Probstein is putting on a dog and pony show...for social media to...show everyone how awesome he is. VOMIT. Anyway, as I posted above, the insurance policy will dictate the method the insured is required to use based on the value of what is being shipped. And it is 50 fucking cards. Carry them on the plane with you. |
The handling of this situation is just driving me nuts, and these type of things normally don't. I have never had (nor will I in the future) any interaction with this auction house. Mistakes can and will be made, but...
Here is a quote from one of Ryan's prior posts about how Memory Lane informed him how they would handle the following scenario: Third, I was told anyone who won a stolen card will be given the option, but not obligation, to buy the card at the hammer price + BP if they are found. Really, they would still be looking to profit from the winners of these stolen cards (who placed their bids with the understandable belief that it was a normal auction for these cards, not a phantom one) if they happen to resurface? Does a real company that has made serious lapses in judgement and caused bidders and consigners such headaches and confusion really have the audacity to handle things in this manner? To still offer the cards with a Buyer's Premium? Own up to your mistakes and do the right thing! Or else a fair amount of folks, to keep things on baseball terms, will think strike three and you're out. brianp(arker)-beme (I have already ejected myself from this Auction House's game) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If/when I do get paid, I will disclose. If issues arise, then I have a forum to post on and I have legal recourse. But again, I believe the odds of needing either of the latter are super low. For what its worth, I know more than what has been posted here, but its not my job or place to discuss (and none of your business to hear) some of these facts, especially those concerning the investigation. All I will say on the matter is that as someone who is potentially materially impacted, I am very satisfied with how this is being handled so far and I do not blame Memory Lane -- its a shitty scenario all around. I hope (and frankly expect) that in time Memory Lane will make some announcement on the matter. But I expect that right now they are doing what advisors suggest (counsel, police, insurance, etc) and they are focused more on navigating this crappy situation than satisfying the interests and curiousity of message board posters. BRIAN -- I dont know if ML will charge a buyer's premium, I assumed they would. The point is that no impacted winning bidder will be bound by their bid in the event the cards resurface -- they will be given the option and not the obligation to buy them (I assume on the terms run in the auction). |
Quote:
Brian |
The ML rep was coming from the East Coast and the cards were located in California; that is why they were shipped (similar to how high value items are shipped every day).
But the method of transit is also moot, because the items were stolen after they were safely delivered. The package was supposed to be held in a secure place by hotel management. Memory Lane could have had a California-based employee drive the package to the hotel by Sherman tank or armed convoy, and still, once hotel management was asked to store the package in a secure room, it could/would have been stolen just the same. |
Here's an aspect I don't recall seeing mentioned thus far. Did Memory Lane notify the hotel in advance of the $ value of the shipment? My guess is NO! If ML did advise the value, I'm guessing that the hotel would have refused to accept any liability for loss or damage to the cards while in its possession. Also, I'm thinking the hotel would have instructed ML to address the package to the hotel's manager, who immediately after signing for the package upon receipt would have placed it in the hotel's safe. And, I'm thinking that the hotel would likely have charged ML for this extra service.
IMHO, it was totally inappropriate, even if not illegal, for ML to continue the auction for these 50 cards because ML knew they were not available to be delivered to the auction winners. IMHO, this is the same as the eBay scenario that someone mentioned. While I fully understand the desire to continue the auction in order to determine values to be paid to the consignors, IMHO, this does not override the total inappropriateness of leaving these cards in the auction. |
Quote:
|
This entire situation is just terrible. Truly awful people exist in this world that commit acts like this. For the sake of all parties involved, I hope the cards are recovered, but I do not think it's likely.
Ryan, your insight and transparency regarding all of this has been great. People can point fingers until they are blue in the face concerning whose fault it is, but the situation is what it is. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Brian |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Say Joe brought them in person, kept them in his room. Goes out for a burger. Can't the room safe get burglarized? Say Joe kept the box on his person at all times. He can get robbed. Then what— the internet says he's dumb for carrying them, why didn't he put them in a safe or ask the hotel to put them in the management's safe. Like you said, Peter: hindsight is 20/20. People on the internet can Monday Morning QB this thing a billion different ways. But thieves are gonna thief. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I cannot see how sending the box, which could have been carried on a flight, to a Best Western in the middle of nowhere USA to sit and wait for an agent of the company to show up 3 days later to claim them meets the level of safeguarding. To me it is careless but I am sure we are missing lots of details. |
Quote:
|
All this talk of hotels did make me think of this vintage commercial
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHCTaUFXpP8 |
Memory Lane
Is there a list of the cards that were stolen?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I believe Memory Lane had and has a good faith need the cards would be recovered. It is making consignors whole. I cut ML slack here.
|
Quote:
I can say that I have always personally traveled with consignments that are going to shows. Of course in my case that is, to date, larger amounts of lower value items than the ones in question. I've brought maybe half a million in consignments to the National, but it was a helluva lot more than 50 cards! Of course just because I am with the items doesn't mean they couldn't be stolen, but most of what we sell has pretty easily established value unlike many of the items in the ML situation. So I doubt we'd "need" to let them continue at auction to come up with an accurate settlement. Even so I would obviously comply with whatever path my insurance company wanted me to take. My preference would be to pull the items but if my insurance company (or lawyer or law enforcement) requested I do otherwise, I imagine I would do what ML is doing. Our travel/transport rider is 600k I am sure ML's is significantly higher. When insurance companies have to start paying on bigger claims they call a lot of the shots. They are likely also involved in the investigation of the crime. They'd rather it be solved and resolved than paid. There are no winners in a situation like this and I'm sure ML is trying prevent as many people as possible from feeling like they're on the losing end. I don't personally know anyone at ML so anything I say is conjecture and shouldn't be taken as me having inside information. |
Unless ML contacted the insurance company as soon as the cards went missing and was instructed by the insurance company to proceed with the auction I believe it was wrong to not remove those lots from the bidding. Values, I believe, could have been determined by other means.Hopefully, the cards will be recovered soon and this will become a non-issue for all involved.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
. |
Quote:
Imagine if insurance companies added that provision to policies? One could never know if the item being offered is actually there to be bought or if it is to ascertain a value for an ins claim. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
. |
I'm curious to know if these cards were part of the stolen box:
D304 E Collins PSA 3 = $14,298 D304 Lajoie PSA 4 = $20,934 D304 Mathewson PSA 3 = $42,290 D304 Wagner PSA 3 = $50,339 An SGC 3 D304 Wagner sold in REA in August of last year for $11,700... Curiosity killed the cat but the above prices made absolutely no sense whatsoever. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:24 AM. |