Assuming the information is not skewed by shilling. But I get it. Similar to being familiar with those who are tough on the card grades and those who are more lenient, I take the source into account when bidding.

My apologies. I went back and re-read. I got hung up on the "The elimination of shilling just means higher BINs for everyone." statement, though the implication is that shilling doesn't "cost" as much as no shilling from that statement. (something I still disagree with) :)

Along with 50 shades of "stamping". ;)

Maybe and maybe not, and where we probably disagree. No problem there. Though I think a good "exercise left for the student" would be an analysis of BIN listing prices vs their actual sale prices as a comparison to auction style realized prices, and not just a "sold" price comparison.

If Net54baseball.com decides not to support a seller by prohibiting their banner advertisements, then I will follow suit and not participate in their auctions.*

* Does not apply to signed T206 auctions! :D

Definitely. Maybe we can hire a few unpaid interns to do that. Totally worthwhile exercise!

I wouldn't recommend letting a for-profit business do your thinking for you.

I'm okay with Net54Baseball.com's stance on these issues. I assume you're here because you agree, too. Otherwise you're supporting their corporate sponsors - think of the click through rates on this thread alone!

Re: baseball cards v. art (paintings)

To me baseball cards are art, the same as an oil painting. However, they are considered a lower form of art. I am surprised that so many people talked about the two as mutually exclusive.

That's a good point.

On the other hand, this site allows criticism of the advertisers and much of the complaints, critiques and information comes from this site. If it didn't allow discussion of the topics due to advertisers, then I think boycotting and disgust would be appropriate. I would chose not to participate. But Leon allows free discussion of advertisers(within reasonable parameters, including posters have to identify themselves when accusing).

The CU board, of course, does things differently than over here :) But then, as far as I know, PSA has also never publicly said the PSA9 T206 Honus Wagner was trimmed even after the trimmer himself pleaded guilty to it in court. But I'm a reasonable guy and will give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps I missed it and they have admitted it was trimmed. Or perhaps they intended to but were distracted by a shiny object on the ground and forgot. After all, show me a tinfoil pinwheel or some rainbow sparkle and I'll forget the whole world around me including what is my middle name.

There are no pinwheels or sparkle nearby, so, for the record, I can post that my middle name is Ned. Please write that down in case I later forget.

I'm ethical but easily distracted. If it weren't for my movie star looks and exquisite fashion sense, I wouldn't survive in this world.

T206collector, you are making a huge unfounded assumption. I am here because I like discussing vintage baseball and it's the best place to do it.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

I would not boycott net54 because I disagreed with a few of their business decisions, nor would I put you on ignore because you have opinions I disagree with. I will not; however, bid on stuff offered by shillers or those who allow it.

The rationalization that goes on here, to justify 'getting neat stuff' is truly mind-boggling.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

Truly. But not surprising.

I find a "holier-than-thou" vibe as troubling as shilling ;)

Not as troubling as a self-satisfied, too cool for school vibe. :)

Depends on who you ask.

I had no intention of asking you, Todd. :)

Wise man--usually I would just say wise guy :)

Nice deflection.

I have nothing to deflect.

Why can't we all just get along?

This is really a non-productive discussion. I get it that some of you feel that it's fine to bid on shilled auctions. I won't continue trying to convince you not to, but please do not try to convince the rest of us that supporting such auctions is something that we should do. It's reminding me of the kid in the candy store who tries to convince the other kids that it's okay to steal because you can get away with it and no one will notice. It's true for shilled auctions as well, so I can't argue with such logic.

You guys knock yourself out with this - I've got better things to do.

I don't care about right and wrong, I just want to do what's best for ME.

At first I thought you were being sarcastic, even without the appropriate emoticon. But then I see that this is consistent with what you said two years ago:
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ghlight=hidden

Enlightened self-interest?

:D

Todd good cross my friend!! Seriously, my thinking definitely has evolved and I have no trouble admitting that. A couple of years ago I was troubled mostly by card doctoring and, perhaps naively, assumed shill bidding was confined to a few of the big name auction houses. I still am, of course, troubled by card doctoring. And continue to think it's the bigger issue. But as the evidence of suspicious auction after suspicious auction of certain ebay sellers has mounted, it has troubled and pissed me off increasingly, and I decided I just wouldn't bid in certain auctions any more because I did not want to support them, however trivial an impact that has.

Fair enough, but I think I liked the old Peter_Spaeth better. :)

The question I would have for you is this.

WHY do you think your bid is a fair one?

If you assume there's been no market manipulation - shilling or otherwise- then you're operating outside of what most collectors in any field do.

For most collectibles there are pricing resources. I've been involved in a few hobbies where there is or was little to no readily available pricing information. (Films, the racing bikes, and to some degree cards before 1979-80. ) Under that condition, hobbyists are free to assign value based on their own opinion and budget. Having tastes outside the average means that's usually worked well for me. The stuff I like is often ignored by most collectors and is comparatively cheap. The cycling jersey I mentioned in an earlier post was worn in the 48 Olympics, and was a whole lot less expensive than any game worn baseball item from the same era. (Yeah, probably including uniform pants)

But those are small hobbies. Most collectors need a price guide of some sort.
And that's where a popular hobby can have problems.

If the price guide uses actual reported sales, it's very prone to manipulation. If it doesn't use actual sales then it IS the manipulation. Sometimes not by much, sometimes more seriously. There have been lots of guides that showed higher prices for stuff the writer had and lower prices for items they wanted but didn't have.

So is your hypothetical $100 card a $100 card because you personally place that value on it regardless of previous sales?
Or is it a $100 card because the last 10 sales averaged $100 or over?

If it's the latter, how is it you can't see the problem caused by price manipulation?
If it's the former, a tip of the cap to you!


My pricing method is fairly complex, sometimes I'll decide what to bid or what I want to pay based on previous sales. Sometimes I believe an item is worth more to me than the typical sale price - often tempered by budget. It's more my impression of whether an item is currently over or undervalued. I go more by price guides in hobbies where the prices are typically stable, more by instinct in hobbies where there's no guide or for items I think are special.

My general feeling is that the big consignors don't shill themselves. But also don't make a major effort to eliminate those who do or appear to.
In any business I think there's a point where certain things are tolerated. It's not right, but that's the way it is.
For instance a business could make a major effort to stop shoplifting. It's conceivable that they could stop nearly all of it. But to do that they would have to make the shopping experience inconvenient at best, or Invasive and borderline illegal at the worst. So they make just enough effort to reduce their losses to an acceptable level without driving customers away.

I've seen the opposite effect. At a rural fair they have the usual vendors. One year a guy from NYC decided to setup his tool sales booth. Which included heavy side curtains on the awning that were staked into the ground. Then double row of snow fencing, a chrome railing like fence and metal detectors. He was incredibly unpopular. Around noon, he started making loud comments about the cheapness of the fairgoers who weren't buying his stuff. Most didn't even bother entering the booth. When he started packing up shortly after, and swearing at pretty much anyone walking by he drew the attention of a few of the local farm workers. Fortunately one of the local cops defused the situation before it reached the brawl level. (Some stuff was thrown, and some threats made by both sides, which was let slide. ) When things calmed down some of the old guys took him aside and explained that his entire setup was insulting. he explained that in his usual flea market if he didn't have the fence and metal detectors he probably wouldn't have a truck left to drive home, let alone any of his inventory.

There's some lesson in there about balance, and balance in different situations, but it's late and I'm rambling.

Steve B

I haven't been on the site for a few days, so I just saw this thread for the first time.

I'm WAY to lazy to read thru it, so apologies if others have posted similar thoughts to mine :

I bid the most that I am willing to pay for an item to get it into my collection.

I don't care what it's sold for in the past.

I don't care what it's "worth".

I have been know to send offers for less than 10% of the asking price. With a polite note. Sometimes they are accepted. Sometimes they are not.

I collect a lot of stuff that few others want, that tends to keep my costs down, although the lovely wife might disagree.

As far as shilling of items that I bid on is concerned, I would prefer that it didn't happen, and I am sure that it has at times cost me money. But, there isn't really anything that I can do to stop it, especially since ebay tacitly encourages it.

Doug

Well quite a thread to read through and all I have to say is being honest cost me money for no reason since obviously some people just like to be screwed.

But seriously one thing that could reduce the shilling is if eBay would remove all the bids made by a buyer who retracted is last bid and bring the price down to where it should be in the first place, but why would they.

I went over 8 months without bidding on any auctions from the 2 big ebay dealers that seem to condone shill bidding. This was 100% a result of what I learned from reading threads like this. Thank you all for outing fraud in our hobby.

I would see so many awesome cards up for auction and I would pass on them. So many cards sold for less than I was willing to pay, but it felt good to know I was standing on my principles and not supporting this behavior.

I fell off the wagon a few days ago. Fired about 10 snipes at cards that I liked and won 1. The card came in the mail today. I love the card, but I actually feel guilty like I did something wrong. Maybe you folks can tell me I did do something wrong and continue pointing out fraud with threads like this so hopefully, I wont fall off the wagon again.

tacitly
 

And a mighty fine use of the word it was Doug :)

It is amazing to me how many people can't stop themselves from bidding on items that are being sold by sellers who are known to allow shilling and/or shill. And the excuse is that they can't personally stop the shilling. Not picking on you, Doug, as I realize that probably 1/2 to 2/3 of our forum members can't keep from pressing the bid button in such situations, and freely admit it.

Not sure why I re-visited this thread, but I didn't read any of the new posts until I saw your name, and since you have bought stuff from me in the past, and I respect your opinion, so I was curious what your thoughts were on the type of sellers described in this thread.

What's more amazing by far is the amount of purportedly educated people who are convinced that fraud in our hobby isn't a big deal and that they can control it. Of course, I'd like to be there when they sell their collections and get pennies on the dollar for their cards.

I have bought cards from PWCC and Probstein over the years...but not since all of this nonsense has come out. I often will see cards on ebay...click the link and see they are one of these two and I move on.

If one of them had a card I had to have...I'd bid accordingly...I may even overbid but that's my prerogative.

At least you have rules that you go by most of the time, and don't make excuses. We all bend our self-imposed rules every now and then.

Nah, Ullman is weak. :D:D

...

you guys are right...I AM weak! and if I were going to cleveland I would be drinking...but it doesn't look like theres going to be a net54 dinner...regardless...I will be drinking at the paul mccartney concert here in the twin cities that weekend.

I will miss you all dearly!

...

In my opinion, contributing to the profits of a company you know is acting highly unethically and breaking the law is by definition being unethical. You can tell me reasons why you do it-- and some of those reasons may contain logic and sense and I can see your practical card collecting point of view--, but those are reasons for why you are acting unethically, not reasons for why it not unethical.

And I don't want to hear theoretical comparisons of buying baseball cards to procuring bread and eggs for your starving family from an ethically challenged food industry, because we're talking about baseball cards here, something you don't have to buy. And, besides, perhaps your food buying habits should be more influenced by ethics than it is.

And pointing out that others act unethically is neither here nor there. If you and 501 others act unethically then you and 501 others act unethically. If half of collectors act unethically and the only way you can win a card is to also act unethically, then half of collectors act unethically and the only way you can win a card is to also act unethically. I understand the reasoning, but didn't see the word "ethically" once in that last sentence.

That's the way I see it. After reading the posts in the thread I certainly don't expect that everyone will agree with me.

...

David, Do you mean by allowing certain sellers to advertise here or by buying from them, or both. BTW I think I agree with you.:)

Hey Dave
Any time you don't like this place you can get the F--- out. It won't hurt my feelings.

Would it hurt your feelings if I stayed?:)

That worked well for ya'.

...

Don't make this argument about something it's not. Ebay is one thing and the board is another.

Just in case you didn't notice, David won't be participating with us anymore. He had been banned once before for going completely ballistic with an extremely vile post towards me that stayed up for a few hours. He was gone for 6 mos to a year (or more) and pleaded to come back, so I said ok. Because of that he was already on a short leash. Now he is free to do what he wants, somewhere else.

I wouldn't go as far as David here, and I am sure I am not 100 percent consistent in life, but I do think just not doing business with people whose activities are highly suspicious is the right thing to do.

Some of the rationalizations I've seen here could be used to justify bidding in an Al Qaeda fundraiser. Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if people would do just that if they had that key card.

I'm neither a saint nor a zealot, though believe in calling a spade a spade. And sometimes people mistake an observation for an opinion.

My post on ethics was part personal value judgment and part logical explanation. It wasn't entirely my value judgment and certainly not a how to guide to collecting covering all ethical conundrums and gray situations, though my personal views were strongly implied.

I mean someone can agree with my definition of ethics, but think ethics are of lesser importance. I'm sure many unethical people consider themselves unethical. Some are even unapologetic about it.

Leon, with all due respect, you can shoot/ban the messenger, but I don't see how the question is invalid. Since we were just given an unsolicited opinion on who is acting ethically in the hobby, where it was suggested that any business contact with a company that itself is acting "highly unethically" and "breaking the law" (with an apparent inference that at least one and likely two specific ebay sellers identified in this thread qualify) is also unethical, how is it not fair to question the ethics of allowing these nefarious people to advertise here?

You got some fast moving tears! Next time you cry, PM me, I'm riding a tear to paradise :D

So, that would be two tickets to paradise?

Pack your bags, we'll leave tonight......

Scott commence the tears again!

I think I just got banned from Eddie Money concerts. I can live with that.

Umm......

If we need to abandon all contact with businesses that behave badly at times, we'll have to shut this whole thing down.

I can't think of any major computer industry company that hasn't been in legal trouble or that hasn't engaged in some questionable practices at some time.

And Then...............

I suppose going to shows is out. Since I'd have to get there by car. Which means using gas, and contributing to the profits of oil companies.

Perhaps if I became a hermit?

Ah, but I've done stuff in the past that I'm not exactly proud of.

If I'm withdrawing ALL contact, that's kind of a problem.


The high road is great, and we should try to stay on it as much as possible.
But taken to extremes it just isn't practical.

Steve B

Todd, the question was perfectly valid, if you will notice I didn't ban him for questioning any advertising, questioning a seller, or what goes on on this board. Please look at the timing of posts carefully. Anyone can question anything, that is fine. I have no issue with the debate. What I have issue with is someone that was banned before, being given a second chance, and then taunting me about being on the board. I told him if he didn't like the board he can leave. That is true for anyone.. He has his moments but his sh** to equity ratio was poor. I have never banned anyone for questioning what goes on on the board. Now if someone is relentlessly attacking me, or someone else, and won't quit, then that might get them banned too. But his banning wasn't concerning his questioning of advertising..It was for screwing with me.

Leon,

I see what you are saying on the behavioral aspect, but can we delete the profanity? I am not trying to be funny. It is obvious the guy got under your skin, but keep the foul language out of the conversation.

Duly noted. I don't want to offend any members with my harsh language.

Steve that's all true but it remains the case that if one believes someone selling baseball cards is not ethical, it's pretty simple not to do business with them instead of rationalizing it.

...

Guys, we have people here who think that even though they've been shilled they are not victims of fraud. This is a bigger issue.

Every member of this forum has been a victim of hobby related fraud in one way or another. We have all purchased cards off ebay and through auction houses. We have all been suckered into graded cards, or have been affected by the absurd price manipulation that comes with it. Every one of us has been duped one way or another - reprints, altered cards, forged autographs or general ebay scum. Each one of us is a victim of fraud, anyone with a card collection who says otherwise is delusional.

Sad but true, but still, the fact that the sea is rough does not mean one should not try one's best to navigate it.

I'm not rationalizing, I try to avoid sellers I know are questionable. I also don't make much effort to investigate any particular seller. In that way I'm probably a small piece of the problem.

And I agree. Within a hobby it's easier to avoid questionable sellers.

It just struck me as mildly hypocritical for someone to say we should cut off all business with sellers who are known to at least ignore stuff like shilling. And to make that post from a computer or phone that's almost certainly got software form Microsoft(Antitrust, less than forthcoming at times) Apple (Production in factories with deplorable working conditions) Or Google (Copyright violation - many times over)

We all do business in some way with all of them.

To me the difference is that with the big corporations there isn't much choice.
And at least we can do that business knowing what sort of company we're dealing with.
I've bought from some flea market dealers I didn't trust. But did it knowing they were a bit sketchy, and made my decisions on the item at the time. There were a few I simply wouldn't bother with at all.
If you look hard enough at almost any seller there's something they've done that would bother someone. Maybe not criminal, but maybe not exactly "right" either.


I think others make some good points, fraud is here, and has been. And we probably can't stop it entirely. To think that I haven't been harmed indirectly by shilling in a major auction I don't buy from would be foolish. (Not directly since I can't afford the great stuff even unshilled) The rise in price of the good stuff raises the price of the cheaper stuff I can afford.

There are positive aspects to higher overall prices, but that's a bit too far removed from this discussion.

Pointing out fraud when it happens is a good thing.

Steve B

...

well said

Yesterday you defended an ebay seller who is offering an old mill "brown"card for 2,500$ which many knowledgeable folks here called a black back. It seems to me that that listing is deceptive and unethical or worse. You seemed to have no problem rationalizing that the seller is actually honest and well respected and ethical.
I spent over an hour last night looking at old threads which try to prove out the shill bidding clearly because I tend to rationalize as well: I trust PWCC & Brent and don't believe he would ever ruin his reputation by allowing it to occur with his knowledge. I know cards I consigned were never shilled. And I have trouble seeing all unusual bidding is actually shill bidding. every ebay participant once had 0 feedback or low feedback. PWCC advertises more than most and it's hard to miss when he has 1 card closing every minute all night. I believe that attracts a lot of new ebay bidders. Some of us have strange bidding practices hitting the bid button a lot and looking for the current high bid. Bid retractions are to me inexplicable and clearly another story and not sure why ebay wouldn't suspend someone with more than a couple in a 30 day period.
Obviously shilling is wrong and illegal. I think trying to deceive buyers about a card and overcharging for it is equally wrong. Rationalizing stuff is human and we are all guilty of it as you said

...

I'm honored to make the list. I didn't realize you have an exclusive on the threads & I find it funny that you assume it means I follow you around because I would comment on another thread. I guess you don't see the irony in discussing others lapses in ethical behavior and rationalizing while supporting a "proven honest seller"" grossly misrepresenting a card . Your first comment to me is that I am blind because my opinion doesn't match yours. I believe my positions are supportable & your arrogance is not
With all due respect.
Paul C

...

And the arrogance continues.

Scott,
Ethics and rationalizations aside I understand for some people ignoring points raised in a discussion rather than addressing differences is an easy route to take.

...

...

Scott,

You and I have had some pretty strong disagreements, but we never put each other on ignore. I have never used that function at all (don't even know how). I find it kind of childish to ingore all posts of someone I disagree with. And though we disagree on some things, I still agree with you on a lot of other things. It's ok to disagree. You are one of my favorite posters on here. In fact, some of the people I've disagreed the most with are some of my favorite posters. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you can't respect their opinion if it differs from yours. That's just me, but even the people I disagree with still have valuable information sometimes, and why miss that?

DJ

Jeff- I went back and re-read a statement I made in this thread and want to amend it here. I said to "just put a bid/snipe in and be done with it." I think that is still the case but it doesn't mean I WANT to pay that much if I don't need to, in a legal auction setting. I am not condoning, what looks to be, the fraud that we see going on with the bidding patterns and id's. I am not OK with getting ripped off. If I inadvertently stated otherwise then that was a mistake. If we see fraud going on then it is for the good of the hobby to expose it. Please keep doing what you are doing, but be nice :).

...

I don't think there are easy answers, especially when applying to the real world. I think there can be compromise and things are rarely black and white and the real world situations can be complex. If all pants makers are unethical, I don't expect you to walk around without pants. Realize I grew up in the Northern Midwest and it can get chilly here in Seattle too. I don't rank every misdemeanor as a felony, nor do I expect people to be Saints (Though, to be candid, I expect people to be good people. Sorry, but I don't give excuses for stealing money from honest people or lying in auction descriptions. Use your rationalizations on someone else).

But, while I think one's ethics can sometimes justifiably be compromised on occasion ("All food makers are unethical in some way, but I actually have to eat and already have a full time job and can't start my own farm. I have to make some sort of practical compromise"), if all it takes to toss out one's ethics is to get a kid's baseball card, that's pretty sad. If there is a is god as commonly described, I would imagine he doesn't forgive your sins because they were done in the pursuit of gathering baseball cards.

And I'm not telling you what your ethics should be. I'm not saying I have the universal definition and here is what the are. But, for a starting point, you should know what are your ethical beliefs. And you know what is right and wrong by your definitions and you should be aware when you are breaking your rules in the of baseball cards. You know when you are really just rationalizing, if to yourself more even than to others. You know when you are manipulating definitions to meet your card collecting aims.

You don't have to argue to me your points. You don't have to convince me of anything. You don't have to convince me that this or that offense is really just an ethical parking ticket not a felony, and you more than make up for it by being good to your family and giving to charity. But you should have the discussion with yourself. And, in the end, if you are breaking your personal ethical rules but honestly believe it's justifiable in the pursuit of baseball cards, that's the way it is. The discussion was with yourself, and my and others' opinions and belief systems are neither here nor there. We weren't even in the room to hear your points, much less offer opinions on them.

P.s. Don't call me holier than thou after I said my personal belief system was neither here nor there.

P.s.s. Or at least have the decency to say it behind my back and not to my face.

Steve yes you could by Socratic method push even the most ethical person to the point where he would have to admit that he is not being completely pure or consistent. But so what? That doesn't undercut the legitimacy of taking the obvious step of foregoing card purchases from known or strongly suspected fraudsters. It's like Robert Bork allegedly said -- just because there is a slippery slope doesn't mean you have to ski it to the bottom.

I would ask you what the hell you are talking about, but that might imply I care.