That may or may not cut any weight with the insurance company though. That was more about managing consignor expectations (and I don't mean that in a negative way)

And a higher grade Matty was sitting on eBay for much much cheaper.

Maybe the thieves bid them up? :confused:

Right. I was simply answering the question posed. Ins cos will pay off most likely based off of comp sales which allowing the auction to go on unfettered.

Worth pointing out is the fact that not all flavors of theft are the same from the perspective of the insurance company. Some forms of theft are much more likely than others, which is why they impose different maximum payouts for different scenarios.

If I brought my cards over to a friend's house and asked him to watch them for me while I went to Disneyland for a few days, I can assure you that my insurance policy is going to give me the middle finger if I were to file a theft claim after his meth-head cousin stole my box of cards. But they would honor my claim if I left them in my safe and my home was burglarized and my safe broken into while we were on vacation.

While this strawman scenario isn't the exact same thing, it's also not that different from what supposedly transpired.

I used to work for a major insurance provider. I wrote algorithms to detect fraudulent claims. Insurance companies are in the business of denying claims, not honoring them. Honoring a claim only occurs after every attempt at denying it has failed. It's all going to come down to the specific language of the policy that details the coverage limits, if any, for when you ship something worth $2 million dollars to a Best Western Plus and ask them to hold it for you until you arrive a few days later. Perhaps they have some sort of rider that covers such egregious acts of negligence, but I certainly wouldn't be as confident as some people here seem to be that ML's loss is covered should they indeed have to file the claim.

Couldn't 54 cards be carried onto a plane rather easily?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

I think someone said that one was gobbled up after the auction ran. That buyer might not be happy if the sale was one of the phantom ones.

How do the big Art auction houses transport/store high end material for Art shows & auctions ?

Not to mention, that Hotel was probably one of the biggest dumps I have stayed in since the 1970's. Best Western PLUS, they say. Plus what? Bed Bugs? It was like camping. There are no safes in the room. The hot water took 20 minutes to warm up on the top floor. That's only if you gingerly turned it on and the handle didn't come off. The Elevators were out both nights and the tiny staff reflected all of it.

That said, I had a great time but was somewhat apprehensive traveling there with cash and cards. Obviously for good reason.

I probably had one of the best times on this trip than I've had in a long time though. Especially where baseball cards are concerned. So much so, I want to go back next year. I was waiting in the lobby when the detectives were doing follow-up interviews on SAT Afternoon, talking about a "Package" and "video". Now it all makes sense.

I really enjoyed getting to know Joe T and he helped "hard sell" me on a card at Ashish's table:) before I left. Knowing that Bad MemoryLane is a local company, I bid pretty hard and won 3 great items. First and last time I'll use them. I just confirmed my lots were "not stolen" before I sent my fat check. I'm going to pick-them up in person.

Also, This is really the 2nd year I've utilized auction houses significantly. That said, I'm not overly happy with the entire experience of my losses or wins. My eyes are hurting...I CAN'T SEE giving these clowns 20% buyer premium. It is flat out gouging and not worth the service, IMHO. Get it down to 5% and I'll give them another chance. :):D

I feel terrible for Ryan who has just a tremendous collection. At least he has faith in MemoryLane and is probably why he trusted his prized possession to them in the first place. If he's happy, I'm happy. Good luck Ryan.

Still I've made my last bid at Heretic, Bad MemoryLane and REA. cause I can't win anything @REA anyway.

Was that NET54 cards

Am I the only one on this board that believes that the bidders on these cards Got a big middle finger from the auction house.

We are truly in a sad state in this industry.

Johnny Marsili

How are auction winnings of this high dollar value transferred to the winning bidder? Are they usually mailed or picked up? I would think most winners of a $2 million dollar card would pick it up? I'm just curious.

+1 good luck to anyone trying to recoup cards they sold off in attempt to win something that wasn't there.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Wow... Just wow. A pretty incredible story. I feel for the consignors in this scenario. I hope you are all made whole.

ML seems to have been in a no win situation. I think most auction houses are going to err on the side of doing what's best for the consignors if that is different from what is best for the bidders.

What's best for their eithical duties is to disclose it and end bidding on the stolen cards

Consignor and bidders have all been slighted it needs to be fair this has not been.

ML should have done the right ethical thing. I don't believe that was fully done in this case that's it.

In PA, our fiduciary duty is, indeed, to our consignors.

Perhaps, but on the other hand, that potentially means 50+ disputes with consignors about how much to reimburse them, assuming they in fact have coverage disputes with the insurance company over values, not to mention the gut punch that would deal to the rest of the auction.

Peter i respect your views and commentary. This is black and white there is no gray area here for me. I'm not saying you're making defenses for them but doesn't their insurance cover the theft in itself right then and there? Not a sale of cards they do not have in their possession and the end of said auction.

I don't know if they have insurance coverage or not. Even if they did, most of these cards don't have established values. So there is a logic to establishing values through the auction. The same logic would apply if no insurance, to establish compensation for the consignors of the lost cards. Not defending them, just offering a perspective.

So I list a card on eBay in an auction I don’t have the card the sale ends. I reach out to the buyer and I say the cards were stolen. I don’t have them and then I try to recoup that sale price as the value of my card I don’t think any insurance companies gonna pay that number because I never possess the card at the end of the sale.

If the auction was clean, and assuming the card was stolen during the auction, why isn't that as good a valuation point as any? Or are you saying you just did a fraudulent listing after the fact?

Your case is completely different from what happened with ML. You never owned or had in possession these cards you listed on ebay. Getting insurance on items you never had and then claiming they were stolen to try get insurance reimbursement is fraud. ML actually had these cards in their possession at one point and took a blanket insurance on them. Of course, they would get reimbursed with the amount depending on the details of their policy. Nothing fraudulent there.

What I hear you saying, which is clear, is that ML did what was easiest and best for THEM. That does not mean what they did was ethical or right.

They auctioned off cards they did not have. They created fake sales to serve a purpose other than to complete sales. Isn't that, basically, lying to bidders? It certainly is misleading them to a huge degree, and I don't see how that can be defended.

What should've happened:

1. Immediately close those auction listings.
2. If the cards are not recovered, establish values for insurance purposes the standard way. It's done all the time, without staging fake auction listings.
3. If the cards are recovered, offer the consigners a return, or a discounted listing in a subsequent auction.

But don't use your trusting bidders for your own purposes, to their detriment.

I’m saying the sale continued after the theft of said items that they no longer possessed.

I would respond to this is there anyone with standing in this case upset that ML did them wrong? That is, are there any consignors who had some of their cards stolen or any winning bidders who will not receive their winnings due to their cards being stolen think that ML did them wrong? All of the consignors and winning bidders who have posted so far seem very understanding to ML, and are instead upset at the thieves who stole the cards. I really don't think folks should be blowing this up more than necessary. If ML were unethical, who are the victims here that are upset with them?

If you possessed a card that you were listing for auction, I would think that insurance would cover it if it was stolen during or after the auction was completed. If the auction is completed, that would seem to be a reasonable amount for insurance to pay (which appears to be what ML did). If not, then a fair value would have to be determined some other way, as others have said.

Well, just to continue the discussion for argument's sake, what detriment?

People and museums with rare works of art regularly carry insurance. If a dollar value can be determined for something unique, like van Gogh's The Starry Night, a value can be determined for a Cracker Jack Matty.

Again, the notion the auction listings needed to run to determine value is ridiculous. This is a very rare instance - meaning, values are almost always determined for insurance purposes in other, conventional ways.

Justifying the deception of bidders simply because you want to find out what they would pay is not, IMO, ethical. As another poster said, if somebody on this forum wanted to know what his card was worth and ran a phantom auction to find out, would that be condoned?

It's not the same thing. The auction was in progress, and perhaps they were given reason to believe recovery was likely. The intent was not to run a phantom auction.

Bidding, thinking it's an honest auction, then learning you've been used, is detriment enough. But consider the bidders who were shuffling assets around, selling things off, in preparation of needing money to pay for anticipated winnings. Could such a bidder "prove damages?" Maybe not. But being chumped is, again IMHO, not okay.

I don’t believe that was their intent either Peter…I’m just saying the fact is they didn’t possess the cards at the end of the sale nor during parts of bidding, that’s it.

Imagine all the people who stayed up two extra hours though, Gary. :D

I get it. It's not pretty. I am only saying that in the context of the mess created by the theft, it may have been a reasonable measure. Not like any bidders were massively defrauded. Just annoyed.

It’s definitely more convenient to cover it up and hold a fake auction.

This is the only hobby I’ve been a part of where convenience is considered an appropriate reason to do the wrong thing, to cover things up, to lie, or to host frauds. I’m sure it’s not the only one, but my other hobbies have been so much cleaner than this.

That it is more convenient to do X is not really a justification for X, and we all would think that if I was the seller instead of an auction house many people like.

When those cards went missing, those became phantom lots. They were auctioning cards they didn't have.

Honestly, I find it so hard to believe that so many people defend this.

+1

It was the best solution for a bad situation. What if the cards had been recovered before the close of auction? Unlikely but a possibility.

This way you have established current FMV on cards that would have been difficult to establish value otherwise.

You have established who the card belongs to if/when they are recovered.

You have established a solid value to compensate the consignors.

You have mitigated layers of litigation.

Yes it sucks and hindsight is what it is but I don't see a better solution.

Again, who was hurt and how?

I don’t :)

Sane question. Who was hurt, and how?

Agree.

To be clear, your argument is that if I cannot prove definable injury to anyone, lying is okay? You think it would be acceptable for me to do this in the BST and reveal after the auction I didn’t have the cards, they’d been stolen and I said nothing, but I needed to value them for my insurance claim, thanks for bidding in this farce, because, since nobody paid, nobody had a definable fiscal damage?


I think we all know not a single person would support this if it was not an auction house many like.

What part of "they were working with authorities, the insurance company, counsel, and other hobby veterans to determine the best route" do you not understand? There is no doubt in my mind those were the folks helping ML make their decisions. And at the end of the day it was JP's call.
And imo, he did exactly what they should have done.

As far as getting the cards there; they got there. That wasn't a problem. The problem was a thief (or thieves) at the hotel.
.

Memory Lane had no business keeping people up until 1, 2, 3 am bidding on and committing finances to cards they weren't going to get unless the cards get recovered.

When Memory Lane no longer had access to the cards, that was their problem to deal with, with insurance and with consignors...THEIR problem. No right to recruit unwitting volunteers in their plan to establish value, if that's what it was.

There simply cannot be left open the possibility that in every auction, your participation is completely fictional and completely for someone else's benefit...at your expense of time and resources.

.

It also directly affects one of if not the most popular and respected members. And that’s a fair consideration but I have a sense folks would not be so forgiving if it didn’t. Just my two cents.

It’s abundantly clear that ethics selectively apply based on who benefits, and we will twist into a pretzel to defend any conduct if it produces the desired outcome. It’s absurd and stupid to argue backwards from conclusion and to pretend that things 100% of us know are wrong when someone we don’t like does it are totally fine when someone we do like or see benefit in defending does it, but it will usually carry a majority vote in the world.

-
200+ posts, time for a card or two...
-

To those blasting ML: If you are the auction company and your insurance provider says "let the auction run to conclusion or we won't pay" what do you do?

I assume all of those who are sharpening their pitchforks and getting their torches ready would just pay the consignors out of pocket and tell the insurance company to take a flying leap?

I don't KNOW that this is what happened. But I suspect it's not all that far off.

This whole thing is wild. My $0.02:

1. The logistics were idiotic. There is an entire secured logistics industry out there that moves small high value items from point to point and stores them. I've researched a few in the past for a cross-country option for moving my collection. For $2 million in a small-ish box you could readily have them transported securely and stored securely in a facility where theft would be a non-issue. It amazes me that ML sent seven figures in cards with about the same level of care as Aunt Edna's ugly Christmas sweater.

2. Allowing the auction to run baffles me. ML is a CA company. Conducting an auction on items it cannot deliver seems to me to be a violation of multiple consumer protection laws. CA Business & Professions Code 17200 prohibits unfair or fraudulent business practices. Any 'winner' who had no actual chance of winning the card they were chasing because it was stolen a few weeks ago was effectively subjected to an unfair or fraudulent trade practice. Then there are the auction regulation laws. CA Civ Code Section 1812.605(c) requires that all auctions "Truthfully represent the goods to be auctioned." If the cards being auctioned have been stolen, that seems to me to be a pretty big untruth. I have a hard time believing that ML was told by counsel to go ahead and risk running afoul of these laws.

3. Apart from legalities, why would they waste customers' time like this? There are a lot of AH's competing for market share, so why disappoint so many customers by running an auction you can't fulfill when the alternative was to pull the stolen lots and run them later if the cards are recovered? It's just a shitty thing to do to collectors.

Scott, I don't think the insurer would make that call. I've worked for insurers and that isn't how they operate. Property insurers are used to appraisals and valuations; they don't need sham auctions to figure out what the items are worth.

Damn, Phil, that Baker is sweet. Great card.

Again, I would love to see any insurance policy that requires someone to host a fraudulent fake auction after a theft in order to assign value to the items. Perhaps this is on the insurance provider, but this requirement that ML's fans are postulating seems to be extremely unlikely.

You’re focusing on the second aspect which is debatable at best. The first aspect appears to be mailing expensive items to Best Western management and hoping for the best. That would be ridiculed hard if not for who is involved/affected.

+1

Great post. Worth at least 25 cents. :)

Clearly, the problem is the law, for we have ascertained based upon our material interests that J.P. & Gang wouldn't do anything illegal, shady, or sleazy. We must change these unjust laws.

Well said, Adam.

And Phil, that "Big Eater" card is just as sweet, if not sweeter!

I agree, Adam seems to have a scoop on how this legally was probably a very poor choice by the auction house, as well as just being a damper on their reputation. Definitely a post worth up to $100.00 in my view (but evidently only a phantom auction could determine its true worth).


brianp(arker)-beme

Thank you.

I am besides myself that in 2024, a major AH tried to sell STOLEN cards in an auction. Such sad times.

Wild story. I hope the cards are found and everyone is made whole. Shipping a box with 2 million in cards to a Best Western is mind-boggling to me. The only way I can imagine doing that is if I had a guy sitting in the lobby all day long waiting to sign for it.

+1 This. I for one am glad that everyone (to our knowledge) will be made (or told they will be) whole. That said, what ML did was NOT ethical no matter how you paint or draw it up.

It's good to be a company in this hobby - people will defend you for anything and justify any crime or sleaze for you! Your PR department doesn't even have to do the job, your customers will. When they behave this way, we will get a never-ending sleazefest. Industry rule #4,080

I highly doubt the insurance carrier for Memory Lane believes they are the ones that have the lion share of the exposure. Memory Lane and its insurers will be looking for the Best Western Strongsville Carrier to cover the loss at their hotel I would bet. It is also more likely than not that the Best Western is owned by others who pay to fly the BW flag and not a corporate owned hotel. I am involved in partnerships on two Best Western properties where we pay a license fee. Our insurance carrier would be expected to perform or get sued. It will be interesting to see who take the loss if the cards don't show up.

I was worried when i heard a bunch of 14CJs were stolen..

i confirmed my card was not part of the stolen group..... Sorry to hear of this news for the other buyers. I hope the lost cards are found.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...691968b7_c.jpg

If you let your friend borrow your car and he decides to leave it parked in downtown San Francisco for a week and then returns it to you with broken windows and human feces in the passenger seat, do you get mad at your friend or at the homeless meth addict who smashed out the windows and defecated on the seat?

Lots of angst over a decision in a no win situation that didn't hurt anyone, accomplished some practical things as summarized by Phil's post, and avoided disrupting completely an auction where lots other folks had consigned non-stolen cards with the expectation of business as usual. Some good sanctimony though, for sure.

Both?

I'd like to use a lifeline, Howie.

I believe there is a state law in Ohio limiting the liability of innkeepers for lost or stolen customer property to a very small amount. I read it on the back of the hotel door last time I was in Cleveland for a National. Every place I've ever traveled has the same sort of rules. The BW will probably happily hand over the $500 or whatever it is and call it a day.

Sanctimony? Please. Disagree with people who don't think an AH should deliberately pretend to offer cards it doesn't have, but stooping to belittling should be beneath you.

Damn Jamie, beautiful card.

OK, I'll reframe it along the lines of your own post.

Honestly, I find it so hard to believe that so many people are offended by this.

To be clear, you said before, Honestly, I find it so hard to believe that so many people defend this.

Agree.

You said you don’t consign items to AHs. Do you buy from AHs? They apparently had customers sweating bids at 1 and 2 in the morning for six figures as a practical exercise for their own benefit or to satisfy a hypothetical of if we actually had these cards what would you pay. That seems wrong. And there’s also the fundamental problem before all that they shipped millions of value to a local Best Western’s management. That can and should be called into question.

I definitely call into question shipping to the Best Western, and have posted on that. They should have held it for pickup, or shipped to Joe to take with him on the plane. I think it's unfortunate that people bid on the stolen cards, and admit and admitted before it isn't a pretty look at all, my point has been it's a no win situation and their solution may have been better than the alternative taking into account all the issues and concerns.

But, but, but, there's a double standard. If an AH we like does it, that's fine, there's nothing to see here, and those who have a problem with it are sanctimonious.

If you or I did such a thing in the BST section of this website, we'd be heavily scolded if not banned.

What about my 91 Honda CRX?

I thought this might be the thread we were on the same side for once lol. Running apparently illegal, fraudulent fake auctions seems very difficult to defend. And we all know none of you would defend someone unpopular doing 100% the same thing. I cannot see how this is not a different rules for different people take. Nobody wants to bite and say me doing it in the BST is just fine and dandy also.

If one's position is defending a lie or fabrication, then one is pretty much always wrong. I have a very hard time seeing any situation where the right thing to do is to lie to your customers. And half the arguments given in support are just obviously fictions like this imaginary insurance policy that requires a fake auction to set values.

I am 99% sure I would be banned for it and not a single person here would defend me. Nor should they. This hits the nail on the head, it's just wagons circling around people they like without any consistency to the claims.

I am no fan of ML. I don't consign to them or bid with them. Maybe a card or two years ago. So don't presume.

You're presuming in my case. Falsely.

That's a fact, it's not a guess

Fact: If ML ended the auction immediately upon knowing the cards were stolen, and notified all involved, this thread would be all about the theft of the cards.

Don't presume I was speaking only about you.