Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   the list (of criminals) is revealed (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=217245)

Shoeless Moe 01-29-2016 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnaz01 (Post 1497411)
Bill,

Not for a second do I believe Bill has exited the hobby. We may not see his name but it is my opinion (and it is just that, an opinion) that he is still "in the hobby" somehow.

He is, well as of about a year ago he was, I sold him something, on here I want to say.

RCMcKenzie 01-29-2016 08:40 PM

Great Expectations
 
Not only is 'not offering to pay more than you are willing to spend' not "dumb", it's a tautology. Be careful out there, gang.

Shoeless Moe 01-29-2016 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BASEBALLCARDGURU (Post 1497548)
As a newbie a few questions I like to ask is does anybody think this news will affect the market for Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle card or other similar much sought after cards?
Do some of these high sought after cards have artificial higher value because of this?

uh......yah!

Kenny Cole 01-29-2016 08:47 PM

I have tried to stay out thus far. I am now unsuccessful. I am not on either list simply because I didn't' win one of those auctions. I was probably one of those legitimate bidders who bid Ryan up at the same time the auction house or consignor/friend was doing that. We have similar interests. Even by losing, I screwed my friend.

I get all the stuff about altering the price point of the PSA 8 card and whatnot. Blah, blah, blah. Its wonderful to have the best card ever and I am certain that getting that 8.5 so you can drop that ratty 8 is exhilarating. Its just the shits when you find out you paid substantially more than you would have had things been honest. Yawn.

But to me, it is much more basic. Ryan won a lot we probably both bid on. It cost him more than it should have, because neither one of us knew we were both being cheated to begin with. I probably beat him on one of the other auctions that have no bidding records that was also shilled.

Peter, you were absolutely wrong. I get the reasoning though. There is a long list of people, myself included (on multiple occasions), who do things for friends while knowing that they are ... wrong. The fact that you did it for a friend doesn't make it less wrong, it just makes it more understandable. Been there, done that. Can't really shoot at you too hard.

That list makes me sick. I hope that its wrong while I know it probably isn't. What a betrayal. I'm historically an SGC guy, but probably no longer. Just a sad revelation all around.

Shoeless Moe 01-29-2016 08:54 PM

Leon, ban these son of a bitches!!!! They come back under an assumed name owe well, they wouldn't like that anyway, they have to big of egos and want the world to know them, well who gives a rats ass about them, BAN 'EM ALL!!!!!! Judge Kennesaw Mountain Luckey!!!!

Huck 01-29-2016 09:00 PM

[QUOTE=botn;1497093

At no point did we ever conspire with anyone at Mastro on those bids. We never knew who was bidding on our items or what their bids were. I have no recollection which of our consignments I was the one to place a bid and which my former business partner bid on but since he is no longer here I have to take responsibility for our actions. Sometimes a top all would be placed and other times we would bid incrementally so as to not open ourselves up to being shill bid, as ironic as that might sound. In each instance our bids were made with the intent to buy back the item and a willingness to pay the buyer’s premium, as we did each time we bought back a lot. It did not feel right doing this but I never thought of it as being illegal.

[/QUOTE]


Incremental bidding -

Example 1: Lot A, you the cosigner think the lot should sell for $2,000.

Did the bidding go like this?

Bidder 1: $650.00
You: $750.00
Bidder 1: $900.00
Bidder 2: $1,000.00
Bidder 1: $1,200.00
You: $1,400.00
Bidder 3: $1,600.00
You: $1,800.00
Bidder 3: $2,000
You - See that is the rub, did you stop or keep pushing?

vintagetoppsguy 01-29-2016 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince Hal (Post 1497570)
I don't personally know any of the folks on the "shill" list. If the information as presented is true, Ronald Goldberg and Peter Spaeth and all the others thus far identified are crooks. I'm sure you are not bad people and you're not Isis. But anyone who manipulates the market is a crook. You enter an item for the market to decide and you win or you lose. That's your gamble. Forget the shill moniker it's too misleading. You are just common, but repentant (sort of), crooks. Everyone is sorry or has an excuse when they get caught and the prisons are full of innocent people. Mia culpa all you want. You can't unring a bell. Very sad. Duncan MacKenzie

I disagree. Sure, they got caught, but they owned up to their mistakes. Do you remember the Joe Pankiewicz threads? He was caught multiple times shilling his own consignments with Probstein...even accused of doctoring cards to get grade bumps. Probstein was made aware of Joe's actions and did absolutely nothing. And when Joe finally responded, of course he denied everything and told us how honest he was, blah, blah, blah. Heck, he even called for an apology to Rick. All the proof was right there, but he still denied it. Peter and Ron have admitted their mistake and take responsibility for their actions. To me, that says a lot about their character as opposed to people like Joe Pankiewicz or Rick Probation.

I wonder if those with the pitchforks have bought anything from Probstein since that mess a couple years ago? I'd be willing to bet so. You'll buy from a guy that allows shill bidding, but you're so quick to condemn here. I made a vow at that point to never buy anything from Probstein again AND I HAVE NOT! And it wasn't because of the shilling in his auctions, it was because he turned a blind eye and LET IT CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. So again I ask, how many of you pointing fingers here have bought from Probstein since then? Post your eBay IDs and let's find out.

ElCabron 01-29-2016 09:16 PM

Kenny,

Your bids on the particular lot I won that is on this list didn't affect the price at all. You didn't drive me up. You were probably the 3rd high bidder. Had you been the underbidder, it wouldn't list my name in the "victim" column. You bidding against me is just healthy competition. Nothing wrong with that. But after you had maxed out (if you were even bidding on this lot), I was shilled up another $2,000+ of pure shill bids that had nothing to do with you.

I'm just happy the list is now public because I should be receiving a check any day now from Doug Allen as restitution, right? Yep.

Also, the main reason all these scumbags on the list aren't responding in this thread is that they're too busy spending everyone's money they made, consequence-free, from all of this. I'm guessing quite a few of them made deals to tell the truth about Mastro and Allen that got them off the hook, but also keeps them from posting here about any of it. This is especially true of the employees of Mastro and Legendary that many of us know well and consider to be friends. They haven't posted here because they are guilty.

The real lesson here is that crime absolutely does pay, and pay very well. So, congrats to all you silent scumbags who are reading this in your huge houses bought with money you stole. Sleep well tonight, douchebags!

-Ryan

Robert_Lifson 01-29-2016 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz (Post 1497483)
The consignors' items were shilled because they wanted it shilled and worked with someone else to get it shilled.

My one and only post about this at this time: The above statement is not accurate in all cases. It may be the case with virtually all of the 2463 auctions listed in the document, but it is definitely not the case with the one lot in which I am listed as the consignor. That lot is listed because there was shill bidding on this lot. But I (as the consignor) had nothing to do with the shill bidding, did not work with anyone to get my lot shilled, and most certainly did not want my lot shilled. There is much additional fascinating information about this lot and the case in general which I choose not to share here (as this is not the time and place) but I will add this: The consignor-portion of the funds stolen by Mastro Auctions via shill bidding against the high left bid on this lot were sent to me against my wishes and were immediately returned by wire (as opposed to check as my attorney said he was concerned they might just not cash the check) and the FBI was given all information, and this played a significant role in launching the entire investigation. As I have said, there is much additional information, but please excuse that I will not be posting more about this right now. I just felt that it was important to clarify this.

Sincerely,

Robert Lifson

Robert Edward Auctions, LLC

Klrdds 01-29-2016 09:51 PM

I have not read each and every post on this topic but I have read about 3/4 ths of them so forgive me if this topic has been addressed already.
A lot of us old time / veteran collectors have to wonder how long has the Mastro shill bidding been actually occurring ? Since only a few years of results are available one must ask how long did this go on ?
Does it go back to Mastro - Steinbach auctions ?
Does it go back to mergers with Oregon Trading , which later did business for a time as Mastro West, and with Ron Oser and their merger into a bigger Mastro Auction company ? No harm is meant to Ron Oser with this comment.
Does this prove an old adage of that " as long as there are auctions there will always be a phantom ( shill ) bidder " that I heard as a warning years ago when phone and fax bids were accepted as the auction business began in lieu of live auctions .

Also to digress was a greater scam attempted when Bill Mastro came out with an attempt to sell shares in his auction house to a select few collectors and bidders and customers . I was offered shares but turned them down as overvalued and a bad long term investment with little prospect of an adequate ROI. Does any one remember this ? Looking back now it seems like a Ponzi scheme was attempted .


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:55 AM.