[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Snowman

So are 90% of you guys all really going to sit here and continue to pretend that the listing didn't expressly state that you could win the set lot but still end up losing if the individual lots closed higher in aggregate?

In what universe is Powell the rightful winner under the terms set out in the auction itself? Half you guys are lawyers, and you really can't figure out this one simple little paragraph? It's not exactly a riddle.

The rules were stupid. We can all agree on that. But they were extremely clear. This shouldn't have surprised anyone. This exact outcome was very predictable. If you wanted to ensure a win, you had to bid on every single lot, including the set. If you weren't sure about that or how it might work, you could have easily picked up the phone and asked.

I know Peter has already pointed this out in the thread, but I can't believe you are saying that Powell should have bid against himself. If he would have bid on every individual lot, that would have raised the price for the high bidder on the complete set. That bidder was Powell as well. No auction should require a bidder to bid against himself to ensure a win.

I guess Powell should have just alternated between bidding against himself on the set and every individual lot and raised the price to infinity?

Powell, sorry to read this happened to you on a once in a lifetime set. I know hindsight is 20/20, but it seems amazing after the fact that HA did not foresee that they needed to keep the complete set open as long as even one individual card from the set was still open.