There'd probably be a split, one could credibly argue that removing 54 of the best cards would lose some bidders interest and could be bad for consigners, just as one can credibly argue that smaller consigners may have lost some bids by people budgeting for the bigger cards that were not actually for sale.
When people argue from the outcome that is most beneficial to them instead of what makes sense or is honest, there will always be a split because somebody doesn't do as well in each scenario.
The difference, of course, is that the other path is actually honest and the path taken of hosting a fraudulent auction (still waiting for the lawsuit) is blatantly dishonest. I have learned from this board that dishonesty that is beneficial to certain people is a good thing though and the truth should not ever intrude and the common sense 'being honest is the right path' is a silly absurdity and I am stupid for wondering how Memory Lane acquired this bizarrely unique insurance plan that requires hosting of said fraudulent auction.
|