Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth
Since we are having fun and the OP hasn't been back.
I guess I see things different. Say you are in a room full of people all talking and sharing stories. Then after you tell a story about something you have done someone then asks if you have any proof you really done that. Wouldn't you think they are basically calling you a liar?
Plus I just find it weird in life when someone is asking for proof fairly regularly.
|
Telling stories is one thing. In this case, the reputation of one of the biggest and longest-running auction houses is on the line.
Asking for evidence, as I see it, isn't meant to answer the question whether the OP is being truthful. I see it as putting fresh eyes on the evidence. For example, the details of the cryptic "contract" that was posted. The "no additional fees" statement, followed by the ambiguous "60/40 split for auth."
Some of us, like me, look for inconsistencies. Some of us look at things through the eyes of an attorney experienced in contract law. Some look at it from the perspective of frequent consignors, comparing to their own experiences. Some from their work running auctions, or other similar businesses.
Basically, thinking people want more information to analyze, to more fully, and accurately, understand the full scope.
In short, this isn't sitting around a campfire telling stories. This is a subject that could shed light on the way a major auction house is currently doing business, for better or worse.