[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Well if the auction house itself is the one doing the shill bidding, they certainly are to blame. Especially if they are bidding on items that they themselves own, so they have nothing to lose except perhaps a delay in finding buyers by some other means, if nobody tops their in-house bids. If they are bidding on items consigned to them, they are still potentially in a position to make a reasonable profit, since the 10% or so extra they have to pay the consignor when they raise the highest legitimate bid is less than the 15% to 20% buyer's premium that the high bidder was willing to pay.

Buyer collusion: how does this actually work? Say Buyer A and Buyer B both want Card 1 and Card 2 for their collections. But they agree that Buyer A will only bid on Card 1, and Buyer B only on Card 2. So Buyer A forfeits the opportunity to buy Card 2, but gets a better price on Card 1 in return, since Buyer B is not bidding against him. Is that it? I know this has been discussed here before, as to whether this sort of agreement is ethical or even legal, but I can't remember what the conclusion was.