Greetings all. I know everyone has been awaiting a Heritage response, and I hope you’ll all understand that, this being the absolute last day of proofing before sending our November Signature Auction catalog to the printer, we’ve all been otherwise heavily engaged.
It’s tough to know where to start.
The thing I find probably most annoying in this whole mess is that Heritage will not stand behind their employee, Mr Gutierrez. What is the point of having executive employees rendering opinions on authenticity if the auctioneer won't stand by that opinion.
I guess I’ll begin with the notion of a Heritage employee “guaranteeing authenticity” of an autograph. It’s an easy place to begin, as it is simply not accurate. Heritage is not an authentication firm. We do not issue letters of authenticity for autographs, and we do not charge for our opinions. We employ third party experts to authenticate our autographs, both PSA/DNA and James Spence, the most widely respected experts in the field. I’m not entirely certain whether or not some members of this board believe, if a Heritage employee offers his personal opinion on a piece (which we all do dozens of times a day, hundreds of times a month) that Heritage should be held somehow financially accountable for that free opinion in the event of a mistake. If that were the general assumption I suppose Heritage would need to rethink supplying this complimentary service. But I have to believe that the vast majority of hobbyists are more reasonable than that.
Jonathan- if Heritage bids so low that they virtually never win anything, why conduct this practice at all? On the positive side you win virtually nothing and accomplish little; on the negative side you create a great deal of suspicion and a boatload of bad will, since nearly 100% of your customers would likely hate this practice.
I believe you when you say it is done a week before the auction closes, and I understand the distinction you make between placing early bids and shilling. But how could Heritage risk the reputation it has built over decades, with the only thing to show for it is a few stray lots that slip between the cracks?
Sounds like the risk far outweighs the reward.
As to the tangential issue of house bids, it is an interesting dilemma that the policy could be misconstrued. It’s heartening that many of you appear to understand the difference between placing early house bids at wholesale prices Heritage would be willing to pay, and late shill bidding intended only to make a winning bidder pay more. But since it’s clear that the entirety of the hobby doesn’t fully grasp the distinction, it’s worthy of further consideration. We will revisit this policy, and perhaps it will be changed. As I am not a member of the executive team, I couldn’t promise any more than that. It is interesting to note however that when consignors have raised the issue of house bids in our auctions, we let them know that if they would prefer that we not place any bids on their items, then we can certainly comply with that request on their lots. Interestingly, we have yet to have anyone make that request.
“Also, I'm not sure I follow the distinction he makes - the difference between this and shilling is that these bids come in before competitive bidding starts and shill bidding takes place after? Before/After the start of "competitive bidding is an imaginary line.”
The issue is not when the bid was placed, although placing the bid early without knowledge of any other bids on the item is an important distinction, the real issue is the intent. We are placing a bid at which we are willing to pay for the item. Shill bidders are bidding on material with no intention of winning or paying for the item, simply with the intention of pushing up the prices. If we win the item, then we pay for the item with the buyer’s premium included and most importantly: The consignor is paid for the item at settlement.
1910 T229 Pet Cigarettes Chas. Willard SGC 60 EX 5
Oct 1, 2009: $448.13
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...6&Lot_No=81539
Jan 24, 2010: $167.30
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...4&Lot_No=44114
Would you (HA) really pay $448.13 (-19.5%) for this card again?
I’m not sure what the point of your post is as your links are for two different cards and Heritage neither owned or won either of them. That being said, if you have the time and the desire, I’m sure that you could search our expansive prices realized database to find an example of a lot that Heritage may have won at auction, then offered in a later auction or on eBay and sold at a loss. If we bid on an item and win it, then we write a check for that item including the 19.5% BP into the cost basis and the consignor is paid at settlement. Our money is at risk in the same manner that it would be if any other collector or dealer had won an item and decided to re-sell it. There is no doubt we have made some mistakes with purchases in the past.
I am well educated (like most on the board) but still having a very hard time understanding the distinction between someone on eBay shill bidding up their own item(s), winning and reslisting vs. HA's policy. Would it make a difference if the eBay bidder stated shill bidding was OK if the fine print?
From what I can tell, this is the only distinction. Maybe I am wrong? Is it semantics or something else? People usually do not accuse me of being slow but maybe I just don't get it. Since Jonathan asked for people that still do not get to ask questions, that is all I am requesting. Crickets, crickets...
Here is the simple distinction. An eBay shill bidder owns the material he auctions and therefore has no interest in buying it. Conversely, Heritage does not own the material it auctions, and has interest in buying it. Anything we already do own that goes to auction would be sold with a posted reserve if we were to “bid” on our own material. And shill bidding is a criminal offense, so stating it is “OK in the fine print” wouldn’t quite get it done. Our policy is legal, and clearly stated. So it is far more than semantics, I’m sure we can all now agree.
And, in closing, to put the genesis of this thread in its proper perspective, this sender of 120+ emails (and dozens of phone calls) sent yet another email to our Chairman, warning that he intended to start multiple accounts and place fake bids to ruin our auctions, and to hire “hackers” to crash our system. This email has, of course, been forwarded to the proper authorities. Again, it’s always tempting to take the side of the little guy when he complains about a big company, but the smart folks will take a step back and see that Heritage truly is a leading force for good within this hobby.
Heritage makes our auctions as transparent as possible and we state our rules in our T&C because we have nothing to hide. We are the only large sports auction firm that publishes reserves. We make all of our past results readily available in our auction archives. We have paid every consignor on time, every time over our 35 year history and we have sold collections on behalf of the FBI, DEA, and IRS. Heritage just strikes me as an odd target in a hobby with no shortage of legitimate ones. And, again, remember, this thread began because a guy who has absolutely flooded Heritage with over 100 emails got free advice for a $1500 baseball that didn’t pan out, then threatened a cyber-terrorist attack in retaliation.
Providing quality auctions is a service business and we understand that. Heritage has grown to be the world’s third largest auctioneer with over $600,000,000 in annual sales because of the trust and relationships that we have built over 35 years of quality service to our clients. This year is the first that Heritage Sports will be the largest sports auction firm as well, with over $12,000,000 in sales for 2010. If anyone has any additional questions from this post then please feel free to email me directly because I will not be able to post regularly.
By the way, Heritage will be launching its incredible November Signature Auction any day now, so be on the look out for it.