[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

Mastro's methodology is vastly superior. It encourages participants to bid up to a near final price well before the end (good for consignors, nothing overlooked) and sets it up such that those lots that are "in play" or contested will have the bidders on line together at the end to settle it (maximizes realizations). REA's way of doing it discourages bidders from being aggressive until the last possible moment and does not foster the head-to-head competition for certain lots that results in good (or better than good) realizations for consignors. I might be competing for something, yet hours pass between bids for that item. Staying up until all hours of the morning just to see if a counter bid gets made is silly.

I know that Rob makes the argument that his way (a holdover from the old phone call-based auction model) is better for small buyers because they can switch between lots to find bargains. While there may be some truth to this, wouldn't the presence of bargains for purchasers imply the opposite for consignors? I don't see many things fall through the cracks at Mastro, but wouldn't be surprised if it happened in REA. I was certainly prepared to go higher on several items if I had any competition directly.

I have a great deal of regard and respect for Rob personally and how he conducts his business, but I feel it is time for him to adopt the hobby's "best practices" with respect to auctuion endings. On the other hand, if he doesn't change a thing and disagrees with eveything I have to say, we will still be friends and continue to do a lot of business together.