pwcc

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Jason, why can't Brent tell us his thoughts on these issues instead of you?

I'm not the person to ask that question to.

Originally Posted by calvindog

Doesn't he have more invested in concerns about the fraud that might be occurring in his auctions than you do?

Yes, I would love to hear his take on the whole issue.

Originally Posted by calvindog

And why are we responsible for cleaning up his auctions? I wasn't aware of that responsibility.

If a person comes onto a public forum and "outs" the owner of an auction house for fraudulent activity that is beyond his control, he certainly has the responsibility to offer a solution.

Originally Posted by calvindog

I thought our responsibility started and ended with the rules of his auction.

The rules of Brents auction explicitly forbids the act of shill bidding. If it is OUR responsibility to adhere to these rules then how can we blame Brent for the people who do not listen?

Per PWCC:

The sportscard hobby hinges on the honesty and integrity of the seller. Too often we hear of fraud and other manipulation that serves to undermine the integrity of our hobby. Bidders deserve better, where bidding is 100% legitimate and uninfluenced by manipulations such as fraudulent (shill) bidding by the auction house, consignors, friends of consignors, friends of the auction house, or anyone else who participates insincerely with the sole intention of manipulating the sale price. We do NOT permit shill bidding of any kind and actively police our auctions to prevent such acts from occurring. If we learn that a bidder is questionable, we take action in the form of canceling the bid and blocking a bidder from participating in future auctions.

To preserve the integrity of the bidding process, we believe that eBay is the best forum to host auctions due to the privacy of the eBay platform. Unlike proprietary auction software, eBay’s platform is equally transparent to both the buyer and the seller. We don’t know the value of a bidder’s max bid, nor do our consignors, or anyone else. We've spent the last 15 years on eBay (since 1998) working to garner the trust of collectors and the hobby at large. Rest assured that you can trust our service and can participate in our auctions with the confidence that integrity is our #1 priority.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Doug Allen had a Code of Conduct too. See indictment.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

The rules of Brents auction explicitly forbids the act of shill bidding. If it is OUR responsibility to adhere to these rules then how can we blame Brent for the people who do not listen?

Per PWCC:

The sportscard hobby hinges on the honesty and integrity of the seller. Too often we hear of fraud and other manipulation that serves to undermine the integrity of our hobby. Bidders deserve better, where bidding is 100% legitimate and uninfluenced by manipulations such as fraudulent (shill) bidding by the auction house, consignors, friends of consignors, friends of the auction house, or anyone else who participates insincerely with the sole intention of manipulating the sale price. We do NOT permit shill bidding of any kind and actively police our auctions to prevent such acts from occurring. If we learn that a bidder is questionable, we take action in the form of canceling the bid and blocking a bidder from participating in future auctions.

To preserve the integrity of the bidding process, we believe that eBay is the best forum to host auctions due to the privacy of the eBay platform. Unlike proprietary auction software, eBay’s platform is equally transparent to both the buyer and the seller. We don’t know the value of a bidder’s max bid, nor do our consignors, or anyone else. We've spent the last 15 years on eBay (since 1998) working to garner the trust of collectors and the hobby at large. Rest assured that you can trust our service and can participate in our auctions with the confidence that integrity is our #1 priority.

Respectfully, I have to question... "Where have you been?" What you are posting here simply is making Peter and Jeff's point (among others) for them.

This HAS been brought forward in the past and it goes UNANSWERED. It has been brought up again explicitly because Brent has posted to the forum. Peter simply was asking for Brent's response to this.

Either they are doing what they say they are doing (see bold and highlighted) or they are not.

[Peter_Spaeth]

FYI it took me about three minutes to find five (or maybe it was more) suspicious bidders who should be investigated. The stats people throw up in an effort to make this seem more overwhelming than putting a man on the moon don't impress me much.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

FYI it took me about three minutes to find five (or maybe it was more) suspicious bidders who should be investigated. The stats people throw up in an effort to make this seem more overwhelming than putting a man on the moon don't impress me much.

What type of "investigation" do you wish Brent would conduct on these 5 suspicious bidders?

[tschock]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

What type of "investigation" do you wish Brent would conduct on these 5 suspicious bidders?

Jeez, you posted this yourself.

If we learn that a bidder is questionable, we take action in the form of canceling the bid and blocking a bidder from participating in future auctions.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

FYI it took me about three minutes to find five (or maybe it was more) suspicious bidders who should be investigated. The stats people throw up in an effort to make this seem more overwhelming than putting a man on the moon don't impress me much.

How?

I decided to try it myself, looked at about 25 auctions bid history. Only checked patterns that looked odd.

That took roughly 13 minutes.

I did find three bidders I thought were a bit suspect, and two maybes.

But over a couple thousand auctions the hours spent would be close to what Jason had. And call it statistics, but the costs I figured would be the costs no matter what you call them. Checking requires labor, those workers need to be paid.

I do agree that some effort would weed out the most obvious problem bidders.

I'm not so sure that would reduce the overall problem since those bidders might be replaced with new problem bidders.

And I have doubts that such light scrutiny would satisfy you.
If a big consigner came on once a month and said he'd spent a half hour and banned 5 people would you be ok with that? Or would you demand that he look into every bidder.
If he looked into every bidder on items over 250 would that be ok, or should it be every bidder on every item?

And what's the threshold for "suspect" a couple bid retractions? A certain pattern? Someone intent on shilling will work around almost any detection method. (See also computer anti-virus programming. They're written nearly as fast as the AV can be adjusted to block them)

I agree shilling is bad, and that some steps should be taken. Persoanlly I'd be happy with any genuine effort by any of the large consignment companies.

But it does have to be tempered with a bit of realism. Not all suspect patterns are shills. Not all shills can or will be caught. It doesn't mean not trying.

Ebay allowing people with too many retractions to be blocked would be a very big help. And for Ebay it wouldn't be that hard or expensive. (Not counting the lost fees from shilled items.) They already have the programmers on the payroll.

So far no takers on bankrolling a shiller detection program..........Not that I'm expecting any.

Steve B

[nsaddict]

Does this one qualify??



http://tinyurl.com/k3d63f8

same dude..........underbidder

http://tinyurl.com/lkvfruk

[CobbvLajoie1910]

Crickets.

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

Does this one qualify??



http://tinyurl.com/k3d63f8

same dude..........underbidder

http://tinyurl.com/lkvfruk

That 1 is enough proof for me. Also someone in that auction with 0 feedback bidding 12k with plenty of time left in the auction to retract the bid and someone with 14 feedback and 4 bid retractions in the last 6 months bidding 11k plus.

D@v1d $h1p$ey

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

Does this one qualify??



http://tinyurl.com/k3d63f8

same dude..........underbidder

http://tinyurl.com/lkvfruk

That's another thing one sees spending a few minutes clicking through the high dollar auctions -- same bidders with mega retractions or high percentage with seller, bidding on disparate items that seemingly one person would not collect. Here, the Mantle rookie and a Cabrera autograph. That is imprecise and circumstantial, of course, but noticed it many times.

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

Does this one qualify??



http://tinyurl.com/k3d63f8

same dude..........underbidder

http://tinyurl.com/lkvfruk

PWCC scan looks fine to me in my example. This is a bigger issue.

[glchen]

I agree, I think Brent is in a bad spot because of volume. (Same with other large ebay consignors like Probstein.) However, I do think there are some solutions.

The most obvious would be if ebay would actually get off their butt and help out here. First, ebay can make the bidding id's public. Then everyone can see the actual bidding id's. Next, beside the bidding id in the bidding history, ebay can place the location (City/State) of the bidder. Therefore, if a bidder create fake id's, you can see it b/c of the location of the bidder. However, how about those bidders who fake their location? You can require that the location be mapped to a confirmed shipping address from paypal. In addition, ebay can require that all bidders have paypal accounts. (or if ebay does not, PWCC can in their auctions require that all bidders have valid paypal accounts.) In their paypal accounts, ebay/paypal can require that all accounts have confirmed bank accounts linked to them. This way, it won't be as easy for bidders to create fake accounts, and ebay/paypal can make sure that the account name on the bank account matches the account name on the ebay account along w/ the location. This way there would be more transparency for potential bidders to see what's going on in the bidding history for an auction, and ebay would be able to catch shill bidding much easier. Even if someone is having a friend bid for them, it would be much more difficult if they're near the same location. Obviously, there would still be loopholes if the friend or dealer friend is in a different state.

Another thing that ebay can add is as part of the Buyer Requirements, add a requirement for bidding retractions where if a buyer has a certain number of retractions in the last year, prevent them from bidding in the auction. Then sellers can use this auction to help prevent shilling.

Everything I mentioned is pretty much for ebay. Obviously with so many auctions, it's tough for PWCC to police every one of them. However, perhaps they could participate in some of the threads more openly, and post the actual bidding history of auctions when asked. Basically if certain auctions were questioned, they could investigate those auctions openly as needed, which would help ensure the public that no funny business were going on.

[Leon]

The part of the solution I was talking about takes about 3 seconds. Check someone's bid history, if more than 2 retractions a year, ban them. I don't give a rat's ass where they did the retractions. I am all inclusive of any ebay auction. That is a workable partial solution.

If we found a cure for breast cancer would we take it now or wait until all cancer is curable?

[CaramelMan]

No Auction house will stop Shill bidding!

IT MAKES THEM MONEY to have shill bids

IT COSTS THEM MONEY to Police it....

sorry folks...it will never stop....

EBAY LOVES SHILL BIDDING....they have meetings every month to talk about how they can further HIDE shill bidding for their customers...

its like beating a dead horse....IT WILL NEVER END...part of buying something over the computer....

[glchen]

Originally Posted by CaramelMan

No Auction house will stop Shill bidding!

IT MAKES THEM MONEY to have shill bids

IT COSTS THEM MONEY to Police it....

sorry folks...it will never stop....

EBAY LOVES SHILL BIDDING....they have meetings every month to talk about how they can further HIDE shill bidding for their customers...

its like beating a dead horse....IT WILL NEVER END...part of buying something over the computer....

This argument really reminds me of steroids in baseball...

The FANS love the home runs and offense!
The OWNERS love increased gate revenue and higher TV contracts!
The PLAYERS love their names in the record books and the higher salaries from increased revenue!

The "only" people who get hurt are the players who don't want to take steroids but find that they are not able to get a job in MLB b/c of all of the steroid users producing better numbers.

It's the same thing in this situation. Consignors, even honest ones, will flock to those auction houses that seem to bring the highest prices. So the honest auctioneers will tend to get less consignments. Those consignors who don't shill will get lower prices on their consignments, which may be flipped by consignors who do shill, inflating the VCP average. Then honest buyers see these average selling prices and think that these are the prices they can sell their cards in the future, but it's all a mirage created by this shilling.

[CaramelMan]

Originally Posted by glchen

This argument really reminds me of steroids in baseball...

The FANS love the home runs and offense!
The OWNERS love increased gate revenue and higher TV contracts!
The PLAYERS love their names in the record books and the higher salaries from increased revenue!

The "only" people who get hurt are the players who don't want to take steroids but find that they are not able to get a job in MLB b/c of all of the steroid users producing better numbers.

It's the same thing in this situation. Consignors, even honest ones, will flock to those auction houses that seem to bring the highest prices. So the honest auctioneers will tend to get less consignments. Those consignors who don't shill will get lower prices on their consignments, which may be flipped by consignors who do shill, inflating the VCP average. Then honest buyers see these average selling prices and think that these are the prices they can sell their cards in the future, but it's all a mirage created by this shilling.

not saying I agree with shilling..its very bad ..BUT and this is a big BUT:

THERE IS NO INCENTIVE TO STOP....and a big incentive to continue to shill...

IMPOSSIBLE TO STOP IT, that is the problem..

how many theads has Probstein been subject of for letting shill bidders consign with him...its never ending and he has no incentive to stop it!

even when they are caught red handed (as been shown here plenty of times) THEY DONT STOP.....

actually I think they get more brazen AFTER the get caught and have no repercussions....

[calvindog]

Time spent by potential victims of fraud in PWCC auctions discussing solutions to fraud = much

Time spent by owner of PWCC auctions discussing solutions to fraud = 0

[the-illini]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Time spent by owner of PWCC auctions discussing solutions to fraud = 0

The above is significantly less than the time spent by owner on this forum soliciting feedback to help improve his bottom line.

[Wahoowa]

Originally Posted by the-illini

The above is significantly less than the time spent by owner on this forum soliciting feedback to help improve his bottom line.

Just to clarify, Brent is soliciting feedback because I had reached out to him expressing my concerns with the new mid-day closing time. Sure it helps his bottom line but he seemed genuinely interested in addressing my concerns as a buyer/consignor.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Strictly IMO and just a thought, one easy way to eliminate the shilling (or the potential of shilling)in these type of traditional auctions, save the man hours of attempting to police it, and still attempt to maximize the profit of the consignor would be to use a reverse auction format via BINs on ebay.

[thehoodedcoder]

delete

kevin

[markf31]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

The rules of Brents auction explicitly forbids the act of shill bidding. If it is OUR responsibility to adhere to these rules then how can we blame Brent for the people who do not listen?

Per PWCC:

The sportscard hobby hinges on the honesty and integrity of the seller. Too often we hear of fraud and other manipulation that serves to undermine the integrity of our hobby. Bidders deserve better, where bidding is 100% legitimate and uninfluenced by manipulations such as fraudulent (shill) bidding by the auction house, consignors, friends of consignors, friends of the auction house, or anyone else who participates insincerely with the sole intention of manipulating the sale price. We do NOT permit shill bidding of any kind and actively police our auctions to prevent such acts from occurring. If we learn that a bidder is questionable, we take action in the form of canceling the bid and blocking a bidder from participating in future auctions.

To preserve the integrity of the bidding process, we believe that eBay is the best forum to host auctions due to the privacy of the eBay platform. Unlike proprietary auction software, eBay’s platform is equally transparent to both the buyer and the seller. We don’t know the value of a bidder’s max bid, nor do our consignors, or anyone else. We've spent the last 15 years on eBay (since 1998) working to garner the trust of collectors and the hobby at large. Rest assured that you can trust our service and can participate in our auctions with the confidence that integrity is our #1 priority.

When an Ebay user agrees to these terms by placing a bid, guess what... Brent automatically enters into the same agreement to uphold his end of those same auction rules which clearly and explicitly state:
We do NOT permit shill bidding of any kind and actively police our auctions to prevent such acts from occurring.

If Brent has too many listing to (I'm quoting from his own rules) "actively police" all of those listings then he is in violation of his own auction rules! And if having too many items listed at one time prevents him from following through with his own rules then that is his fault, he has failed his responsibility and he is in violation of his own auction rules and this is completely unacceptable.