This is the problem with grading...

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

David- you are the one that just said you had no proof! Besides, like the last post said, how in the world can this guy possibly monitor the amount of auctions he has to deal with?

Agreed. But it's just as clear that fraud occurred in his auctions. Is it asking so much for Rick to address such an issue that he clearly has knowledge of at this point?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Agreed. But it's just as clear that fraud occurred in his auctions. Is it asking so much for Rick to address such an issue that he clearly has knowledge of at this point?

Would you advise a client to come on this Board and address issues?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Would you advise a client to come on this Board and address issues?

If he had done nothing wrong and had nothing to hide? Of course.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

If he had done nothing wrong and had nothing to hide? Of course.

So if I accuse a client of yours of wrongdoing, and he doesn't respond, I will know he has done something wrong and has something to hide?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So if I accuse a client of yours of wrongdoing, and he doesn't respond, I will know he has done something wrong and has something to hide?

Peter, I'm guessing you're having a boring Sunday. There's an issue that arose here based on someone's auctions which were clearly shilled. It's a discreet, simple issue to address which does not really require much research or investigation. There's no grand jury sitting and no federal agents doing the questioning. It would seem bizarre to ignore it especially when the auctioneer apparently addressed half of the claim. And the auctioneer is not someone who has a history of being lambasted on this board and would have a reason to shy away from making a statement.

I honestly think this is pretty easily handled by Rick.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Peter, I'm guessing you're having a boring Sunday. There's an issue that arose here based on someone's auctions which were clearly shilled. It's a discreet, simple issue to address which does not really require much research or investigation. There's no grand jury sitting and no federal agents doing the questioning. It would seem bizarre to ignore it especially when the auctioneer apparently addressed half of the claim. And the auctioneer is not someone who has a history of being lambasted on this board and would have a reason to shy away from making a statement.

I honestly think this is pretty easily handled by Rick

Yeah, a tad slow I would say. My point though is that with this crowd, I'm not sure I would advise anyone to come on here, even if they were completely innocent. There's always going to be someone who isn't satisfied with the explanation, or demand more proof, or whatever, and someone who is going to infer guilt from the failure to answer the last question quickly enough. I have no idea if Rick is guilty of anything, that isn't my point, my point rather is that I don't think it's fair to infer guilt from his unwillingness to engage with us.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yeah, a tad slow I would say. My point though is that with this crowd, I'm not sure I would advise anyone to come on here, even if they were completely innocent. There's always going to be someone who isn't satisfied with the explanation, or demand more proof, or whatever, and someone who is going to infer guilt from the failure to answer the last question quickly enough. I have no idea if Rick is guilty of anything, that isn't my point, my point rather is that I don't think it's fair to infer guilt from his unwillingness to engage with us.

I agree -- but don't you also agree that this is pretty straightforward? "We'll investigate the pertinent auctions and if shilling occurred we won't do business with that consignor anymore." I don't think anyone's enjoyment of the hobby would even be affected by such a response.