Poor Consignment Experience

[RichardSimon]

I send consignments to an auction house.
They send me a proof of the auction listing and invite me to add any corrections or additions as I see fit.
Does not seem like a very hard thing for an auction house to do.

[Sean1125]

Did you actually end up contacting them to change it or did you leave it as it was?

[cjedmonton]

They did include a few enhancements I made to the description, but in the end, the ambiguous title was left as is. That was the nail in the coffin.

Please note that this has much less to do with my being disappointed with the final hammer than it was not even taking the time to properly present the items, or even be willing to individually list the key names.

At any rate, I've washed my hands of the entire ordeal. I'm disgusted, but like anything, life goes on.

A shame, considering how pleased I was with how they handled the estate purchase I consigned with them last year.

[hugginsandscott]

Chris,
I certainly wish it had gone better for both of us. As stated above, we can change anything at any time on the listing. For the record, you never made any indication that you were dissatisfied with the title. We had an email correspondence back and forth prior to us going to print and there was no mention of you wanting the title changed. In fact, here is the email you sent me on May 13th:

Hello,

I see that my consigned lot has been listed. Thank you for a nice write up, but wanted to know if it would be possible to make a few enhancements to the description (space permitting).

1. Jesse Tannehill, Noodles Hahn, Hooks Wiltse, and Dutch Ruether are the highlights to this lot. Would it be possible to underline their names as keys?

2. Clarence Mitchell year of passing was missed (d. 1963).

3. Would it be possible to include the first and last name for each player?

Here are my revisions in a simple copy/paste format. If you could make any or all of these changes, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks again for the great service,

Chris Jenkins


The only thing I didn't accommodate was the request to include the first name of each player in the catalog description and my reasoning was it would result in too much text to allow for a decent sized image; however I did include the first name of each player on the internet and our search feature captures catalog descriptions or internet descriptions, so there was no loss there.
Again, I do wish it had sold for more money, as the more you make, the more we make. I'm sorry you weren't happy with the results - we weren't either.
Josh Wulkan
Huggins and Scott Auctions

[thenavarro]

Josh,

IMO, very poor taste for an auction house to post an email of a consignor on a public message board, irregardless if the consignor expressed issues with a consignment on the same board.

His gripe was not an issue of integrity, or anything that any future consignor should have hesitations over. It was really a simple issue that seems easily avoidable for future consignors and the auction house by communication.

Just my two pesos,

Mike

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by thenavarro

Josh,

IMO, very poor taste for an auction house to post an email of a consignor on a public message board, irregardless if the consignor expressed issues with a consignment on the same board.

His gripe was not an issue of integrity, or anything that any future consignor should have hesitations over. It was really a simple issue that seems easily avoidable for future consignors and the auction house by communication.

Just my two pesos,

Mike

+1

[cjedmonton]

Ooo, fun! While we're airing private emails on a public forum, I've got one.

The bottom of this post features my response to the invoice for proceeds due.

In response to the consignee's weak defence of "you never asked to amend the title" argument, I should not have had to hold your crew's hand by specifically asking that you draft a meaningful and effective auction.

Granted, these were all lower profile items than most that were listed. Nonetheless, I am a paying customer. I should have, without question, been entitled to a quality listing that would best market the items to interested bidders.

If I had a Mathewson autograph, should I have overtly asked them not to list it as a "pre-war Bucknell scholar turned National League star pitcher"? If it were Cobb...please don't say "ex-Tigers great turned shrewd businessman and early Coca-Cola stockholder."? Give me a break.

I stated earlier in this thread that I have throughly washed my hands of this matter. Nothing's changed, other than a decade+ spent collecting those autographs and more money than I care to admit.

The silver lining is that the ordeal is over and the amount lost is not a life-changer. I just want to move on.

-------------------------

6/14/2013

To Whom it May Concern,

I hereby reject this invoice. Please do not forward these proceeds to me or they will be returned.

As suspected (and discussed with Josh Wulkan), this was a poorly constructed listing which I am certain resulted in several hundred dollars being left on the table. Surely this can be acknowledged.

If not, here is a recent example of what just one of the key signatures in this lot (in the same form) commanded:

https://www.premierauctionsonline.co...px?lotid=36361

For the others, simply refer to Quality Autographs for their retail prices as a starting point. Even by deeply discounting those figures, you will see that several of the key signatures were lost in the fray due to the poor format and ambiguous title.

My personal expectations aside, I am thoroughly disappointed with the lack of attention given to this lot.

I fully understand the nature of an open auction environment, and realize that bidding tendencies can fluctuate wildly in such a setting. However, the auction as it was presented was such a disservice to the rarity and quality of these autographs, I would rather waive the $295 in proceeds than accept that disservice.

I do not wish to discuss this matter any further.

Chris Jenkins