The "auction" (for lack of a better word) is over. Look at what happened.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Just pointing out that a high purchase of a BIN on ebay -- or a single bid at a high opening reserve -- has the same propensity to "manipulate" markets.

Your position is starting to make a little more sense in light of a previous post. "The concern of a market artificially inflated by shilling is a red herring, in my view. It is an argument used solely to respond to the shilling-indifferent in an effort to point out a tangible cost of shilling."

One could also point out that the shilling-indifferent might offer other market inflation methods to justify their shilling indifference, since there are tangible costs to shilling. I've yet to see this proven otherwise or even addressed. I'll prefer hundreds of years of real life experience that market manipulation negatively affects prices rather than a theory that BINs will rise if shilling auctions were eliminated.

I think Steve B pointed it out best in that there are 3 approaches to this:
A ) Whether someone takes the high road of abandoning any market or seller that encourages or condones that stuff
B ) Or The middle road of only participating in some auctions.
C ) Or Ignores it all and only bids what they think is fair

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by tschock

One could also point out that the shilling-indifferent might offer other market inflation methods to justify their shilling indifference, since there are tangible costs to shilling. I've yet to see this proven otherwise or even addressed. I'll prefer hundreds of years of real life experience that market manipulation negatively affects prices rather than a theory that BINs will rise if shilling auctions were eliminated.

I think Steve B pointed it out best in that there are 3 approaches to this:
A ) Whether someone takes the high road of abandoning any market or seller that encourages or condones that stuff
B ) Or The middle road of only participating in some auctions.
C ) Or Ignores it all and only bids what they think is fair

What about those of us who pay attention to the information about shilling but continue to bid what they think is fair in light of the available information?

Nobody ever said there were no tangible costs to shilling. I think it is plain that the people who are upset about shilling think they are paying too much for an item (not that there is artificial market inflation). This is where I think the roads begin to diverge - one camp that stamps its feet over shilling because they are convinced that they are overpaying for items; and the other camp that appreciates the information of the feet stampers but doesn't let it get to them because they don't feel like they paid more than they wanted to.

Finally, offering other market inflation methods doesn't justify shilling indifference, it shows that an emphasis on the perils of shilling may be overstated if the true concern is the purity of markets.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

What about those of us who pay attention to the information about shilling but continue to bid what they think is fair in light of the available information?

If you know that the seller or his consignors are shilling, then you are supporting theft.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Runscott

If you know that the seller or his consignors are shilling, then you are supporting theft.

If Net54baseball.com decides not to support a seller by prohibiting their banner advertisements, then I will follow suit and not participate in their auctions.*

* Does not apply to signed T206 auctions!

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

If Net54baseball.com decides not to support a seller by prohibiting their banner advertisements, then I will follow suit and not participate in their auctions.*

* Does not apply to signed T206 auctions!

I wouldn't recommend letting a for-profit business do your thinking for you.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I wouldn't recommend letting a for-profit business do your thinking for you.

I'm okay with Net54Baseball.com's stance on these issues. I assume you're here because you agree, too. Otherwise you're supporting their corporate sponsors - think of the click through rates on this thread alone!

[drcy]

That's a good point.

On the other hand, this site allows criticism of the advertisers and much of the complaints, critiques and information comes from this site. If it didn't allow discussion of the topics due to advertisers, then I think boycotting and disgust would be appropriate. I would chose not to participate. But Leon allows free discussion of advertisers(within reasonable parameters, including posters have to identify themselves when accusing).

The CU board, of course, does things differently than over here But then, as far as I know, PSA has also never publicly said the PSA9 T206 Honus Wagner was trimmed even after the trimmer himself pleaded guilty to it in court. But I'm a reasonable guy and will give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps I missed it and they have admitted it was trimmed. Or perhaps they intended to but were distracted by a shiny object on the ground and forgot. After all, show me a tinfoil pinwheel or some rainbow sparkle and I'll forget the whole world around me including what is my middle name.

There are no pinwheels or sparkle nearby, so, for the record, I can post that my middle name is Ned. Please write that down in case I later forget.

I'm ethical but easily distracted. If it weren't for my movie star looks and exquisite fashion sense, I wouldn't survive in this world.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

What about those of us who pay attention to the information about shilling but continue to bid what they think is fair in light of the available information?

Assuming the information is not skewed by shilling. But I get it. Similar to being familiar with those who are tough on the card grades and those who are more lenient, I take the source into account when bidding.

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Nobody ever said there were no tangible costs to shilling.

My apologies. I went back and re-read. I got hung up on the "The elimination of shilling just means higher BINs for everyone." statement, though the implication is that shilling doesn't "cost" as much as no shilling from that statement. (something I still disagree with)

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I think it is plain that the people who are upset about shilling think they are paying too much for an item (not that there is artificial market inflation). This is where I think the roads begin to diverge - one camp that stamps its feet over shilling because they are convinced that they are overpaying for items; and the other camp that appreciates the information of the feet stampers but doesn't let it get to them because they don't feel like they paid more than they wanted to.

Along with 50 shades of "stamping".

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Finally, offering other market inflation methods doesn't justify shilling indifference, it shows that an emphasis on the perils of shilling may be overstated if the true concern is the purity of markets.

Maybe and maybe not, and where we probably disagree. No problem there. Though I think a good "exercise left for the student" would be an analysis of BIN listing prices vs their actual sale prices as a comparison to auction style realized prices, and not just a "sold" price comparison.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by tschock

I think a good "exercise left for the student" would be an analysis of BIN listing prices vs their actual sale prices as a comparison to auction style realized prices, and not just a "sold" price comparison.

Definitely. Maybe we can hire a few unpaid interns to do that. Totally worthwhile exercise!

[steve B]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

What about those of us who pay attention to the information about shilling but continue to bid what they think is fair in light of the available information?

Nobody ever said there were no tangible costs to shilling. I think it is plain that the people who are upset about shilling think they are paying too much for an item (not that there is artificial market inflation). This is where I think the roads begin to diverge - one camp that stamps its feet over shilling because they are convinced that they are overpaying for items; and the other camp that appreciates the information of the feet stampers but doesn't let it get to them because they don't feel like they paid more than they wanted to.

Finally, offering other market inflation methods doesn't justify shilling indifference, it shows that an emphasis on the perils of shilling may be overstated if the true concern is the purity of markets.

The question I would have for you is this.

WHY do you think your bid is a fair one?

If you assume there's been no market manipulation - shilling or otherwise- then you're operating outside of what most collectors in any field do.

For most collectibles there are pricing resources. I've been involved in a few hobbies where there is or was little to no readily available pricing information. (Films, the racing bikes, and to some degree cards before 1979-80. ) Under that condition, hobbyists are free to assign value based on their own opinion and budget. Having tastes outside the average means that's usually worked well for me. The stuff I like is often ignored by most collectors and is comparatively cheap. The cycling jersey I mentioned in an earlier post was worn in the 48 Olympics, and was a whole lot less expensive than any game worn baseball item from the same era. (Yeah, probably including uniform pants)

But those are small hobbies. Most collectors need a price guide of some sort.
And that's where a popular hobby can have problems.

If the price guide uses actual reported sales, it's very prone to manipulation. If it doesn't use actual sales then it IS the manipulation. Sometimes not by much, sometimes more seriously. There have been lots of guides that showed higher prices for stuff the writer had and lower prices for items they wanted but didn't have.

So is your hypothetical $100 card a $100 card because you personally place that value on it regardless of previous sales?
Or is it a $100 card because the last 10 sales averaged $100 or over?

If it's the latter, how is it you can't see the problem caused by price manipulation?
If it's the former, a tip of the cap to you!


My pricing method is fairly complex, sometimes I'll decide what to bid or what I want to pay based on previous sales. Sometimes I believe an item is worth more to me than the typical sale price - often tempered by budget. It's more my impression of whether an item is currently over or undervalued. I go more by price guides in hobbies where the prices are typically stable, more by instinct in hobbies where there's no guide or for items I think are special.

My general feeling is that the big consignors don't shill themselves. But also don't make a major effort to eliminate those who do or appear to.
In any business I think there's a point where certain things are tolerated. It's not right, but that's the way it is.
For instance a business could make a major effort to stop shoplifting. It's conceivable that they could stop nearly all of it. But to do that they would have to make the shopping experience inconvenient at best, or Invasive and borderline illegal at the worst. So they make just enough effort to reduce their losses to an acceptable level without driving customers away.

I've seen the opposite effect. At a rural fair they have the usual vendors. One year a guy from NYC decided to setup his tool sales booth. Which included heavy side curtains on the awning that were staked into the ground. Then double row of snow fencing, a chrome railing like fence and metal detectors. He was incredibly unpopular. Around noon, he started making loud comments about the cheapness of the fairgoers who weren't buying his stuff. Most didn't even bother entering the booth. When he started packing up shortly after, and swearing at pretty much anyone walking by he drew the attention of a few of the local farm workers. Fortunately one of the local cops defused the situation before it reached the brawl level. (Some stuff was thrown, and some threats made by both sides, which was let slide. ) When things calmed down some of the old guys took him aside and explained that his entire setup was insulting. he explained that in his usual flea market if he didn't have the fence and metal detectors he probably wouldn't have a truck left to drive home, let alone any of his inventory.

There's some lesson in there about balance, and balance in different situations, but it's late and I'm rambling.

Steve B

[doug.goodman]

I haven't been on the site for a few days, so I just saw this thread for the first time.

I'm WAY to lazy to read thru it, so apologies if others have posted similar thoughts to mine :

I bid the most that I am willing to pay for an item to get it into my collection.

I don't care what it's sold for in the past.

I don't care what it's "worth".

I have been know to send offers for less than 10% of the asking price. With a polite note. Sometimes they are accepted. Sometimes they are not.

I collect a lot of stuff that few others want, that tends to keep my costs down, although the lovely wife might disagree.

As far as shilling of items that I bid on is concerned, I would prefer that it didn't happen, and I am sure that it has at times cost me money. But, there isn't really anything that I can do to stop it, especially since ebay tacitly encourages it.

Doug

[Gamebits]

Well quite a thread to read through and all I have to say is being honest cost me money for no reason since obviously some people just like to be screwed.

But seriously one thing that could reduce the shilling is if eBay would remove all the bids made by a buyer who retracted is last bid and bring the price down to where it should be in the first place, but why would they.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

As far as shilling of items that I bid on is concerned, I would prefer that it didn't happen, and I am sure that it has at times cost me money. But, there isn't really anything that I can do to stop it, especially since ebay tacitly encourages it.

Doug

It is amazing to me how many people can't stop themselves from bidding on items that are being sold by sellers who are known to allow shilling and/or shill. And the excuse is that they can't personally stop the shilling. Not picking on you, Doug, as I realize that probably 1/2 to 2/3 of our forum members can't keep from pressing the bid button in such situations, and freely admit it.

Not sure why I re-visited this thread, but I didn't read any of the new posts until I saw your name, and since you have bought stuff from me in the past, and I respect your opinion, so I was curious what your thoughts were on the type of sellers described in this thread.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Runscott

It is amazing to me how many people can't stop themselves from bidding on items that are being sold by sellers who are known to allow shilling and/or shill.

What's more amazing by far is the amount of purportedly educated people who are convinced that fraud in our hobby isn't a big deal and that they can control it. Of course, I'd like to be there when they sell their collections and get pennies on the dollar for their cards.

[ullmandds]

I have bought cards from PWCC and Probstein over the years...but not since all of this nonsense has come out. I often will see cards on ebay...click the link and see they are one of these two and I move on.

If one of them had a card I had to have...I'd bid accordingly...I may even overbid but that's my prerogative.