Ron and Khyber Oser leave Legendary for Huggins

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

people keep needing their card to get shilled until finally somebody doesnt do it and gets crushed..but again if its an auction house thats prone to shilling people should just bid less

there are people that get better buys in non shill auctions..and people that get ripped off..and its the same in shill auctions....when i really like a card and know i am willing to pay almost anything..i cant complain if its way above what i can get for it......if im trying to buy a card to resell for example id be more cautious on what i buy...

It seems as all of the shilled cards have ended up in my and Jeff L's collections. I know when I go to sell at auction I tend to lose part of my big arse....

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

The issue is..if the shillers truly lose 20% if they 'win' their item and dont get a courtesy waiver..i really dont see how someone would want to risk 'winning' a 2000 dollar card and having to pay 400 for their own card...

If they paid 6k for it they might pay 400 not to lose 4000....

.. I am NEVER for allowing consignors or auctioneers to bid in their own auctions. EVER.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Leon

If they paid 6k for it they might pay 400 not to lose 4000....

.. I am NEVER for allowing consignors or auctioneers to bid in their own auctions. EVER.

Succinctly said If I could do that as well as you, I probably wouldn't have kids crawling all over by butt in here.

[steve_a]

I'll be counted among those who have no problem with shill bidding as long as the shiller can't see other bids. Shilling is essentially risking the buyers premium to set a hidden reserve price. That "reserve" set by the shiller is just as much a part of market value as what the buyer is willing to pay.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by steve_a

I'll be counted among those who have no problem with shill bidding as long as the shiller can't see other bids. Shilling is essentially risking the buyers premium to set a hidden reserve price. That "reserve" set by the shiller is just as much a part of market value as what the buyer is willing to pay.

I completely am against that. In my mind, If you want a reserve either say what it is or start your item at the least you will take. Be transparent, not fraudulent. You can actually sell, not lose money and still be honest!! I know, it's a novel idea. (and I am not saying I am without fault..but I am not at fault on these issues )

[steve_a]

That would be fine, but what AH lets you set a reserve besides ebay?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by steve_a

That would be fine, but what AH lets you set a reserve besides ebay?

All of them.....well, I take that back. There are a few that might not. But I guarantee if you call 5 big ones at least 3 of them will let you. We don't allow reserves in our auctions per se', but will let consignors start their items wherever they want to. At some point we might say we don't want a consignment, if we have to start it at retail. But most auctions will let you have some form of reserve (or higher opening bid) from my experiences.

[steve_a]

A minimum bid isn't the same as a reserve. I always assume low minimum bids were made to allow more participants into the extended bidding framework, not an expectation you could win at such a low price. I work in finance & deal with price discovery every day which likely influences my perspective but I see no difference between listing below where you are willing to sell and bidding below what you are willing to spend.

[1952boyntoncollector]

well if only worried about 6000 dolllar cards or more than takes out a huge chunck of the market..and again i woudl think people that bid $120,000 etc...are educated enough to pay what they think its worth and not be suckered by shilling...if a shiller weants to eat a $1500 buyers premium..on one ocassion..i dont think they will schill again and make it 3000.......either way i think this issue has been discussed...


Back to Legendary Auctin...would you be confortable sending them a check at this point?

[Peter_Spaeth]

If I had bid and won I would be uncomfortable NOT sending them a check.

[1952boyntoncollector]

anyone who says a card sold at rock bottom price and could easily of gotten more for the card cause its not the 'true' market...why not have a friend or themselve just buy the card and sell it....if the buyers premium makes it unlikely to do that then it was close enough to market price to not complain

basicaly if its selling at a price where you are 100% sure you can resell it for a profit thats worth..go and buy it...dont complain it sold for way under market and market period doesnt mean just a week period.....if so sure it sold cheaply buy it back and move on..otherwise it was sure as heck close enough to market price if you worried about buyers premium...close enough to market price to not be 'rock bottom price'....

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

anyone who says a card sold at rock bottom price and could easily of gotten more for the card cause its not the 'true' market...why not have a friend or themselve just buy the card and sell it....if the buyers premium makes it unlikely to do that then it was close enough to market price to not complain

basicaly if its selling at a price where you are 100% sure you can resell it for a profit thats worth..go and buy it...dont complain it sold for way under market and market period doesnt mean just a week period.....if so sure it sold cheaply buy it back and move on..otherwise it was sure as heck close enough to market price if you worried about buyers premium...close enough to market price to not be 'rock bottom price'....

okay

[1952boyntoncollector]

[QUOTE=Leon;1346971]If they paid 6k for it they might pay 400 not to lose 4000....


again the seller wouldnt be sure if actually losing 4000 on the item but sure as heck going to be losing 400 and now a new buyer will have to pay another buyer premium and the seller isnt likely to eat another buyer premium....and the past sale will be registered on VCP so will be even harder to get higher amount then they just shilled a safe amount for....its not like they woudl be shilling to an all time past sale high....but rather shilling to not 'give it away at rock bottom prices..which arguably may not be rock bottom but the average sale price ..... plus you are assuming a 6000 dollar card will be going for 2000 with a 400 bp.. and the shill 'won' on 2000..so the lower bid was 1800 or so on a '6000' card..i just dont see that as a likely scenerio.....very very very rare...if ever....and not something as a buyer id worry about....

so the shill gets it to 2000 and as a buyer i 'win' on 2200 on a 6000 card?..id take that as a buyer..

[Leon]

Originally Posted by steve_a

A minimum bid isn't the same as a reserve. I always assume low minimum bids were made to allow more participants into the extended bidding framework, not an expectation you could win at such a low price. I work in finance & deal with price discovery every day which likely influences my perspective but I see no difference between listing below where you are willing to sell and bidding below what you are willing to spend.

A minimum bid absolutely can be used as a reserve. Try bidding $100 on a card that has a $500 opening bid (and is a 1k card in real value).

If you work in finance then you have to agree that if I start at $100 but say there is a $500 reserve, it is the same as opening at $500 with no reserve. The reason to open at $100, with a $500 reserve, is to attract "action" ie...bids. But I also don't like hidden reserves and if I ever did use one I would say what it is up front (or well before auction end). I understand there are different views but those are mine. I believe in openness and transparency in bidding.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Runscott

okay

It's hard to argue with the ellipses.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by 4815162342

It's hard to argue with the ellipses.

ok...

[Leon]

[QUOTE=1952boyntoncollector;1347028]

Originally Posted by Leon

If they paid 6k for it they might pay 400 not to lose 4000....


again the seller wouldnt be sure if actually losing 4000 on the item but sure as heck going to be losing 400 and now a new buyer will have to pay another buyer premium and the seller isnt likely to eat another buyer premium....and the past sale will be registered on VCP so will be even harder to get higher amount then they just shilled a safe amount for....its not like they woudl be shilling to an all time past sale high....but rather shilling to not 'give it away at rock bottom prices..which arguably may not be rock bottom but the average sale price ..... plus you are assuming a 6000 dollar card will be going for 2000 with a 400 bp.. and the shill 'won' on 2000..so the lower bid was 1800 or so on a '6000' card..i just dont see that as a likely scenerio.....very very very rare...if ever....and not something as a buyer id worry about....

so the shill gets it to 2000 and as a buyer i 'win' on 2200 on a 6000 card?..id take that as a buyer..

If the Consignor paid 6k, as I said, then yes at 2k he would be losing 4k.
I merely gave an example where it would make sense to pay 400 BP. And as far as VCP goes, it is a good tool but more are needed. It can be manipulated (via bad sales) just as you are describing.

I don't think You have consigned enough and haven't lost enough to have this conversation if you don't think these scenarios happen. I have lost, yes lost, 10k on one card and I had no inclination to shill it. I win some and I lose some....and sleep well at night. To each their own though. Just please don't consign to my auction if you want to shill.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by 4815162342

It's hard to argue with the ellipses.

I appreciate his enthusiasm, but I have to admit I didn't understand much of the post. It's possible I agreed with all of it.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jeff, unlikely to happen. As has been said many times, stuff trumps all.

I'm not saying this is you, Peter, because I don't know you at all. But usually the people who say this are the ones trying to rationalize their behavior to themselves because they know its wrong.

Time to man up and do what right and fix the hobby. Are you part of the solution or the problem?

jeff

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Are the Osers photo guys?

Khyber is listed as one of the co-authors on A Portrait of Baseball Photography. I always kind of assumed it was more as an editor assembling the book itself, correcting spelling/grammar, etc as I believe he was listed as being in college at the time (I don't have the book in front of me, so am going from memory here, which always gets me in trouble). Anyway, that is to say that he at least has some history with photos, and it would make sense for his interest to continue beyond that work.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jefferyepayne

I'm not saying this is you, Peter, because I don't know you at all. But usually the people who say this are the ones trying to rationalize their behavior to themselves because they know its wrong.

Time to man up and do what right and fix the hobby. Are you part of the solution or the problem?

jeff

It was an observation, not a rationalization.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I appreciate his enthusiasm, but I have to admit I didn't understand much of the post. It's possible I agreed with all of it.

I honestly didn't follow it either.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Khyber is listed as one of the co-authors on A Portrait of Baseball Photography. I always kind of assumed it was more as an editor assembling the book itself, correcting spelling/grammar, etc as I believe he was listed as being in college at the time (I don't have the book in front of me, so am going from memory here, which always gets me in trouble). Anyway, that is to say that he at least has some history with photos, and it would make sense for his interest to continue beyond that work.

Good, so hopefully no more 'wishful thinking' false starts;e.g-Rusie, Jackson, etc.

[1952boyntoncollector]

i never said i shill...i was just explaining the issues involved and the fact shilling sort of solves itself with educated buyers and bp that people have to pay if buying their own stuf....i keeps seeing comments that i am shilling..i have never stated that....stop assuming things....

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kevin, hard for me to believe you would have done better elsewhere. I am guessing REA attracts more eyes than anyone.

Peter- You're probably right. My wording may have been slightly unclear. I didn't mean never consigning again with REA (they are one of the best), I meant that particular Fall auction vs. their Spring auction. I may be wrong, but it seems that the Spring brings better money....

[Peter_Spaeth]

Kevin, I come up short just as often in the fall as the spring auction.