the list (of criminals) is revealed

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I have no idea why you are obsessed with me, but I came on here perfectly willing to be transparent and I then did my best to clarify your confusion about my answer and Ron's. Perhaps you should ask some questions of the people who are silent. If it's lawyers you don't like, there are some on that list. One has 50 plus transactions in which he was the consignor and his employee was the bidder.

Peter,
I have no obsession with you ,personally I could care less about you but there are 2 type of people I hate cheats,and liars. And you my friend have fit that mold. You refuse to answer a simple question and that leads me to believe that maybe you have more to hide. Wow kinda sucks to be on the other end of the questioning doesnt it. And Peter people see that you do the dance around the questions and I do believe that many think very differently of you now. For god sake Peter just answer the question I posed maybe it will do you some good to get it off your chest!!
Al S@meo.ne

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

Does Al have a last name?

first name was Big I thought...isn't that the first name of a lot of Als..

as to bastsballsbases:

Simple yes and no answers usually don't end up so simple...I think peter already fell on his sword.....badgering the witness I think is what lawyers say.....

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

first name was Big I thought...isn't that the first name of a lot of Als..

as to bastsballsbases:

Simple yes and no answers usually don't end up so simple...I think peter already fell on his sword.....badgering the witness I think is what lawyers say.....

First of all My name is at the bottom of some of my posts. I have been here on the board for a long time and most know me. Check for my name at the start of this on post 453 if you want. Its also right above you in post 701.

Second just want the truth nothing more or less. simple question deserves a simple answer.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

For god sake Peter just answer the question I posed maybe it will do you some good to get it off your chest!!
Al S@meo.ne

Didn't he already answer the question? Ron placed the bid(s) using Peter's account. What else is there to answer?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Peter,
I have no obsession with you ,personally I could care less about you but there are 2 type of people I hate cheats,and liars. And you my friend have fit that mold. You refuse to answer a simple question and that leads me to believe that maybe you have more to hide. Wow kinda sucks to be on the other end of the questioning doesnt it. And Peter people see that you do the dance around the questions and I do believe that many think very differently of you now. For god sake Peter just answer the question I posed maybe it will do you some good to get it off your chest!!
Al S@meo.ne

..

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

Didn't he already answer the question? Ron placed the bid(s) using Peter's account. What else is there to answer?

No . The question he refuses to answer is DID YOU GIVE RON YOUR ACCOUNT # AND PASSWORD... That is all I want to know and if answered I will never ask Peter another question...

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

Didn't he already answer the question? Ron placed the bid(s) using Peter's account. What else is there to answer?

Oh and by the way as was asked of me please put your full name in your post as I dont see it there..
Al S@meo ne

[Leon]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

No . The question he refuses to answer is DID YOU GIVE RON YOUR ACCOUNT # AND PASSWORD... That is all I want to know and if answered I will never ask Peter another question...

Didn't this post in #668 answer the question? It is yes one way or the other, btw...

"Fair question let me clarify. Ron placed the bids, as he stated. When I first posted -- as Ron also stated -- I did not want to try to distance myself from/blame Ron because he is a friend, so I did not emphasize that distinction. I believe this answers Al as well."



.

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by Leon

Didn't this post in #668 answer the question? It is yes one way or the other, btw...

"Fair question let me clarify. Ron placed the bids, as he stated. When I first posted -- as Ron also stated -- I did not want to try to distance myself from/blame Ron because he is a friend, so I did not emphasize that distinction. I believe this answers Al as well."



.

Leon,
I believe its post 688 and no it didnt answer what I asked. But If YOU want me to let it go his silence has answered the question for me..

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No there was only one lot involved I am sure. 9 years later I really don't recall what the bidding was on the one lot it may well only have been one bid and I misspoke.

While my name holds zero gravitas - at least on this board, my kids think I'm a god.., can I ask this?

Daniel Enright

I'm surprised the events we are discussing are murky at all for you, and I understand the 9 years part. You were asked to participate in an illegal and surely uncomfortable for-you situation, one you didn't repeat, and from my reading of your posts over the years, its an act that wouldn't have sat right. Generally I feel your call on this board is for the greater good, the moral and ethical right to win out.
So such an even should have seared itself into you mind.
I'm 47, and at age 15 stole a Penthouse magazine from a store, getting caught on the way out. I can see it all very easily right now, my school uniform, which side of my jacket I put the magazine behind, the point at which the owner called for me to stop as I sidled out the door. I had to go to the police station, have my mum pick me up.....I never stole a thing again in my life.
I can't un-remember it.

The part of your story, and what happens to all stories if they contain any innacuracies, is as you tell them over and over aspects that don't jive start to stand out.

Originally you described the action as a single bid, meant to act as a minimum amount your friend Ron would accept. I think you allowed the number of bids, and how you framed it in your mind as a minimum, to mitigate the whole sordid action to yourself. Ron was simply protecting himself from being ripped off by a low offer.

You just now said in your last post, you are unsure of how many bids were placed?
You can see how that would change everything, from setting a minimum to an active effort to shill up another bidder.
I also have a feeling you would have followed the auction more than just casually, to know how it turned out and because it was a moral car crash - it would have been hard to avert your eyes.

Is there a chance you more accurately remember how the item was bid on, on reflection?
Did you talk to Ron afterwards, tell him how uncomfortable it made you feel, that it was once off?
Knowing AH rules of the time and now, I would also think this memory would have followed you for years, especially as a lawyer and knowing what could happed to your life's work if you were found to have acted illegally......

I realize it's easier to talk in modified short responses as you have so far, and I actually am with you in what you've said so far about at least fronting the pitchforks while others pathetically hide their involvement.
But it would be helpful to believe you as a fellow human being, if you took a few more words to tell the story so far untold.
About what the act meant to you then and now, and whether you are really so equivocal in judging it today?
You knew it was wrong then, otherwise you would have asked the AH to simply advertise what was being done and be transparent about it......so why so gray today?

[Peter_Spaeth]

//

[Leon]

So YES didn't answer the question? How about NO or Maybe? I don't care what you do it just seems like he answered the question but you keep on keeping on. He let Ron use his account one way or the other. The rest is semantics and I didn't see him lie or anything else about it. He told the truth. He admitted a mistake was made. What more do you want?

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Leon,
I believe its post 688 and no it didnt answer what I asked. But If YOU want me to let it go his silence has answered the question for me..

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Oh and by the way as was asked of me please put your full name in your post as I dont see it there..
Al S@meo ne

Rob Gordy
tiger8mush@yahoo.com
looking for E121s with a "Lou Gertenrich" back if you have any

[batsballsbases]

Leon,
No problem I know he is your friend... Its like you and the Peck + Snyder incident. I know you didnt like it very much and I myself never once commented on it to you. But hay if you want to pencil whip me out of here to as I have always told you no problem.. I had stopped making comments as you know long ago on these posts BUT when a LAWYER came on and Im sorry really didnt tell the truth (the full truth) and did the dance well someone had to call this individual out. So I guess it was me.. Do what you will. I really dont care. Just wanted to stick up for the right side of the law...

[Leon]

I didn't like the P & S issue especially because I did absolutely nothing wrong. Just a small difference. Peter admits he made a mistake. I didn't admit anything except I am out a Peck and Sndyer I bought at auction. There really wasn't anything else except in peoples imaginations. But prefer not to discuss that here, now.

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Leon,
No problem I know he is your friend... Its like you and the Peck + Snyder incident. I know you didnt like it very much and I myself never once commented on it to you. But hay if you want to pencil whip me out of here to as I have always told you no problem.. I had stoppe making comments as you know long ago on these posts BUT when a LAWYER came on and Im sorry really didnt tell the truth (the full truth) and did the dance well someone had to call this individual out. So I guess it was me.. Do what you will. I really dont care. Just wanted to stick up for the right side of the law...

[ElCabron]

Originally Posted by Leon

He told the truth. He admitted a mistake was made.

Not to make this thread all about Peter, but to clarify, he actually didn't tell the truth or admit a mistake was made, did he? This is a long thread so I legitimately might have missed it when he said it was a mistake. I hope he did and I just didn't see it. I know that he did say, "I don't view myself as a shill bidder, nor do I believe Ron did anything inappropriate." I read that as the exact opposite of admitting a mistake.

That was from his initial post in this thread. The one where, as he says, he "came on here perfectly willing to be transparent." The way he demonstrated that transparency was to lie about it and say that he was asked to bid for Ron, and he agreed to do it. Ron later posted that he was the one bidding on his own item, using Peter's account. It's not that different either way, but it's also not just semantics. One story was the truth, one was a lie. Maybe we have different ideas about what transparency means.

Again, there are far worse offenders than Peter, but Peter still belongs on the list. Coming on here and lying about it didn't make him look less guilty. Actually transparency and remorse might have gone a long way.

-Ryan

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by Leon

I didn't like the P & S issue especially because I did absolutely nothing wrong. Just a small difference. Peter admits he made a mistake. I didn't admit anything except I am out a Peck and Sndyer I bought at auction. There really wasn't anything else except in peoples imaginations. But prefer not to discuss that here, now.

And Leon,
Like I said I never once made any comment on that issue whether I thought it was right or wrong but somewhere down the line you made a decision to return it. Whether it was right or wrong YOU made that decision and that was your choice. But when this thread started someone came on and made a long statement, then his friend came on and made another long statement., in both statements there were inconsistency, and all I wanted was to clear up some very simple points. Thats all but when the party started to do the dance well thats when I pushed for the truth. Peter I hope you sleep well every night and never stop standing up for truth justice and the american way! I salute you sir...

[trobba]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

And Leon,
Like I said I never once made any comment on that issue weather I thought it was right or wrong but somewhere down the line you made a decision to return it. Weather it was right or wrong YOU made that decision and that was your choice. But when this thread started someone came on and made a long statement, then his friend came on and made another long statement., in both statements there were inconsintences and all I wanted was to clear up some very simple points. Thats all but when the party started to do the dance well thats when I pushed for the truth. Peter I hope you sleep well every night and never stop standing up for truth justice and the american way! I salute you sir...

Your points would resonate much more if less attention were drawn to your continued butchering of the English language...most notably in this instance the difference between weather and whether. And for the life of me I cant find inconsintences anywhere in the dictionary, its almost some sort of contraction.

Rob G$the#l

[jason.1969]

Originally Posted by trobba

And for the life of me I cant find inconsintences anywhere in the dictionary, its almost some sort of contraction.

Rob G$the#l

It is a cross between inconsistent and incontinence. Tough situation to be in.

"Will I need adult diapers for this?"
"Depends."

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

It is a cross between inconsistent and incontinence. Tough situation to be in.

"Will I need adult diapers for this?"
"Depends."

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[JimStinson]

Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them....Santayana

[whiteymet]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Thats what I wanted to know.
So again to be clear YOU gave ron your account and password with your knowledge and he acted from his computer and placed the shill. Thats a yes or no answer councilor....

Al:

Please help me understand why it is so important for you to know if Peter gave Ron his acct info and password and Ron bid from his own computer.

Is there a difference I am missing?

Fred McK.ie

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by whiteymet

Al:

Please help me understand why it is so important for you to know if Peter gave Ron his acct info and password and Ron bid from his own computer.

Is there a difference I am missing?

Fred McK.ie

Fred,
As I posted he states one thing and then Ron states another. Just wanted the real truth but as I see that isnt going to happen. Fred Im done asking let others carry the torch. If not then you ask him why he wont answer my simple question. But as Leon pointed out the question was asked and answered in a round about way. I believe the word was semantics.(Did I spell that right for you rob) So I will leave it with that.

[slidekellyslide]

Al, it seems pretty clear to me that he took the blame for making the shill bid, then Ron said he made the bid with Peter's account and Peter admitted this is how it went down, but he didn't want to throw Ron under the bus.

From the looks of it this appears to be one guy who wanted his investment protected, suckered a friend into using his account to do so (still bad, still shilling).

Now there are a bunch of guys on that list with MULTIPLE acts of shilling, one of them a major auction house owner who obviously is reading this thread and giving information about people posting here, but is too much of coward to come on here and explain himself.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

While my name holds zero gravitas - at least on this board, my kids think I'm a god.., can I ask this?

Daniel Enright

I'm surprised the events we are discussing are murky at all for you, and I understand the 9 years part. You were asked to participate in an illegal and surely uncomfortable for-you situation, one you didn't repeat, and from my reading of your posts over the years, its an act that wouldn't have sat right. Generally I feel your call on this board is for the greater good, the moral and ethical right to win out.
So such an even should have seared itself into you mind.
I'm 47, and at age 15 stole a Penthouse magazine from a store, getting caught on the way out. I can see it all very easily right now, my school uniform, which side of my jacket I put the magazine behind, the point at which the owner called for me to stop as I sidled out the door. I had to go to the police station, have my mum pick me up.....I never stole a thing again in my life.
I can't un-remember it.

The part of your story, and what happens to all stories if they contain any innacuracies, is as you tell them over and over aspects that don't jive start to stand out.

Originally you described the action as a single bid, meant to act as a minimum amount your friend Ron would accept. I think you allowed the number of bids, and how you framed it in your mind as a minimum, to mitigate the whole sordid action to yourself. Ron was simply protecting himself from being ripped off by a low offer.

You just now said in your last post, you are unsure of how many bids were placed?
You can see how that would change everything, from setting a minimum to an active effort to shill up another bidder.
I also have a feeling you would have followed the auction more than just casually, to know how it turned out and because it was a moral car crash - it would have been hard to avert your eyes.

Is there a chance you more accurately remember how the item was bid on, on reflection?
Did you talk to Ron afterwards, tell him how uncomfortable it made you feel, that it was once off?
Knowing AH rules of the time and now, I would also think this memory would have followed you for years, especially as a lawyer and knowing what could happed to your life's work if you were found to have acted illegally......

I realize it's easier to talk in modified short responses as you have so far, and I actually am with you in what you've said so far about at least fronting the pitchforks while others pathetically hide their involvement.
But it would be helpful to believe you as a fellow human being, if you took a few more words to tell the story so far untold.
About what the act meant to you then and now, and whether you are really so equivocal in judging it today?
You knew it was wrong then, otherwise you would have asked the AH to simply advertise what was being done and be transparent about it......so why so gray today?

that's actually a really good post...I remember being the get away driver when my 'friend' stole some things from 7-11, I was 16 and when he came to my car the worker from 7-11 was running after him and I drove him away to safety...its not like I was the guy from person of interest to save him....but the 7-11 guy did hit the hood of my chevy nova before I was able to move my car out of his grasp.....i didn't know he was going to the store to steal something but i had a good idea he must of stolen something when the 7-11 guy was running after him outside the store to my car..

on another note I do think I did steal a few wax packs from 7-11, maybe 1988 topps when I was a minor..not sure if it was one or two packs..i not get caught but I feel worse being the get away driver in that other participation of theft....and while I am confessing my sins, I believe the last thing i ever remember stealing was a 'switch-blade' plastic comb and key chain license plate with my name on it that I stole at the gift store in the Twin towers in new York city...

in the years since i have contributed a lot more money to charity that the gross value of the switch blade plastic comb, the key chain license plate, 2 1988 topps wax packs and the slurpee and/or candy my 'friend' took....

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Al, it seems pretty clear to me that he took the blame for making the shill bid, then Ron said he made the bid with Peter's account and Peter admitted this is how it went down, but he didn't want to throw Ron under the bus.

From the looks of it this appears to be one guy who wanted his investment protected, suckered a friend into using his account to do so (still bad, still shilling).

Now there are a bunch of guys on that list with MULTIPLE acts of shilling, one of them a major auction house owner who obviously is reading this thread and giving information about people posting here, but is too much of coward to come on here and explain himself.

Dan,
You are absolutely right, there are many others and for that matter I have dealt with and probably been shilled by many of them. Since names were named Andy Imperato a major player with Grey Flannel collectibles, went on his own and has his own auction house. Seems like Jerry Zuckerman was his(Alleged) personal shill in many of his auctions. Then you have Joe Esposito a person who has been called "One of the good guys" and has been talked about in an archive thread 10 years ago as having his auctions shilled (alleged). Big ebay presence I believe B+E collectibles. etc etc. But as for Peter and I am done with him and talking about him, he can live with himself and do what ever he pleases. Im just glad thru PMs from many people that I was not alone in my thoughts about the subject....

[Duluth Eskimo]

I don't want to fuel the fire as I appreciate the fact that Peter came forward early on and admitted fault and described the situation. For those that were not in the hobby then, although I did not participate in this action and have only auctioned one item through an AH, I can tell you this was very common during that era and today. Everyone wanted that BIG money, but no one wanted to sell their item without a reserve. Not that I agree with it, just a fact.

The one thing I think Al is referring to is that the change in the story smells a little. As someone who hears a lot of stories in my career, it sounded like this to me also.

My immediate thought was, why change the story? To me, it reads like you are deflecting the crime. As an attorney you take an oath, and an action you initially described could land an attorney in front of an ethics board or be sanctioned.

In the land of baseball cards and memorabilia, it's no big deal and just wording. Although, in the real world the consequences could be very great. I may be mistaken and could be off course, but either way it's your explanation.

Others mentioned as I did in an earlier post, this was only two years of disclosed records from one auction house. If you think that list was long, the truth in the hobby would probably scare the hell out of the common collector. Most "veterans" assumed this was the case in most of these "big" auctions.

What Peter is "admitting" doing or participating in is the equivalent of speeding at the Indy 500. I haven't seen anyone even attempting to clear their name from these incidents when they would normally be on the board answering a question within the hour. Although, it's hard to explain the unexplainable.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

What Peter is "admitting" doing or participating in is the equivalent of speeding at the Indy 500. I haven't seen anyone even attempting to clear their name from these incidents when they would normally be on the board answering a question within the hour. Although, it's hard to explain the unexplainable.

Exactly. Where is JC Clarke who had been very active on this forum previous to this list coming out? Where is Ken Goldin who quite clearly is reading this? Can we get a statement from Huggins & Scott on the current employment of Jay Dyer who features very prominently on that list.

And let's not fool ourselves, every one of those SOB's on the wrong side of the list who isn't already in prison is following this thread very closely.

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Exactly. Where is JC Clarke who had been very active on this forum previous to this list coming out? Where is Ken Goldin who quite clearly is reading this? Can we get a statement from Huggins & Scott on the current employment of Jay Dyer who features very prominently on that list.

And let's not fool ourselves, every one of those SOB's on the wrong side of the list who isn't already in prison is following this thread very closely.

Dan,
Glad I wasnt the only one who named REAL names!!! And yes Peter if they come on and explain themselves I will also ask questions and be the same SOB I was to you...

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

When I see one of those "Let's share an auction lot" posts on Net54 I feel like that also falls under collusion.

I don't agree, Dan. If I only want part of a lot, I'm going to bid knowing that finding a buyer for what I don't want may take some time, and that I may not get near what I need. But if I know beforehand that, effectively, I've got those pieces sold, I most likely will feel free to bid a bit higher. (And that goes for my "partners." Their knowing that they are getting what they want, with the other pieces pre-sold, as it were, enables them to go higher for their particular bit.)

[Rickyy]

[QUOTE=Kenny Cole;1497580]I have tried to stay out thus far. I am now unsuccessful. I am not on either list simply because I didn't' win one of those auctions. I was probably one of those legitimate bidders who bid Ryan up at the same time the auction house or consignor/friend was doing that. We have similar interests. Even by losing, I screwed my friend.

I get all the stuff about altering the price point of the PSA 8 card and whatnot. Blah, blah, blah. Its wonderful to have the best card ever and I am certain that getting that 8.5 so you can drop that ratty 8 is exhilarating. Its just the shits when you find out you paid substantially more than you would have had things been honest. Yawn.

But to me, it is much more basic. Ryan won a lot we probably both bid on. It cost him more than it should have, because neither one of us knew we were both being cheated to begin with. I probably beat him on one of the other auctions that have no bidding records that was also shilled.

QUOTE]

+1 on that... it's just plain wrong to bid on something for reasons other than because you want that item...by someone coming in with nefarious intentions ends up screwing us all...

Ricky Yoneda

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

I don't agree, Dan. If I only want part of a lot, I'm going to bid knowing that finding a buyer for what I don't want may take some time, and that I may not get near what I need. But if I know beforehand that, effectively, I've got those pieces sold, I most likely will feel free to bid a bit higher. (And that goes for my "partners." Their knowing that they are getting what they want, with the other pieces pre-sold, as it were, enables them to go higher for their particular bit.)

David,
I also dont fell that it falls under collusion. But I always said to myself when someone would post up and say hay lets partner up on this lot. And as we know many AHs look at net 54 all the time and I always said to myself wow what a wonderful way to shill up a lot that you already know has a group of buyers if one wanted to if you get what I mean!!!!!

[Exhibitman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman
Your posts ARE confusing; don't sell yourself short.

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

ah and your posts really add value and people thank you for their posts...I guess my last post wasn't confusing for you to comment..

I know I will be confused if you actually post something that people in the hobby would value when commenting to me.


and no. posts about .fake 1952 Topps Mantle and Wagners on ebay do not count if you go there...
.

You have no sense of humor...

[Rickyy]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

I guess they think they are living in Nazi Germany.

Or Pyongyang....

Ricky Yoneda

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

I don't agree, Dan. If I only want part of a lot, I'm going to bid knowing that finding a buyer for what I don't want may take some time, and that I may not get near what I need. But if I know beforehand that, effectively, I've got those pieces sold, I most likely will feel free to bid a bit higher. (And that goes for my "partners." Their knowing that they are getting what they want, with the other pieces pre-sold, as it were, enables them to go higher for their particular bit.)

There was a thread on here early last year which was started by the same Net54 member who started this thread in which he and another bidder agreed to partner up on a lot of rare Topps Hocus Focus cards. The lot sold for $10,000 and there was poor communication between the two partners and the division of the lot did not happen right away. This of course angered the guy who sat out of the bidding and he stated that he would have gone $20,000 on the lot. It all worked out in the end as one guy went on an extended vacation. But the point of all of this is that those two guys getting together on that lot clearly worked in their favor to keep the price down.

Does it always work that way? No, and I have no statistics to show which outcome is more prevalent. I understand why people do it on lots though, it has to be frustrating to see the one card you've been pining for in a lot of stuff that you don't want or need.

[ElCabron]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Where is JC Clarke who had been very active on this forum previous to this list coming out? Where is Ken Goldin who quite clearly is reading this? Can we get a statement from Huggins & Scott on the current employment of Jay Dyer who features very prominently on that list.

JC deserves his own thread here, considering he was an active member for so many years. Please explain yourself, JC. Some of the people you cheated out of their money are board members. Do you still consider yourself a member of net54? (He is definitely reading this thread, btw)

More importantly, a lot of these scumbags are still in business today. Who would still do business with Ken Goldin or Kevin Keating? Lots of you. That's why none of these guys will get any consequences for any of their fraudulent activities, other than getting rich.

There are a lot of misunderstandings and incorrect beliefs about the list. Maybe we can clear some of that up at some point. I think it would really help people get a better understanding about all of this and stop pushing for it to be swept under the rug like it's no big deal.

-Ryan

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

There was a thread on here early last year which was started by the same Net54 member who started this thread in which he and another bidder agreed to partner up on a lot of rare Topps Hocus Focus cards. The lot sold for $10,000 and there was poor communication between the two partners and the division of the lot did not happen right away. This of course angered the guy who sat out of the bidding and he stated that he would have gone $20,000 on the lot. It all worked out in the end as one guy went on an extended vacation. But the point of all of this is that those two guys getting together on that lot clearly worked in their favor to keep the price down.

Does it always work that way? No, and I have no statistics to show which outcome is more prevalent. I understand why people do it on lots though, it has to be frustrating to see the one card you've been pining for in a lot of stuff that you don't want or need.

At least they have located the card they need. Splitting a lot at the lowest price possible, through collusion, allows them each to get the one or two cards they want, plus make a larger profit when they re-sell the rest of the lot, than if they had simply bid on it fairly. The only one who loses is the consignor.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Runscott

At least they have located the card they need. Splitting a lot at the lowest price possible, through collusion, allows them each to get the one or two cards they want, plus make a larger profit when they re-sell the rest of the lot, than if they had simply bid on it fairly. The only one who loses is the consignor.

I would say there is more than one loser in that story.

[sflayank]

Splitting a lot has nothing to do with shill bidding
If theres a lot of yankees and dodgers and i collect yankees and my brother collects dodgers should we bid against each other?...thats a ridiculous comparison.
Thats why ive railed on people who put in max bids as idiots...bid once and then bid at the end..if you put in a max bid....u might not deserve to get screwed but u will...
If youre famous or well known major collector bid under your cousins name and address so the ah doesnt know u

[xplainer]

This thread makes another turn. Wow.

[sflayank]

And btw...has any one on t his board figured out why these auction houses wont go to the 15 minute rule per lot?
ITS TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PUT IN MAX BIDS SO THEY DONT HAVE TO STAY UP TIL 4AM.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by sflayank

And btw...has any one on t his board figured out why these auction houses wont go to the 15 minute rule per lot?
ITS TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PUT IN MAX BIDS SO THEY DONT HAVE TO STAY UP TIL 4AM.

I get why houses close all at once. It helps bring in more bids. Plenty of times I've reached my limit on one item so I fell back to another I was watching or put an early bid in on. If those would have happened to close early the house and consignor lose money.

[sflayank]

its a total fallacy...if the auction house rules were 15 minutes per lot or even 30 minutes per lot all the bidders would know that and bid accordingly....they want you to go to sleep and put in a max bid.....PERIOD...

[sbfinley]

I disagree, but hey it's a great country and we're allowed to.

[begsu1013]

i don't even think garmin could navigate this thread w/o a hefty dose of tylenol, but could someone transcribe a list of those who have stepped up and commented on their actions for me?

not asking whether you believe or even liked what they had to say, simply of those that had the balls to actually log in and post.

just curious to see how short the list is.

thanks in advance.

"recalculating"

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by begsu1013

i don't even think garmin could navigate this thread w/o a hefty dose of tylenol, but could someone transcribe a list of those who have stepped up and commented on their actions for me?

not asking whether you believe or even liked what they had to say, simply of those that had the balls to actually log in and post.

just curious to see how short the list is.

thanks in advance.

"recalculating"

Shilling in the name of...

[begsu1013]

that was a good one!

i actually thought about posting it, but did not think anyone on here would actually get it.

i'd speculate that the median age of the board members here was probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 53...

which basically rules them out of knowing anything about rage against the machine.

bulls on a parade, i guess.

[ullmandds]

im 46

[begsu1013]

38 1/2.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by sflayank

Splitting a lot has nothing to do with shill bidding
If theres a lot of yankees and dodgers and i collect yankees and my brother collects dodgers should we bid against each other?...thats a ridiculous comparison.
Thats why ive railed on people who put in max bids as idiots...bid once and then bid at the end..if you put in a max bid....u might not deserve to get screwed but u will...
If youre famous or well known major collector bid under your cousins name and address so the ah doesnt know u

Thanks for laying all that knowledge on us.