PWCC vault?

[Dpeck100]

It was in this article


https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidse.../#2b0cba6d22fa


Here is my post


Let me first say I am a big fan of PWCC and really feel they have done a great job in the trading card market. I used to marvel when I would see their listings on EBAY and it took a few years to realize they weren't actually the one's who owned all of the awesome cards they were selling. I have purchased from them many times and feel they are miles ahead of other major EBAY sellers and their great results speak for themselves.

This quote from the article caught my eye and has me pondering whether or not this is a good idea.

In several cases, Huigens steered him away from the cards PWCC was selling: “I prefer you focus on slightly higher grades where the eye appeal is less volatile and the market is more stable,” he wrote him about an early Bowman Mickey Mantle in off-condition.

My first take is that this is a conflict of interest. When you have someone list your card the goal is to achieve the highest selling price. If the person selling it for you is talking buyers out of bidding on your card it can work against the final selling price as less buyers are in the market for it. I feel that this is kind of like a listing agent in real estate talking you out of the house they are selling. Their first priority is to the person whose home or in this case card that they are representing. I do think it is a great concept when dealing with others sellers cards and another value add that PWCC is trying to offer.

Curious what others think about it.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

It was in this article


https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidse.../#2b0cba6d22fa


Here is my post


Let me first say I am a big fan of PWCC and really feel they have done a great job in the trading card market. I used to marvel when I would see their listings on EBAY and it took a few years to realize they weren't actually the one's who owned all of the awesome cards they were selling. I have purchased from them many times and feel they are miles ahead of other major EBAY sellers and their great results speak for themselves.

This quote from the article caught my eye and has me pondering whether or not this is a good idea.

In several cases, Huigens steered him away from the cards PWCC was selling: “I prefer you focus on slightly higher grades where the eye appeal is less volatile and the market is more stable,” he wrote him about an early Bowman Mickey Mantle in off-condition.

My first take is that this is a conflict of interest. When you have someone list your card the goal is to achieve the highest selling price. If the person selling it for you is talking buyers out of bidding on your card it can work against the final selling price as less buyers are in the market for it. I feel that this is kind of like a listing agent in real estate talking you out of the house they are selling. Their first priority is to the person whose home or in this case card that they are representing. I do think it is a great concept when dealing with others sellers cards and another value add that PWCC is trying to offer.

Curious what others think about it.

Sure...that's a conflict of interest...and an exhibition of preferential treatment likely in the hopes of making more money from that client at a later date...imo.

Similar to the preferential treatment that may occur on the part of the TPG'ers to their best clients/friends...same as what occurs in the government and in big business on a daily basis.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Money corrupts. Lots of money corrupts, if not absolutely, pretty close to it.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by peter_spaeth

money corrupts. Lots of money corrupts, if not absolutely, pretty close to it.

yup!

[Dpeck100]

Leon if there is full disclosure it is probably fine in some eyes and not in others.

My personal view is I don't think it is a good idea but I have never sent any cards to them to sell so I have no skin in the game.

Offering services like this though will certainly increase the chances of some form of regulation so that should definitely be considered.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

Leon if there is full disclosure it is probably fine in some eyes and not in others.

My personal view is I don't think it is a good idea but I have never sent any cards to them to sell so I have no skin in the game.

Offering services like this though will certainly increase the chances of some form of regulation so that should definitely be considered.

Regulation???? In the baseball card world??? We can’t even get it in big business???

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Regulation???? In the baseball card world??? We can’t even get it in big business???

I am in the securities business and if you are offering investment advice I would think you would need some form of oversight.

[MikeGarcia]

..interesting thread , but every once in a while y'all need to look at a pre-war baseball card.

..

[Leon]

What if PWCC said on the front end that they represent both buyers and sellers interests?

I guess I can imagine telling a friend not to bid on a card I am selling as it isn't the best card for them, given their circumstances and desires? If my specific intent is to be honest, transparent and helpful I don't think there is a problem.

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

It was in this article


https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidse.../#2b0cba6d22fa


Here is my post


Let me first say I am a big fan of PWCC and really feel they have done a great job in the trading card market. I used to marvel when I would see their listings on EBAY and it took a few years to realize they weren't actually the one's who owned all of the awesome cards they were selling. I have purchased from them many times and feel they are miles ahead of other major EBAY sellers and their great results speak for themselves.

This quote from the article caught my eye and has me pondering whether or not this is a good idea.

In several cases, Huigens steered him away from the cards PWCC was selling: “I prefer you focus on slightly higher grades where the eye appeal is less volatile and the market is more stable,” he wrote him about an early Bowman Mickey Mantle in off-condition.

My first take is that this is a conflict of interest. When you have someone list your card the goal is to achieve the highest selling price. If the person selling it for you is talking buyers out of bidding on your card it can work against the final selling price as less buyers are in the market for it. I feel that this is kind of like a listing agent in real estate talking you out of the house they are selling. Their first priority is to the person whose home or in this case card that they are representing. I do think it is a great concept when dealing with others sellers cards and another value add that PWCC is trying to offer.

Curious what others think about it.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

I do think it is a great concept when dealing with others sellers cards and another value add that PWCC is trying to offer.

Curious what others think about it.

If they steer you away from another company's auction, is it because they don't highly recommend that particular card or because they don't want you to put your money in other's auctions but want you to only spend in theirs (PWCC's)? If you are in the auction business, you should not be advising anyone in regards to what auction they should or should not bid in. Honest or not, the perception of a conflict of interest rears its ugly head in any recommendation you might make. If you steer them from your auction, as you've pointed out you are not acting in the best interest of your consignor. If you steer them toward your auction, is it because you're trying to help your (PWCC) bottom line?

Also, what if they have more than one client looking for a particular card? Do they advise them both to go after it in a particular auction knowing that the final hammer price might greatly exceed the current value, or do they tell one client to hold off? If they tell one client to hold off, how do they decide which one?

If they have more than one client looking for a card, what if they can get all of them to not bid in other's auctions, but to wait until they (PWCC) have one in their auction? Just imagine what the final price could be. That would be great for their consignor, wouldn't it? Maybe they are looking out for their consignors after all?

I think the whole concept is terrible.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

If they steer you away from another company's auction, is it because they don't highly recommend that particular card or because they don't want you to put your money in other's auctions but want you to only spend in theirs (PWCC's)? If you are in the auction business, you should not be advising anyone in regards to what auction they should or should not bid in. Honest or not, the perception of a conflict of interest rears its ugly head in any recommendation you might make. If you steer them from your auction, as you've pointed out you are not acting in the best interest of your consignor. If you steer them toward your auction, is it because you're trying to help your (PWCC) bottom line?

Also, what if they have more than one client looking for a particular card? Do they advise them both to go after it in a particular auction knowing that the final hammer price might greatly exceed the current value, or do they tell one client to hold off? If they tell one client to hold off, how do they decide which one?

If they have more than one client looking for a card, what if they can get all of them to not bid in other's auctions, but to wait until they (PWCC) have one in their auction? Just imagine what the final price could be. That would be great for their consignor, wouldn't it? Maybe they are looking out for their consignors after all?

I think the whole concept is terrible.

I think you raise some excellent points.

The hurdle for conflict of interest is much lower I believe if there card investment advisor's that are helping you build a card "portfolio" are telling you to buy a card in say a Heritage auction or some other marketer rather than their own.