ebay finds that PWCC engaged in shill bidding?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'm changing my assessment based on real time information, that is the 120 bid which I presume to be in good faith. This isn't rocket science and my thinking is not convoluted at all.

In your example, the shill bidder is signalling the asset is worth $120. YOU are the one coming up with the $130 price.

It is convoluted to say $130 from a dealer (also a real-time offer) is too high, but the same price for the same item is not.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

In your example, the shill bidder is signalling the asset is worth $120. YOU are the one coming up with the $130 price.

It is convoluted to say $130 from a dealer (also a real-time offer) is too high, but the same price for the same item is not.

Once I see the 120 bid, I am indifferent between winning the auction or the BIN. You are unfairly comparing my views in different timeframes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

In your example, the shill bidder is signalling the asset is worth $120. YOU are the one coming up with the $130 price.

It is convoluted to say $130 from a dealer (also a real-time offer) is too high, but the same price for the same item is not.

Shorthand for the next bid level. I wouldn't mind paying a few percent over what I thought was unmanipulated market, but would mind paying 30 percent over, which is what the 130 represented prior to the bid.

[Exhibitman]

Here's how grotesque and blatant it was:



These are three alleged sales of Floyd Mayweather's RC. The exact same serial #'d card. Not only are the prices vastly different, and all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them, note the offering dates: every two months like clockwork.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Here's how grotesque and blatant it was:



These are three alleged sales of Floyd Mayweather's RC. The exact same serial #'d card. Not only are the prices vastly different, and all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them, note the offering dates: every two months like clockwork.

Wow Awful.... Great Work.

One should ask which sale was real? I say none of them were real. Check their new platform to see if it shows up.

Hucksters

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Here's how grotesque and blatant it was:



These are three alleged sales of Floyd Mayweather's RC. The exact same serial #'d card. Not only are the prices vastly different, and all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them, note the offering dates: every two months like clockwork.

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

It's too bad you weren't around in 2016, you would have been defending all the BS that people were defending back then and they turned out to be completely wrong.

[5-Tool Player]

PWCC = sinking ship

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It's too bad you weren't around in 2016, you would have been defending all the BS that people were defending back then and they turned out to be completely wrong.

I'm not saying that PWCC is innocent of all these accusations against them. And frankly, I find the owner to be very off-putting. All I'm saying here is that from a data abnormality perspective, there is nothing fishy about those 3 sales.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'm not saying that PWCC is innocent of all these accusations against them. And frankly, I find the owner to be very off-putting. All I'm saying here is that from a data abnormality perspective, there is nothing fishy about those 3 sales.

That's because it flies in the face of how most people act. The typical buyer gets absolutely married to their purchase price (even though that shouldn't have anything to do with any future decision about if/when sell, except for tax purposes).

And the biggest psychological basis of that marriage is not taking a loss. Especially a noticeable one in a short period of time. It's actually kinda fascinating, how if something is likely going from $40 to $1, the person who paid 30 for it is happy to sell (while the one who paid 60 will probably hold on w/ blind hope). Even though all that matters at that point is what will happen in the future. Anyway, I digress....

This is why I find those sales suspect. Sure it's highly circumstantial evidence, but it's hard to believe that two consecutive people immediately dumped something that they just bought in the next available auction. It's not really a spot where a panic from the market dropping dictates someone's frame of mind as much.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

Come on…..please. You’d have to be a complete idiot with cards of this kind of money if you’re doing this taking loss after loss of this magnitude in such short periods of time. I can’t think of many people that stupid to immediately sell when they could hold it and wait it out… I’m sorry nah I don’t buy it for one second.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

Yikes. That take seems almost impossible to believe. After everything that has come out regarding PWCC being a clearinghouse for trimmed cards, telling a bidder to take the high bid because he will not win the auction and now the proof of shill bidding, there are still people out there defending PWCC and arguing there is nothing to see?

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

Twice, in four months? Do you really believe that two separate sellers aware of the pricing trends each panicked? Do you know anyone who behaves like that? Or maybe it is because after the $11K+ 'sale' someone bought one for $7700+ from PWCC Vault, followed two weeks later by the second 'sale' of this one at $5100 and the 'sale' two months later of the same card at $4861.90. I see an effort to pump up the card in order to sell other ones.

But why speculate on why there is such a strange trend PSA reports when we can go to PWCC directly for their archive of sales of the Mayweather card? So I did:



Guess what? Our friend #18931022 shows as sold by PWCC on February 24 and June 26. Whatever happened to the April sale through eBay that PSA lists? Maybe, and this is just a hypothetical, maybe it never actually sold in April?

[japhi]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't see anything fishy at all about these sales. The selling prices are in line with what I would expect to see given the dates. In Feb, the market was twice as high as it is now. That 11k price lines up perfectly with the peak of the market. Someone bought in at the wrong time, then panicked and sold when the market crashed. And the sale dates line up perfectly with PWCC's monthly auctions. These look like normal sales to me.

My guess is the first sale was rigged, second guy thought he was getting a steal, went to flip it and the market said, ya that's a 5K card.

I suspect there were some BS BIN's leading up to the first sale.

In case anyone is wondering how this racket works, there is a pattern; a few BIN's get hit leading up to a PWCC auction. Those BIN's are to set a baseline. The PWCC card closes at a price higher then the BIN's and voila the hobby has a new baseline for that card. All you need is a multiple copies and a few friends and you can drive prices up substantially.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by japhi

My guess is the first sale was rigged, second guy thought he was getting a steal, went to flip it and the market said, ya that's a 5K card.

I suspect there were some BS BIN's leading up to the first sale.

In case anyone is wondering how this racket works, there is a pattern; a few BIN's get hit leading up to a PWCC auction. Those BIN's are to set a baseline. The PWCC card closes at a price higher then the BIN's and voila the hobby has a new baseline for that card. All you need is a multiple copies and a few friends and you can drive prices up substantially.

Hyping them up on a forum with a brother or friend(s) seems to help substantially with the above. or so I have heard

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by japhi

My guess is the first sale was rigged, second guy thought he was getting a steal, went to flip it and the market said, ya that's a 5K card.

I suspect there were some BS BIN's leading up to the first sale.

In case anyone is wondering how this racket works, there is a pattern; a few BIN's get hit leading up to a PWCC auction. Those BIN's are to set a baseline. The PWCC card closes at a price higher then the BIN's and voila the hobby has a new baseline for that card. All you need is a multiple copies and a few friends and you can drive prices up substantially.

Even if they were able to succeed in doing this for x number of cards (and I fully acknowledge that this does in fact occur), it's still artificial demand and economic theory tells us that the market will adjust. The market as a whole, or even sub segments of it, is just far too big for it to be manipulated by a handful or even hundreds of transactions. Do people get scammed? Yes, for sure. Daily. But the broader market stabilizes to meet supply and demand.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Even if they were able to succeed in doing this for x number of cards (and I fully acknowledge that this does in fact occur), it's still artificial demand and economic theory tells us that the market will adjust. The market as a whole, or even sub segments of it, is just far too big for it to be manipulated by a handful or even hundreds of transactions. Do people get scammed? Yes, for sure. Daily. But the broader market stabilizes to meet supply and demand.

If you look at 2016, it seemed there was a price umbrella effect from the cards that were clearly manipulated resulting in increases across a wider spectrum of cards. Whether ultimately the market adjusts really doesn't lessen the pernicious effect of manipulation, especially in a market where information is so critical and where FOMO, maybe more than in other markets, is huge.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Even if they were able to succeed in doing this for x number of cards (and I fully acknowledge that this does in fact occur), it's still artificial demand and economic theory tells us that the market will adjust. The market as a whole, or even sub segments of it, is just far too big for it to be manipulated by a handful or even hundreds of transactions. Do people get scammed? Yes, for sure. Daily. But the broader market stabilizes to meet supply and demand.

The market for even the highest traded cards is miniscule. The PSA 10 Jordan trades what 50 times a year and there are multiple guys with 10+ of them.

Wake me up when a popular card trades more then a thousand times per day. Of course hundreds of transactions can manipulate a card price when that card only trades a thousand times per year.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Here's how grotesque and blatant it was:



These are three alleged sales of Floyd Mayweather's RC. The exact same serial #'d card. Not only are the prices vastly different, and all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them, note the offering dates: every two months like clockwork.

I just looked into this further since I'm basically being called an idiot for my statement regarding these not looking fishy at all from a data perspective.

You state that these sales are "all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them". This is not true. These sales are all very much in line with the other sales for this card. I looked up all sales of this card in any grade going back to November 2020 on both Terapeak and PWCC's Market Research Tool. The list below is comprehensive. Every sale in this dataset lines up with market expectations. Also worth noting is that the middle sale of the 3 in your post above is absent in both eBay's Terapeak research tool and PWCC's research tool, which generally implies that it was not paid for. Perhaps that listing was shill bid by the person who previously bought it for 11k? Who knows. But it makes perfect sense for it to be listed again if whoever bought it did not pay for it.

Note the sale of another PSA 9 by some random ebay seller on June 5th, just 3 weeks before the most recent sale of the 3 you posted. It sold for $5911 at auction, but there were at least FOUR unique bidders all of whom placed a bid north of $5k in that auction. The one you say was "far above actual sales contemporarenous" to this one sold just 3 weeks later in the same PSA 9 grade (but with an older style slab) for $4861.90 at auction with PWCC.

Here are the sales of this card. All of these line up perfectly with expectations given the market trends we've seen throughout 2021.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I just looked into this further since I'm basically being called an idiot for my statement regarding these not looking fishy at all from a data perspective.

You state that these sales are "all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them". This is not true. These sales are all very much in line with the other sales for this card. I looked up all sales of this card in any grade going back to November 2020 on both Terapeak and PWCC's Market Research Tool. The list below is comprehensive. Every sale in this dataset lines up with market expectations. Also worth noting is that the middle sale of the 3 in your post above is absent in both eBay's Terapeak research tool and PWCC's research tool, which generally implies that it was not paid for. Perhaps that listing was shill bid by the person who previously bought it for 11k? Who knows. But it makes perfect sense for it to be listed again if whoever bought it did not pay for it.

Note the sale of another PSA 9 by some random ebay seller on June 5th, just 3 weeks before the most recent sale of the 3 you posted. It sold for $5911 at auction, but there were at least FOUR unique bidders all of whom placed a bid north of $5k in that auction. The one you say was "far above actual sales contemporarenous" to this one sold just 3 weeks later in the same PSA 9 grade (but with an older style slab) for $4861.90 at auction with PWCC.

Here are the sales of this card. All of these line up perfectly with expectations given the market trends we've seen throughout 2021.

From the data perspective I’m not arguing with you However it’s not the goal of somebody who owns this card to continue to lose money of this magnitude in a such short period of time that’s what doesn’t make sense to me it just doesn’t.

I’m sorry you can run the current market date numbers for that time however you want it just doesn’t make sense for someone to buy that card selling it so quickly just to lose and lose and lose month after month. I’m sorry they got greedy plain and simple. They pushed the issues doubled down trying to get more more and more, it backfired and bit them in the ass, That’s how I see it.

Yeah that’s my take I’m not calling you an idiot I think you’re actually very intelligent. However I don’t buy this in any way shape or form for this particular card by this particular Seller in this particular time frame I’m being very specific.

[maniac_73]

So you mean the random explosion in prices for mass produced tennis cards and obscure professional wrestling cards isn't legit? Once again, Im shocked

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

So you mean the random explosion in prices for mass produced tennis cards and obscure professional wrestling cards isn't legit? Once again, Im shocked

[Oscar_Stanage]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I just looked into this further since I'm basically being called an idiot for my statement regarding these not looking fishy at all from a data perspective.

You state that these sales are "all far above actual sales contemporaneous to them". This is not true. These sales are all very much in line with the other sales for this card. I looked up all sales of this card in any grade going back to November 2020 on both Terapeak and PWCC's Market Research Tool. The list below is comprehensive. Every sale in this dataset lines up with market expectations. Also worth noting is that the middle sale of the 3 in your post above is absent in both eBay's Terapeak research tool and PWCC's research tool, which generally implies that it was not paid for. Perhaps that listing was shill bid by the person who previously bought it for 11k? Who knows. But it makes perfect sense for it to be listed again if whoever bought it did not pay for it.

Note the sale of another PSA 9 by some random ebay seller on June 5th, just 3 weeks before the most recent sale of the 3 you posted. It sold for $5911 at auction, but there were at least FOUR unique bidders all of whom placed a bid north of $5k in that auction. The one you say was "far above actual sales contemporarenous" to this one sold just 3 weeks later in the same PSA 9 grade (but with an older style slab) for $4861.90 at auction with PWCC.

Here are the sales of this card. All of these line up perfectly with expectations given the market trends we've seen throughout 2021.

I agree with you. many cards followed the pattern of peaking in Feb/March and then dropping by 50% in June.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Wid_Conroy

I agree with you. many cards followed the pattern of peaking in Feb/March and then dropping by 50% in June.

Because they were shilled? What makes more sense? Someone buys a card and sells it for half a few months later then the second buyer sells it for 20% less. Or the first auction is shilled and never paid for, the second auction is shilled and never paid for and then the third auction results in a sale (or not). The later is what happened in 2016, why wouldn't it be the same in 2021?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Because they were shilled? What makes more sense? Someone buys a card and sells it for half a few months later then the second buyer sells it for 20% less. Or the first auction is shilled and never paid for, the second auction is shilled and never paid for and then the third auction results in a sale (or not). The later is what happened in 2016, why wouldn't it be the same in 2021?

The alleged sellers realized even less than that after fees if those sales are real.
Yeah, real likely.
But defenders will defend, that's what they did then, that's what they do now.

Imagine if he gets indicted, what will they say then?

[Oscar_Stanage]

Originally Posted by rats60

Because they were shilled? What makes more sense? Someone buys a card and sells it for half a few months later then the second buyer sells it for 20% less. Or the first auction is shilled and never paid for, the second auction is shilled and never paid for and then the third auction results in a sale (or not). The later is what happened in 2016, why wouldn't it be the same in 2021?

no. I actually think the example posted looks like a lot of marquee cards over that same period. Shilling is clearly a problem, but the example posted just looked like normal activity to me.