ebay finds that PWCC engaged in shill bidding?

[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?

[Peter_Spaeth]

This is the Blowout thread on PWCC cards supposedly not paid for I referenced the other day.

I probably posted it here a long time ago but worth another look in light of the recent ebay claim.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1307889

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is the Blowout thread on PWCC cards supposedly not paid for I referenced the other day.

I probably posted it here a long time ago but worth another look in light of the recent ebay claim.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1307889

This is precisely the sort of analysis that drove me nuts over at the Blowhard forums. Somehow, someone thinks they can "prove" that they've discovered a way to uncover this damning list of manipulated transactions because they found cards on PWCC's research tool but those cards were absent on eBay's. There's a huge problem with this assumption though. eBay's data integrity is absolute garbage to begin with. I deal with data integrity issues every day at work. It's an extremely important aspect of a data scientist's job. Every company has these issues. You can't just assume that what pops up in eBay's market price research tool is comprehensive of anything, and the same with PWCC's tool. You can't look at the intersection of those two datasets and start making conclusions like this about the missing links. There's often no rhyme or reason to which cards get listed as "sold", which ones get removed or flagged, when the ones that do get removed actually get removed, etc. Just go look through your own eBay purchases and try to see which ones you can find through their market research tool and PWCC's research tool. You will find missing sales. It is extremely common.

These sorts of threads are tattooed all over the place at Blowhard. Then the subsequent posts are just an avalanche of praise from people who just gobble this nonsense up. "Oh wow! Great work detective!"

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying shill bidding doesn't happen on the regular with PWCC consignors, or that some of these cards weren't paid for. I'm just saying that this list isn't what you think it is. The primary conclusions from that thread are not valid. Also, just because an item wasn't paid for doesn't mean it was because of shill bidding.

Here's a prime example from my own collection. And this is for a 52 Topps Mickey Mantle no less. I bought this card on eBay from PWCC on 07/22/2021 for $45k. But it doesn't show up in eBay's market pricing tool. Yet I assure you, it was paid for and is currently in my possession.

Same with some of my other recent purchases. I bought 3 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan SGC 9 rookie cards, all on eBay from PWCC. But only 2 of the 3 show up. Why is that? Again, all were paid for and all are in my possession.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You know best. I am sure it means nothing. I am sure what DeLorme (who was in the thick of it) told me about what was going on was contrived as well. Just data set errors, nothing to see here. And just a huge fortuity that it coincides with a period when Brent acknowledged a group of people were "pushing" the market and reported prices were surging to unheard of levels. And just a coincidence that the seller is PWCC and not someone else.

Next..... nothing to see here.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You know best. I am sure it means nothing. I am sure what DeLorme told me about what was going on was contrived as well.

There might very well be all sorts of shenanigans going on at PWCC. I'm not defending them. I'm merely pointing out that this list proves nothing. Then, I demonstrated why with an example from my own purchases.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

There might very well be all sorts of shenanigans going on at PWCC. I'm not defending them. I'm merely pointing out that this list proves nothing. Then, I demonstrated why with an example from my own purchases.

The list strongly supports what some know from other sources what was going on. Your semantics are meaningless.

Anyone can look at almost anything and hypothesize another explanation. So what? In context, what's the most likely explanation for all these apparently unsold items? A database error?

Oh and BTW a number of the recurring IDs identified are the same people Brent acknowledged were trying to push the market. Must be an innocuous explanation for that too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

There might very well be all sorts of shenanigans going on at PWCC. I'm not defending them. I'm merely pointing out that this list proves nothing. Then, I demonstrated why with an example from my own purchases.

Of course you're defending them. Every piece of evidence against them, you are trying to rebut. Oh, wait, it's just an academic exercise.

[Wite3]

Originally Posted by Snowman

There might very well be all sorts of shenanigans going on at PWCC. I'm not defending them. I'm merely pointing out that this list proves nothing. Then, I demonstrated why with an example from my own purchases.

What if I told you that the data points you provide from your own purchases could have been shilled and you overpaid due to that bidding practice? It sounds like you are trying to prop up your own recent purchases now.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is precisely the sort of analysis that drove me nuts over at the Blowhard forums. Somehow, someone thinks they can "prove" that they've discovered a way to uncover this damning list of manipulated transactions because they found cards on PWCC's research tool but those cards were absent on eBay's. There's a huge problem with this assumption though. eBay's data integrity is absolute garbage to begin with. I deal with data integrity issues every day at work. It's an extremely important aspect of a data scientist's job. Every company has these issues. You can't just assume that what pops up in eBay's market price research tool is comprehensive of anything, and the same with PWCC's tool. You can't look at the intersection of those two datasets and start making conclusions like this about the missing links. There's often no rhyme or reason to which cards get listed as "sold", which ones get removed or flagged, when the ones that do get removed actually get removed, etc. Just go look through your own eBay purchases and try to see which ones you can find through their market research tool and PWCC's research tool. You will find missing sales. It is extremely common.

These sorts of threads are tattooed all over the place at Blowhard. Then the subsequent posts are just an avalanche of praise from people who just gobble this nonsense up. "Oh wow! Great work detective!"

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying shill bidding doesn't happen on the regular with PWCC consignors, or that some of these cards weren't paid for. I'm just saying that this list isn't what you think it is. The primary conclusions from that thread are not valid. Also, just because an item wasn't paid for doesn't mean it was because of shill bidding.

Here's a prime example from my own collection. And this is for a 52 Topps Mickey Mantle no less. I bought this card on eBay from PWCC on 07/22/2021 for $45k. But it doesn't show up in eBay's market pricing tool. Yet I assure you, it was paid for and is currently in my possession.

Same with some of my other recent purchases. I bought 3 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan SGC 9 rookie cards, all on eBay from PWCC. But only 2 of the 3 show up. Why is that? Again, all were paid for and all are in my possession.

Boy, no wonder you apologize and are on Brent Mastro's Schwanz with every post. 45 K, He hammered you like a red headed step child. You must have not had a clue he was crook, criminal, lying loser...or you still did business with a known criminal anyway. Good for you. Enjoy your A** pounding Just send that one back to him and he'll have it a PSA 6, just like he probably promised you.

[MattyC]

Always nice to see a discussion degenerate into ad hominem attacks criticizing what a collector chooses to pay for a piece he wants.

[jingram058]

I'm probably committing net54 Hara Kiri here, but here goes...

Leon, are you watching this thread? I have watched this entire diatribe play out. I have stated this before on multiple occasions when I have become frustrated, but I have to ask, is this a card collecting forum or a card and memorabilia investment brokerage?

Sure, I could just go away. I have done that on occasion. But being a relative newby to these pre-war cards, and not being a multi-millionaire many times over, I just would like to talk about the cards. Have I come to the wrong place?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Boy, no wonder you apologize and are on Brent Mastro's Schwanz with every post. 45 K, He hammered you like a red headed step child. You must have not had a clue he was crook, criminal, lying loser...or you still did business with a known criminal anyway. Good for you. Enjoy your A** pounding Just send that one back to him and he'll have it a PSA 6, just like he probably promised you.

Snowman gives an actual example of a card he won on ebay, that shows up in one data set but not another, and brings that point into the discussion. To me, that is constructive to an honest dialogue.

Why do you feel a need to rip him for doing so?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Boy, no wonder you apologize and are on Brent Mastro's Schwanz with every post. 45 K, He hammered you like a red headed step child. You must have not had a clue he was crook, criminal, lying loser...or you still did business with a known criminal anyway. Good for you. Enjoy your A** pounding Just send that one back to him and he'll have it a PSA 6, just like he probably promised you.

Nobody took advantage of me. I wasn't shill bid on this card. I made an offer for less than what I felt the card was worth to me. The seller accepted my offer. I love the card and am more than happy with the price I paid. Feel free to berate me ale my purchasing decisions though if you dislike me. I don't mind.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Nobody took advantage of me. I wasn't shill bid on this card. I made an offer for less than what I felt the card was worth to me. The seller accepted my offer. I love the card and am more than happy with the price I paid. Feel free to berate me ale my purchasing decisions though if you dislike me. I don't mind.

Yup, super wrong in my eyes as a collector seeing someone called out like you've been for what you paid for a piece of cardboard.
It's a beautiful Mantle I hope you enjoy as long as you hold on to it, and the price you paid is for you to be comfortable with and only you.

I find your line of thinking interesting, though perhaps you're underplaying/undervaluing the effect of pump and dump.....
It's not just the 'outlier' high price paid for a shilled item that can falsely alter market value for a collectable, but the effect of todays sports forums online and on social media which pile on to the event.
When collectors discuss/post their feelings, both positive and negative, but often with a sense of excitement about that result, it fuels many buyers into that FOMO anxiety.
So without being completely sure themselves, a buyer who doesn't own a copy of a card they really desire may move out of their comfort zone purely because that FOMO suggests the opportunity may permanently disappear from their affordability or manageability.

Only takes 2 or 3 bidders each time, and the ones who are underbidders form the floor at the next auction and tend to bid to AT LEAST where they were on the losing auction, sometimes a little over.
Now further collector eyes see multiple auctions reaching a 'new' seemingly authentic bidder level and it resolves in their minds whether the original result was fairly achieved.

I understand your overall point, and that is that regardless of the above if collectors are willing to pay a new and inflated price, or fall away after a couple of auctions and the item finds once again it's previous selling point, the collectable is finding a longer term number that is considered it's value.

Fair in the way it gets there?
Probs not. But same thing happens in property and other assets, and if your pockets are deep enough it only really matters what YOU are willing to pay.
You see actors and famous people all the time selling uber expensive property they bought top of market for millions less than they paid, and I rarely feel sorry for them.
I own cards I've similarly paid up big time for, especially some modern stuff like Mahomes, and if it falls in to a pit I just accept I was the idiot willing to risk funds for a speculative piece of cardboard.

The anger pointed at your posts are unwarranted IMO, presuming you are not acting in bad faith at the behest of the bad actors.
No reason as I read it to believe that, so feel free to intellectualize as much as you like I say.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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?

I will do business with him till he goes away and again as soon as he gets out. He is a great guy and his auctions bring the most money.

[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.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Wid_Conroy

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.

Do you routinely sell cards you bought at 50% of what you paid? If this is normal activity to you, post your buys on here. I am sure there are members here who would save you fees at take them off your hands at half what you just paid.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Do you routinely sell cards you bought at 50% of what you paid? If this is normal activity to you, post your buys on here. I am sure there are members here who would save you fees at take them off your hands at half what you just paid.

If the first sale of the Mayweather was real, and the buyer consigned it back to PWCC, then assuming a 10 percent fee on the second sale, the buyer lost close to 60 percent. Nothing unusual to see though.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If the first sale of the Mayweather was real, and the buyer consigned it back to PWCC, then assuming a 10 percent fee on the second sale, the buyer lost close to 60 percent. Nothing unusual to see though.

While I realize, or at least assume, you're being facetious, I think you've hit on the disconnect. It really is nothing unusual to see here. This stuff happens all the time. You really don't think there are people out there who bought high and them panic sell when the market is crashing? Lol. Come on. Normally I'd think someone was joking with a comment like that, but reading through this thread, I don't think you guys are joking. It happens constantly in the crypto community. Every time bitcoin falls, some sizeable percentage of people panic sell. It's actually one of causes of steep declines and added volatility. The sports card market is no different. People buy high and sell low every day on eBay. Particularly the flippers. Just go check out Instagram and Podcasters and the YouTube community of all these "investors" and "flippers". It's also when I do most of my buying. When the market "crashed" after the Feb/Mar peaks, I started buying like crazy because so many people were panic selling.

Also worth pointing out is what card this is. It's a Floyd Mayweather PSA 9 RC. This is the practically the poster child card of the Gen Z flippers/investors/crypto enthusiast type. Alternative sports like boxing, wrestling, tennis, soccer, etc are all the rage with these guys now. And so is keeping their "investments" in a PWCC vault. And they go after the GOATS. This is precisely the type of card I would expect someone like this to buy. I wouldn't even be surprised if the person who paid 11k for that card in Feb at the absolute peak of the market and then panic sold it just 2 months later probably has never even seen a Mayweather fight before in his life.

If you think this is abnormal buying and selling behavior, you're simply just out of touch with a pretty significant faction of the market. This truly is "nothing to see here" activity.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Whatever Travis. Defend away. You could spin a bullet hole through the head I am sure into some ordinary ho hum thing. Talk to me when he's indicted, for now I'm done with this.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whatever Travis. Defend away. You could spin a bullet hole through the head I am sure into some ordinary ho hum thing. Talk to me when he's indicted, for now I'm done with this.

I've read this thread top to bottom and I don't see Travis defending anybody.

He's being logical (as opposed to the pitchfork wielding mob who considers anything other than vilifying PWCC to be sheer heresy.)

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whatever Travis. Defend away. You could spin a bullet hole through the head I am sure into some ordinary ho hum thing. Talk to me when he's indicted, for now I'm done with this.

I'm not defending PWCC or Brent. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see him indicted for shady behavior some day. I'm simply pointing out that these Mayweather card sales are not abnormal buying and selling behavior. If you want to find a zinger that's going to catch this guy, this isn't it.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Whatever Travis. Defend away. You could spin a bullet hole through the head I am sure into some ordinary ho hum thing. Talk to me when he's indicted, for now I'm done with this.

This is a false equivalency though. This isn't a 'my opinion' vs 'your onion' question either. This is a verifiable claim that can be answered simply by looking at the data. We're specifically discussing the 3 sales of a Mayweather PSA 9 rookie card. Your claim is that they are representative of extremely suspicious behavior and that the hammer prices for those auctions are completely out of line with other commensurate sales of the same card.

An example of "spinning" a debate regarding fraud in this hobby would be if someone were to say that a card wasn't "trimmed" but rather it was "professionally restored by a curator to its original intended state". That would be "spin". I have done nothing of the sort in this debate. What I did was equivalent to saying, "no, that card is not trimmed and I can prove it" followed by a link to a YouTube video where the card in question was pulled in its current condition straight from the pack.

Your claim about the Mayweather card is false. I disproved your claim with data from all commensurate sales of this card which clearly show that the hammer prices of the auctions in question were all perfectly in line with the market and other commensurate sales of that time. You can't just call that "spin". You can say, "Oh, my mistake. I was wrong about this card." You can even follow that up with, "but it doesn't change my mind about PWCC" or something similar. That would be a perfectly reasonable position to hold. But you can't discard the evidence that disproves your claim and then recast it as "spin" without looking unreasonable.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Snowman

If you think this is abnormal buying and selling behavior, you're simply just out of touch with a pretty significant faction of the market. This truly is "nothing to see here" activity.

Where were all the underbidder from just 2 months earlier ?


Keep trying

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Where were all the underbidder from just 2 months earlier ?


Keep trying

I have no idea what this means. But I've already explained, in great detail, why these transactions are not indicative of abnormal buying and selling behavior. If you choose to ignore that information that's fine with me. We can just agree to disagree. I'm not going to "keep trying".

[warrior1978]

I have read through a few pages of this thread but not all. In the past what concerned me about PWCC was the trimmed graded cards that were making their way through PWCCs auctions. I told myself to avoid them or at least be extremely careful bidding on their auctions. I can also see how shill bidding had occurred, without or without their knowledge. Looking back on my wins in the last two years, only one or two have been in their auctions and because of the relatively low dollar amount, I am not concerned. With them moving off Ebay, I most likely will not follow. I would not be comfortable bidding on their auctions in cards worth more than a couple hundred dollars.

[ballparks]

Originally Posted by warrior1978

I have read through a few pages of this thread but not all. In the past what concerned me about PWCC was the trimmed graded cards that were making their way through PWCCs auctions. I told myself to avoid them or at least be extremely careful bidding on their auctions. I can also see how shill bidding had occurred, without or without their knowledge. Looking back on my wins in the last two years, only one or two have been in their auctions and because of the relatively low dollar amount, I am not concerned. With them moving off Ebay, I most likely will not follow. I would not be comfortable bidding on their auctions in cards worth more than a couple hundred dollars.

My question now is how can ANYONE trust ANYTHING that PSA has graded? It's like all of those old DiMaggio/Williams/Mantle autographs of which 90% were forged. How can you really know which from the 10% were the real ones.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Also worth pointing out is what card this is. It's a Floyd Mayweather PSA 9 RC. This is the practically the poster child card of the Gen Z flippers/investors/crypto enthusiast type. Alternative sports like boxing, wrestling, tennis, soccer, etc are all the rage with these guys now.

The first boxing cards were issued in 1862, so I would hardly classify it as a new kid on the block.



Wish it was all the rage with the new breed; I'd sell my collection into the rise and pay off my mortgage(s).

[Oscar_Stanage]

Originally Posted by rats60

Do you routinely sell cards you bought at 50% of what you paid? If this is normal activity to you, post your buys on here. I am sure there are members here who would save you fees at take them off your hands at half what you just paid.

I’m not an investor or trader, so no. But the market is dominated by those types so who knows. I did not realize it was the same seller, so perhaps it is fake shilling. But I do know that every jordan card dropped 50% over the same period