ebay finds that PWCC engaged in shill bidding?

[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.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

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.

Sorry If I was a little harsh. It's just that IMHO, you are defending Brent Mastro, just by doing business with the know criminal. I actually feel sorry that he shill bidded the trimmed card up your Tuchas (took/us). I have a few cards in that range and I would never trust a known criminal or line their companies pockets with that kind of money. I actually try to stand for something.

I'd have a lawyer by now and trying to get my money back from him and let him ream someone else with his fish stories. I wish you all the best and again, my personal apologies for the tough love. Good luck and enjoy your collection anyway you'd like.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Sorry If I was a little harsh. It's just that IMHO, you are defending Brent Mastro, just by doing business with the know criminal. I actually feel sorry that he shill bidded the trimmed card up your Tuchas (took/us). I have a few cards in that range and I would never trust a known criminal or line their companies pockets with that kind of money. I actually try to stand for something.

I'd have a lawyer by now and trying to get my money back from him and let him ream someone else with his fish stories. I wish you all the best and again, my personal apologies for the tough love. Good luck and enjoy your collection anyway you'd like.

Akin to the people who would justified bidding on authentic stuff in Coaches Corner auctions (The auctions did have some minor JSA/PSA certed items). Irrelevant to that they were able to avoid fake items, their purchases helped keep Coaches Corner in business.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by drcy

Akin to the people who would justified bidding on authentic stuff in Coaches Corner auctions (The auctions did have some minor JSA/PSA certed items). Irrelevant to that they were able to avoid fake items, their purchases helped keep Coaches Corner in business.

There are prominent, frequent posters here who rip PSA a new one every couple of days, who also sell higher-graded cards in PSA slabs.

(Why? Because PSA slabbed cards fetch more money.)

[JollyElm]

347. Kvetch-22
The principle that the people who bitterly complain the most about PSA’s horrific business practices are the same ones who gladly keep sending in more cards to be graded, because PSA slabs deliver the highest sales prices.

See also: “Hegemony Crickets!” - an expression referring to the metaphorical sound of silence as the venerated PSA refuses to ever address even a single one of the countless accusations of malfeasance made against them.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Sorry If I was a little harsh. It's just that IMHO, you are defending Brent Mastro, just by doing business with the know criminal. I actually feel sorry that he shill bidded the trimmed card up your Tuchas (took/us). I have a few cards in that range and I would never trust a known criminal or line their companies pockets with that kind of money. I actually try to stand for something.

I'd have a lawyer by now and trying to get my money back from him and let him ream someone else with his fish stories. I wish you all the best and again, my personal apologies for the tough love. Good luck and enjoy your collection anyway you'd like.

Thanks, and no worries. No offense taken. When I made my offer on the Mantle, it was made with the assumption that it had been altered in some way, whether that was from micro trimming or recoloring or card stock manipulation or whatever. It doesn't bother me. I care more about eye appeal and authenticity. In my eyes, it allowed me to get a 52 Mantle with the eye appeal of a 7 for the price of a nice 3. But I fully recognize that to many collectors, it is borderline worthless because they don't want altered cards in their collection. I can respect that viewpoint, I just don't share it. I personally love the card.

[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.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Snowman

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.

Now you're the one using false equivalencies.

Showing that those listed (assumed) sales were around current market prices does not prove your point. Though most of us were not disputing that as part of the "suspicious" argument anyway.

Some of us feel that (given how people hate to take any losses, and especially quick ones) that it's odd that anyone would continue to sell that particular Mayweather when they did. Especially with a company that has no qualms about being pretty slimy.

You disagree and feel that it was simply people panicking.

These are not objective matters, and you're inaccurately trying to make them so and ignoring a key opposing point to falsely "prove" what you want to assume

[Republicaninmass]

Still trying

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Now you're the one using false equivalencies.

Showing that those listed (assumed) sales were around current market prices does not prove your point. Though most of us were not disputing that as part of the "suspicious" argument anyway.

Some of us feel that (given how people hate to take any losses, and especially quick ones) that it's odd that anyone would continue to sell that particular Mayweather when they did. Especially with a company that has no qualms about being pretty slimy.

You disagree and feel that it was simply people panicking.

These are not objective matters, and you're inaccurately trying to make them so and ignoring a key opposing point to falsely "prove" what you want to assume

If the proposition is, two consecutive people did not win this card and consign it right back to PWCC, then you are right, prices don't disprove that.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If the proposition is, two consecutive people did not win this card and consign it right back to PWCC, then no, prices don't disprove that.

I never said that proved anything. All I said was that he showed that the listed PWCC sales were around other market sales at the time. And even specifically worded it "assumed" sales.

Peter, you seem like a good guy, but I've never seen anyone find so many ways to argue with people on all sides of debates like you do (even when they agree with you, like here). I've made my suspicion about the sale(s) clear :-)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

I never said that proved anything. All I said was that he showed that the listed PWCC sales were around other market sales at the time. And even specifically worded it "assumed" sales.

Peter, you seem like a good guy, but I've never seen anyone find so many ways to argue with people on all sides of debates like you do (even when they agree with you, like here). I've made my suspicion about the sale(s) clear :-)

I was AGREEING with you. Restating your point. Edited it to be clear.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is a verifiable claim that can be answered simply by looking at the data.

Have you not noticed how many people in this country don’t care about verifiable data?

[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.

[ZenPop]

Originally Posted by ballparks

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.

That's why I stick to Bud Harrelson, Tito Fuentes, and Hunter Pence autos.... also my ONE Willie Mays auto (in a baseball book) that I got personally while seeing him at the San Jose Airport. We had a nice 20 minute chat, too.

[Snowman]

Does anyone have an idea of what the maximum amount of time the FBI might spend would be before bringing charges in a case like the PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein/eBay card trimmers and shill bidding scandal?

Also, when did it start? Wasn't it about 3 years ago now?

At some point, we should get to close the door on whether or not PWCC was engaged in illegal activities. If they were/are guilty of what their detractors claim, then Brent, and likely others, will be charged with crimes. At some point we no longer have to guess whether it not they were engaged in illegal activity. We'll know, because we know the FBI looked into it.

If charges are brought against PWCC and/or its owners, then I think it's likely that this ebay email cutting ties with them has something to do with it. However, on the other hand, if charges are not brought against PWCC within the next 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Then it would be safe to assume that the detractors were wrong all along and that ebay's email likely was defamatory and an attempt to tarnish the reputation of a competitor.

I honestly don't know which direction I'd lean here in terms of who is and isn't guilty and what they might be guilty of. I wouldn't be surprised be either outcome (PWCC collapsing and Brent ending up behind bars or PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein all being exonerated). But being 3 years into this with still no charges being brought at all? That's not looking good for the haters. And with every day that passes, it looks less and less likely that they were right. How much time is left in the hourglass of this investigation? When I think about other recent FBI investigations that have been in the news, they were all wrapped up in much sooner than this one and multiple charges were brought against people at different points in time throughout the course of those investigations. Yet we still have no charges from this investigation. Could it be that it was delayed because of the pandemic perhaps? Maybe it's now just heating back up again and that's why ebay cut ties with PWCC? How much longer do we give this? At some point we either need to see some charges or we need to see some apologies.

If there are still no charges by this time next year, I think I'll be pretty firmly in the "they're not guilty" camp. I think 4 years seems like it should be enough time to make that conclusion, but I don't really know. That's just a guess. Maybe these things can take 7+ years for all I know. But it sure seems unlikely to me.

[cannonballsun]

There seems to be two conflicting arguments that have arisen in this issue. One is that eBay is so huge (and they are huge) is that eBay would not miss PWCC's business, and because PWCC's business is so inconsequential to eBay, they would kick them off of eBay out of spite, in an attempt to harm a future competitor.
If PWCC's business is such a small thing to eBay, why would they bother ? Why would they see them as a threat to be concerned with ? As far as competition, almost every major card seller sells on eBay. They also sell from their websites, and some even have their own auction sites. Clean Sweep Auctions and Kevin Savage come to mind. Why doesn't eBay mind this competition ?
The fact that eBay gave PWCC a sweetheart deal, only taking a one to three percent commission (as has recently been learned), definitely makes you think that eBay valued PWCC's business.
So back to my original feeling, there is something more going on here.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by cannonballsun

There seems to be two conflicting arguments that have arisen in this issue. One is that eBay is so huge (and they are huge) is that eBay would not miss PWCC's business, and because PWCC's business is so inconsequential to eBay, they would kick them off of eBay out of spite, in an attempt to harm a future competitor.
If PWCC's business is such a small thing to eBay, why would they bother ? here.

You do know that ebay basically went mafia on a couple of tech bloggers right?

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/s...rgeting-natick

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Does anyone have an idea of what the maximum amount of time the FBI might spend would be before bringing charges in a case like the PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein/eBay card trimmers and shill bidding scandal?

Also, when did it start? Wasn't it about 3 years ago now?

At some point, we should get to close the door on whether or not PWCC was engaged in illegal activities. If they were/are guilty of what their detractors claim, then Brent, and likely others, will be charged with crimes. At some point we no longer have to guess whether it not they were engaged in illegal activity. We'll know, because we know the FBI looked into it.

If charges are brought against PWCC and/or its owners, then I think it's likely that this ebay email cutting ties with them has something to do with it. However, on the other hand, if charges are not brought against PWCC within the next 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Then it would be safe to assume that the detractors were wrong all along and that ebay's email likely was defamatory and an attempt to tarnish the reputation of a competitor.

I honestly don't know which direction I'd lean here in terms of who is and isn't guilty and what they might be guilty of. I wouldn't be surprised be either outcome (PWCC collapsing and Brent ending up behind bars or PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein all being exonerated). But being 3 years into this with still no charges being brought at all? That's not looking good for the haters. And with every day that passes, it looks less and less likely that they were right. How much time is left in the hourglass of this investigation? When I think about other recent FBI investigations that have been in the news, they were all wrapped up in much sooner than this one and multiple charges were brought against people at different points in time throughout the course of those investigations. Yet we still have no charges from this investigation. Could it be that it was delayed because of the pandemic perhaps? Maybe it's now just heating back up again and that's why ebay cut ties with PWCC? How much longer do we give this? At some point we either need to see some charges or we need to see some apologies.

If there are still no charges by this time next year, I think I'll be pretty firmly in the "they're not guilty" camp. I think 4 years seems like it should be enough time to make that conclusion, but I don't really know. That's just a guess. Maybe these things can take 7+ years for all I know. But it sure seems unlikely to me.

Do you really think eBay put out the statement they did without having it vetted by their legal team and having ironclad proof?

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Bored5000

Do you really think eBay put out the statement they did without having it vetted by their legal team and having ironclad proof?

Not taking sides here, but have you read the link just a few posts up? Higher ups and "Fixers" in Ebay have sent bloody pigs masks, cyber-stalked, surveilled, and essentially terrorized tech bloggers who have been critical of them.

They aren't known for making sound legal decisions to begin with.

Billion dollar companies don't have to be quite as careful as the rest of us. Especially when all the highest executives have giant golden parachutes written into their contracts, should things somehow blow up on them.

Ebay says: "Are we protected?"

Legal team says: "Sure, just show us the money!"

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Bored5000

Do you really think eBay put out the statement they did without having it vetted by their legal team and having ironclad proof?

I will reword your question first as Do you really think eBay is capable of putting out the statement they did without having it vetted by their legal team and having ironclad proof?

To this revised version of your question, I would answer yes. Emphatically, yes (although it was certainly also reviewed by their legal team first). I used to live and work only a few blocks from ebay's headquarters. I have several friends who are either current or former employees of eBay. They've also been actively trying to recruit me for years. I've heard many stories from numerous different departments at eBay, all of which shed light on them having a cutthroat corporate culture that I want no part of. An email blast like this is precisely the type of calculated move I would expect from them in an effort to damage their competition. But that doesn't mean this is in fact what happened or that I even believe this to be what happened here. I don't know what went down in this instance. I have no insider knowledge of this particular situation. I'm just saying they are certainly capable of it.

And IF the "individuals associated with PWCC" merely refers to people who consigned with them, then I would have a serious issue with ebay sending out this email and would definitely consider it to be defamatory.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Snowman

At some point, we should get to close the door on whether or not PWCC was engaged in illegal activities. If they were/are guilty of what their detractors claim, then Brent, and likely others, will be charged with crimes. At some point we no longer have to guess whether it not they were engaged in illegal activity. We'll know, because we know the FBI looked into it.

However, on the other hand, if charges are not brought against PWCC within the next 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Then it would be safe to assume that the detractors were wrong all along and that ebay's email likely was defamatory and an attempt to tarnish the reputation of a competitor.

There is a third possibility: The FBI might investigate, find that some of the accusations are true, but for whatever reason, decline to bring charges.

[Andrew1975]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Does anyone have an idea of what the maximum amount of time the FBI might spend would be before bringing charges in a case like the PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein/eBay card trimmers and shill bidding scandal?

Also, when did it start? Wasn't it about 3 years ago now?

At some point, we should get to close the door on whether or not PWCC was engaged in illegal activities. If they were/are guilty of what their detractors claim, then Brent, and likely others, will be charged with crimes. At some point we no longer have to guess whether it not they were engaged in illegal activity. We'll know, because we know the FBI looked into it.

If charges are brought against PWCC and/or its owners, then I think it's likely that this ebay email cutting ties with them has something to do with it. However, on the other hand, if charges are not brought against PWCC within the next 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Then it would be safe to assume that the detractors were wrong all along and that ebay's email likely was defamatory and an attempt to tarnish the reputation of a competitor.

I honestly don't know which direction I'd lean here in terms of who is and isn't guilty and what they might be guilty of. I wouldn't be surprised be either outcome (PWCC collapsing and Brent ending up behind bars or PWCC/PSA/BGS/Probstein all being exonerated). But being 3 years into this with still no charges being brought at all? That's not looking good for the haters. And with every day that passes, it looks less and less likely that they were right. How much time is left in the hourglass of this investigation? When I think about other recent FBI investigations that have been in the news, they were all wrapped up in much sooner than this one and multiple charges were brought against people at different points in time throughout the course of those investigations. Yet we still have no charges from this investigation. Could it be that it was delayed because of the pandemic perhaps? Maybe it's now just heating back up again and that's why ebay cut ties with PWCC? How much longer do we give this? At some point we either need to see some charges or we need to see some apologies.

If there are still no charges by this time next year, I think I'll be pretty firmly in the "they're not guilty" camp. I think 4 years seems like it should be enough time to make that conclusion, but I don't really know. That's just a guess. Maybe these things can take 7+ years for all I know. But it sure seems unlikely to me.

Covid brought US District Court GJ's to a grinding halt, with only the most serious cases getting any GJ time at all (and not much even for those). I'm not surprised in the least that we haven't seen indictments yet. Wouldn't be surprised if eBay thought they might be coming and decided to kick PWCC to the curb before it happened. Just a guess... maybe just wishful thinking.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by ZenPop

That's why I stick to Bud Harrelson, Tito Fuentes, and Hunter Pence autos.... also my ONE Willie Mays auto (in a baseball book) that I got personally while seeing him at the San Jose Airport. We had a nice 20 minute chat, too.

Willie Mays was nice? Now we know you're lying.

[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).