Small Traditions LLC/SCANDAL UPDATE

[Snowman]

I wonder if he's actually in legal trouble or if he simply failed to succeed in running his own auction site. I'm guessing it's the latter since his eBay store is still fairly active with recent sales.

[samosa4u]

I don't think he took his website down because of what BODA did. He can make more money selling his cards through other auction sites.

[Yoda]

I feel pretty confident that when PWCC launches its' new platform, we will see an avalanche of PSA graded cards on offer and undoubtedly some will have been messed with. But if you offer them, they will come.
As big as Ebay is, I am sure they miss the revenue PWCC provided, and it obvious that vintage, maybe outside of Probstein, has dried up on Ebay. The simplest solution, of course, is to stop buying any PSA graded cards and move to SGC or Beckett. That is wishful thinking.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I feel pretty confident that when PWCC launches its' new platform, we will see an avalanche of PSA graded cards on offer and undoubtedly some will have been messed with. But if you offer them, they will come.
As big as Ebay is, I am sure they miss the revenue PWCC provided, and it obvious that vintage, maybe outside of Probstein, has dried up on Ebay. The simplest solution, of course, is to stop buying any PSA graded cards and move to SGC or Beckett. That is wishful thinking.

What makes you think SGC or Beckett are any better at stopping altered cards?

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What makes you think SGC or Beckett are any better at stopping altered cards?

It's more fun to join the psa bashing band wagon

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What makes you think SGC or Beckett are any better at stopping altered cards?

Peter, I don't think for a moment that SGC or Beckett has any magic formula for detecting and stopping altered cards from receiving anything but an A grade. But it seems that all of the scandals we have seen over the past few years, Moser, you name it, have almost always involved PSA graded cards, much less than the other two whose pop reports are suspect at best. Their slick marketing supports auction results, SMR and pop features. As many have said, PSA knows how to play Money Ball.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Peter, I don't think for a moment that SGC or Beckett has any magic formula for detecting and stopping altered cards from receiving anything but an A grade. But it seems that all of the scandals we have seen over the past few years, Moser, you name it, have almost always involved PSA graded cards, much less than the other two whose pop reports are suspect at best. Their slick marketing supports auction results, SMR and pop features. As many have said, PSA knows how to play Money Ball.

Me thinks because psa gets the most money hands down, people would try them first. The crap that doesnt pass filters down to sgc and the like and aome BIG ones have been outed

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Yoda

As big as Ebay is, I am sure they miss the revenue PWCC provided

Makes one think it was a big (legal?) issue for eBay to kick PWCC off.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by drcy

Makes one think it was a big (legal?) issue for eBay to kick PWCC off.

Or that eBay got wind of the fact that there were plans in the works at PWCC to leave eBay completely and set up their own auction platform, so eBay retaliated in classic eBay fashion. Who knows why they actually did it, but to cut ties so publicly in the way that they did sure makes one wonder.

One thing is certain though. The premise of the email was clearly bullshit. eBay has never given two shits about shill bidding in the past. This was most likely about something other than cracking down on shill bidding. Perhaps the FBI was breathing down their neck and the legal team felt they had to make a drastic move to cover their asses. Or perhaps they wanted to damage the brand of a soon-to-be competitor who was already on their way out the door. I think those are the two most plausible scenarios. Time will tell. If it is cracking down on shill bidding though, surely that will become apparent via further actions against shill bidding. And if it's the FBI breathing down their neck, that will become apparent once all these indictments start rolling in (any day now... any day now...). But if neither of those things happens, then the scale begins to tip quite heavily toward them just trying to damage the brand of a competitor. Stay tuned, IMO.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Or that eBay got wind of the fact that there were plans in the works at PWCC to leave eBay completely and set up their own auction platform, so eBay retaliated in classic eBay fashion. Who knows why they actually did it, but to cut ties so publicly in the way that they did sure makes one wonder.

One thing is certain though. The premise of the email was clearly bullshit. eBay has never given two shits about shill bidding in the past. This was most likely about something other than cracking down on shill bidding. Perhaps the FBI was breathing down their neck and the legal team felt they had to make a drastic move to cover their asses. Or perhaps they wanted to damage the brand of a soon-to-be competitor who was already on their way out the door. I think those are the two most plausible scenarios. Time will tell. If it is cracking down on shill bidding though, surely that will become apparent via further actions against shill bidding. And if it's the FBI breathing down their neck, that will become apparent once all these indictments start rolling in (any day now... any day now...). But if neither of those things happens, then the scale begins to tip quite heavily toward them just trying to damage the brand of a competitor. Stay tuned, IMO.

It is definitely NOT about just damaging the PWCC brand. Taking a dump on a competitor to damage their brand is called "trade libel" (publication of matter disparaging the quality of another’s property, which the publisher should recognize is likely to cause pecuniary loss to the owner. The tort encompasses ‘all false statements concerning the quality of services or product of a business which are intended to cause that business financial harm and in fact do so. (City of Costa Mesa v. D’Alessio Investments,LLC (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 358, 376) and if a $10 billion company does it just to thwart a competitor it will find itself on the receiving end of a massive lawsuit. The fact that eBay did what it did publicly and loudly means that it has solid evidence in hand sufficient to allow their corporate counsel to greenlight a statement that is otherwise textbook trade libel.

[packs]

I think people have been trying to point out that a seller's individual gross revenue is not the revenue eBay generates. So if someone is doing a hundred million in sales eBay's revenue lives in the eBay fees generated by those sales. They are not equal and eBay's revenue is dependent on hundreds of thousands of sellers and not any one.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

It is definitely NOT about just damaging the PWCC brand. Taking a dump on a competitor to damage their brand is called "trade libel" (publication of matter disparaging the quality of another’s property, which the publisher should recognize is likely to cause pecuniary loss to the owner. The tort encompasses ‘all false statements concerning the quality of services or product of a business which are intended to cause that business financial harm and in fact do so. (City of Costa Mesa v. D’Alessio Investments,LLC (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 358, 376) and if a $10 billion company does it just to thwart a competitor it will find itself on the receiving end of a massive lawsuit. The fact that eBay did what it did publicly and loudly means that it has solid evidence in hand sufficient to allow their corporate counsel to greenlight a statement that is otherwise textbook trade libel.

How can you possibly say that it is "definitely NOT that" though? I assume you're a lawyer. Pay attention to the language used in that email. Their claim is that "individuals associated with PWCC engaged in shill bidding". That's a remarkably broad statement that could easily just mean that people who consigned with PWCC bid on their own auctions. Surely, their legal team carefully crafted that email so as to avoid any such lawsuits. If they had proof that PWCC employees were the ones doing the shill bidding, then why not just say so? After all, as you said, surely they wouldn't make such a claim without proof. But they in fact did not make such a claim. Probably because they did not have such proof.

To walk away from that email and assume that eBay meant anything other than people who consigned with PWCC would be jumping to conclusions based on assumptions. If that is in fact who eBay was referring to when they said "individuals associated with", then I think what they did should be criminal and that it should be considered trade libel. I'm also of the belief, based on my experiences with eBay and the experiences of several of my friends who have worked there (some of whom were executives) that this is most likely what happened.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

It is definitely NOT about just damaging the PWCC brand. Taking a dump on a competitor to damage their brand is called "trade libel" (publication of matter disparaging the quality of another’s property, which the publisher should recognize is likely to cause pecuniary loss to the owner. The tort encompasses ‘all false statements concerning the quality of services or product of a business which are intended to cause that business financial harm and in fact do so. (City of Costa Mesa v. D’Alessio Investments,LLC (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 358, 376) and if a $10 billion company does it just to thwart a competitor it will find itself on the receiving end of a massive lawsuit. The fact that eBay did what it did publicly and loudly means that it has solid evidence in hand sufficient to allow their corporate counsel to greenlight a statement that is otherwise textbook trade libel.

I hear you Adam, and don't disagree. Also saw Snowman's response to you, and can see the logic in some of his statements as well.

I guess I'm wondering if a huge factor in all this is exactly what is in the terms of use (or whaver they call it) agreement all seller's have to agree to before selling on Ebay. I haven't seen their current rules of what Ebay sellers must agree to and abide by. Also, because of the size/volume of PWCC's sales on their platform and the special sweetheart deal they apparently gave them on fees, is it not possible that Ebay could have had a special operating deal in place with PWCC that goes beyond the standard terms of use agreement they give to everyone else to sign off on? If so, there could be something in it that specifically protects Ebay from trade libel for determining and doing what they did. I guess one way we may find out is if PWCC were to ever bring a lawsuit against Ebay for being booted off their site by them.

But as others have speculated, I find it difficult to believe Ebay's lawyers weren't involved with this PWCC situation from start, and would be shocked if they hadn't already addressed this potential libel issue to make sure Ebay was protected in some way or manner. Again, I guess time will tell.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I don't think he took his website down because of what BODA did. He can make more money selling his cards through other auction sites.

Funny how he ran his site and his own auctions for many years and didn't discover that. I think you're totally wrong here my friend.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I don't think he took his website down because of what BODA did. He can make more money selling his cards through other auction sites.

Well he absolutely stopped running auctions specifically because of being outed by BODA. I am not IT dude but the server error that displays I think suggests it was more than an expired domain but that the data from the site has been wiped out.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I am not IT dude but the server error that displays I think suggests it was more than an expired domain but that the data from the site has been wiped out.

It's not an expired domain. It means that he probably still owns the domain but that his server is corrupt for some reason. Could be he just needs to upgrade it. Could be that the server got hacked. Who knows. But he hasn't ran any auctions for what, a year and a half now? Is that right? He probably just doesn't have time or doesn't care to fix the server issues, whatever they are.

Though plausible, I highly doubt this is some new development in the FBI's ferocious pursuit of card trimmers.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Well he absolutely stopped running auctions specifically because of being outed by BODA.

How successful was this auction site before that though? Was he a real player in this space? I'd never even heard of them before BODA posted about it.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

How successful was this auction site before that though? Was he a real player in this space? I'd never even heard of them before BODA posted about it.

If the site did not somehow mysteriously vanish you could see his prices realized and could see he was raking it in. He sold odd ball stuff and got more than every last penny for what he sold.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

If the site did not somehow mysteriously vanish you could see his prices realized and could see he was raking it in. He sold odd ball stuff and got more than every last penny for what he sold.

Not to mention you can make a lot of money buying cards in one grade and selling them in another.

[packs]

This notion that PWCC was or is a threat to eBay's business is absurd. eBay does not only sell sports memorabilia and the sports memorabilia it does sell makes up a fraction of it's entire revenue. There is no competing with eBay. It's like saying Yahoo is competing with Google. They both exist, but they're not in competition with each other.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

This notion that PWCC was or is a threat to eBay's business is absurd. eBay does not only sell sports memorabilia and the sports memorabilia it does sell makes up a fraction of it's entire revenue. There is no competing with eBay. It's like saying Yahoo is competing with Google. They both exist, but they're not in competition with each other.

I think I posted somewhere that eBay's annual revenues are something like 10 BILLION dollars. There surely is a backstory here, though what it is we don't know, yet anyhow.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by packs

This notion that PWCC was or is a threat to eBay's business is absurd. eBay does not only sell sports memorabilia and the sports memorabilia it does sell makes up a fraction of it's entire revenue. There is no competing with eBay. It's like saying Yahoo is competing with Google. They both exist, but they're not in competition with each other.

Of course PWCC is a threat to ebay's business. They did something like 150 million in revenue in just the first half of 2021 alone. And all those cards that they're selling are in their possession, in their vault. They weren't just the largest seller of sports cards on ebay, they were the largest seller by a long shot. They were also one of ebay's largest sellers in any category, not just cards. When PWCC launches their new platform, they're taking that business with them. Ebay stands to lose a significant revenue stream if those cards are no longer being sold on their platform. Is it going to bankrupt eBay? No, of course not. But it's definitely a kick in the balls to their wallet. Plus, if PWCC is successful, and if they are able to provide a platform with even lower selling fees, they could end up gaining a much larger share of that market in the future. It is without question in ebay's best interest to do whatever they can to ensure this doesn't happen. Ebay is also well known for playing dirty. Cutting off their competition and capping them at the knees by sending out an email blast to all of PWCC's buyers is precisely the sort of calculated move I would expect from eBay. They've earned their reputation for a reason. As has PWCC. Which of the various theories, if any, turn out to be true in the end, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. But you'd be foolish to think that PWCC poses no threat to ebay's business. Even myslabs.com poses a threat to ebay. Hell, myslabs just cost ebay $350 yesterday when I sold just one card on their platform that I otherwise would have sold through ebay. Those fees add up quick.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Snowman

How successful was this auction site before that though? Was he a real player in this space? I'd never even heard of them before BODA posted about it.

I bid on and won some cards thru Small Tradition. Never a problem.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I bid on and won some cards thru Small Tradition. Never a problem.

What does that prove?

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What does that prove?

I was just relaying my experience. Didn't realize I needed to "prove" something.