Robert Edwards Auctions STILL going strong at 8:15 AM Est!!!!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Sorry I thought you were serious. Taking it in the spirit it was intended I couldn't agree more. The phrases "seem to indicate" and "indisputable fact" just made me laugh as they kinda don't go together.

Originally Posted by BobC

Scott,

Is that supposed to be some type of funny joke or an attempt at sarcasm? Aside from being a classic example of someone taking something out of context, that was stated by me in regards to others who posted on here in this thread about how they did in fact end up making additional bids in this recent REA auction because of the closing glitch, and subsequent one-day extension to the auction. I used that language to go along with and parody others who had been saying some things involved in this thread discussion were undisputable facts, when they quite frankly clearly were not. That excerpt you are "saving for posterity" was part of a much longer statement I made showing how there apparently was in fact something in this thread that actually was an indisputable fact, that the glitch in REA's auction closing did in fact lead to some additional bids in this one particular REA auction. And that statement by me was even re-affirmed in later post #239 by one of the parties I had based my original statement on.

So please explain to me why out of all the other statements in this thread claiming to be indisputable facts that clearly were not, you decided and saw fit to "save for posterity" an out of context quote from me about one thing in this thread that actually is an indisputable fact? Especially when the post of mine you are quoting from was already quoted and saved for posterity by someone else in post #225. Seems to make your post totally redundant then. So, I'm just trying to make some sense as to why you still needed to post what you did then, because forgive me, I sure can't make any sense out of it at all.

[perezfan]

It would be interesting to conduct a poll asking forum members who was still able to bid, and who was shut out in the original overtime session.

My experience was roughly 10 minutes of outage (12:06 - 12:16), and then it resumed full bidding capabilities throughout the repeated extensions (which seemed like about an hour in duration). Lots with no activity were extended 4-5 times, as the countdown clock could not effectively close them out.

In retrospect, I think REA had no choice but to extend it to the next day. However, I felt (since the auction shut down in the overtime session), it should have resumed Monday at 9 PM EDT with the 10 minute lot-by-lot overtime. I don't think it should have re-opened for the entire Monday.

Just my two cents regarding the most fair solution.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by perezfan

It would be interesting to conduct a poll asking forum members who was still able to bid, and who was shut out in the original overtime session.

My experience was roughly 10 minutes of outage (12:06 - 12:16), and then it resumed full bidding capabilities throughout the repeated extensions (which seemed like about an hour in duration). Lots with no activity were extended 4-5 times, as the countdown clock could not effectively close them out.

In retrospect, I think REA had no choice but to extend it to the next day. However, I felt (since the auction shut down in the overtime session), it should have resumed Monday at 9 PM EDT with the 10 minute lot-by-lot overtime. I don't think it should have re-opened for the entire Monday.

Just my two cents regarding the most fair solution.

Agree that would have been a fairer solution. All of the lots but one that I was bidding on went way higher Monday. Would be a tough argument to say that an issue during extending bidding of the announced close let the AH extend a full day and then have another extending bidding period somehow decreased prices rather than increased them. I know the side I’d rather defend.