Heritage Auctions - Boston Garters

[oldjudge]

This reminds me of the REA computer glitches in overtime when, if I remember correctly, some items showed that they were closed when in fact they weren’t. I still think the cards should be reauctioned and, unlike others, I think that everyone should be able to bid (I’m sure the consignor agrees with me). I would end the auction for all lots at a fixed time to avoid a repeat of this issue. Otherwise, you can use the same software; you just need a total vs parts page.
As for the consignor being happier if the cards stay together I agree, unless of course it costs him any money.

[calvindog]

I agree, Jay. Ultimately the consigner’s wishes should be honored first. Who knows, he may want the cards to sell as they just did.

[theshowandme]

These auction companies are moving hundreds of millions of dollars through their catalogs annually.

Pay the team of 10 software engineers their juicy six figure salaries and bonuses to make your website and tools as modern as possible.

I hope Heritage has a way to work with all the parties involved here and ensure this never happens again.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

This reminds me of the REA computer glitches in overtime when, if I remember correctly, some items showed that they were closed when in fact they weren’t. I still think the cards should be reauctioned and, unlike others, I think that everyone should be able to bid (I’m sure the consignor agrees with me). I would end the auction for all lots at a fixed time to avoid a repeat of this issue. Otherwise, you can use the same software; you just need a total vs parts page.
As for the consignor being happier if the cards stay together I agree, unless of course it costs him any money.

Right, the consignor obviously agreed to sell them individually if that resulted in more money, so I am not sure from where we are getting that the consignor prefers to keep them as a group.

[Yoda]

I believe that Heritage is the biggest auction house in the world by volume, so their reputation is of paramount importance and a mess up such as this might frighten their huge customer base. I don't know how this is going to play out but a public apology would be a good start.

My buddy Aaron mentioned that he has already been invoiced for the beautiful Baker. If he pays immediately then a contract has been made with an offer and acceptance then fulfilled and he legally owns the card. Any court would agree.

Powell is quite obviously a large and valued customer of Heritage and has a valid case to claim all the lots. Heritage cannot dismiss his claim with crying "software glitch". Heritage is a legally incorporated company with shareholders, officers etc. not a computer.

No matter how this all shakes out but the bluebird of unhappiness is going to land on someone.

Finally, I always thought that this AH gimmick of single lots versus total aggregate was just a way to entice bidders to open their wallets a bit more than they normally might.

[rman444]

What a mess. This thread needs more pictures.

[Powell]

Yoda,

I respectfully disagree. The offer and acceptance already occurred when i was the high bidder and the set closed. My account confirmed I was the winner. The post contract invoice to Aaron (and no disrespect to Aaron) and any payment by him is a nullity. The contract was formed by the high bid when the set lot closed and while ratification is not necessary it was ratified by Heritage afterward with it indicated in my account as a win Friday night and Saturday morning. I still believe Heritage will do the right thing but haven’t heard a response yet from a person with authority. I hope my faith in Heritage doesn’t prove misplaced and put me in a very angry place.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Powell

Yoda,

I respectfully disagree. The offer and acceptance already occurred when i was the high bidder and the set closed. My account confirmed I was the winner. The post contract invoice to Aaron (and no disrespect to Aaron) and any payment by him is a nullity. The contract was formed by the high bid when the set lot closed and while ratification is not necessary it was ratified by Heritage afterward with it indicated in my account as a win Friday night and Saturday morning. I still believe Heritage will do the right thing but haven’t heard a response yet from a person with authority. I hope my faith in Heritage doesn’t prove misplaced and put me in a very angry place.

I wonder if the software would have indicated the same thing even if at the time the set lot closed, the individual bids already were higher. I have no idea, but I am guessing it just made that determination in isolation, with no reference to the special circumstances of the auction and the interaction with the other lots.

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I believe that Heritage is the biggest auction house in the world by volume, so their reputation is of paramount importance and a mess up such as this might frighten their huge customer base. I don't know how this is going to play out but a public apology would be a good start.

My buddy Aaron mentioned that he has already been invoiced for the beautiful Baker. If he pays immediately then a contract has been made with an offer and acceptance then fulfilled and he legally owns the card. Any court would agree.

Powell is quite obviously a large and valued customer of Heritage and has a valid case to claim all the lots. Heritage cannot dismiss his claim with crying "software glitch". Heritage is a legally incorporated company with shareholders, officers etc. not a computer.

No matter how this all shakes out but the bluebird of unhappiness is going to land on someone.

Finally, I always thought that this AH gimmick of single lots versus total aggregate was just a way to entice bidders to open their wallets a bit more than they normally might.

Yes .. I understand heritage has a good reputation but this is leaning towards unethical - You have items That are in multiple lots with different bidders , different ending times and different winners Without a clear outcome ... just To maximize prices (“ for the benefit of the consignor “)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

Yes .. I understand heritage has a good reputation but this is leaning towards unethical - You have items That are in multiple lots with different bidders , different ending times and different winners Without a clear outcome ... just To maximize prices (“ for the benefit of the consignor “)

I don't see how it's an ethics problem. It's a case of poor execution of a plan. They didn't think through the mechanics of the close.