Heritage Auctions - Boston Garters

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To recap, and repeat, the simplest way to view this, I think, is that the set lot never should have closed while bidding was still going on for the individual lots. That effectively foreclosed Powell from competing at the end. It seems a simple analysis in terms of the equities. It will certainly be interesting to see Heritage's response.

+ + +

[Snowman]

Hot take... And I apologize if this comes off harshly, because it almost certainly will. Please don't take this personally. But I feel this needs to be said.

First off, what a tran wreck! But this was all very predictable from the moment this auction was posted. The warning provided in each listing was clear as day:

“Please note that this auction will list each card as an individual lot along with another listing for the complete set. If the aggregate winning bids of the twelve individual lots exceeds the high bid on the complete set, the cards will be sold to each individual winner. If the price of the set exceeds the sum of the twelve individual cards, the victory will be awarded to the high bidder for the complete set.”

To bid on the set and not on the individual lots as well was taking a huge gamble, if you wanted to win. You're taking a gamble that not only would you be willing to outbid the sum of the individual lots, but that someone else would too. If you read the listing, then you knew you'd lose if the individual lots outbid you. You backed the wrong horse. You should have been bidding on the individual lots, or on both, if you wanted to ensure a win. To only bid on the set was to back one horse in a two horse race.

Powell keeps declaring by fiat that him being the high bidder on the set at the time that lot closed somehow just magically nullifies the other individual auctions. This is of course ridiculous. He is just invoking this magical rule because it's the only way he wins. Nowhere is it stated that if the set stops receiving action that it will end the bidding for the individual lots as well. That is an assumption made by Powell, and we all know what they say about assumptions. The listing clearly states that the winner of the set listing will only be the true winner if the individual lot sums do not exceed the set hammer price. But they did. So Powell loses. It's pretty clear to anyone reading the listing. There is no scenario whatsoever that Heritage is going to award this lot to Powell. I'm sorry, but that's just not happening. And I'd be happy to place a side bet on that prediction, in case any of you hot shot lawyers want to put some money where your mouth is.

What if there were two bidders who really wanted the Joe Jackson and who were prepared to go to war over that card? The two of them battling it out all throughout the night, eventually bidding it up to $2 million. But at the time that the full set stopped receiving action, it was only at $50k. What then? Heritage is just supposed to cut in on their battle in the top of the 2nd inning and declare it over because the full set lot stopped getting action? Lol. I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. This is just wishful thinking. Anyone who read that listing should have read the disclaimer at the bottom and should have known they would lose if the individual lots received sufficient bids to overcome their set hammer price by the end of the night.

That said, this was a TERRIBLE strategy by Heritage to begin with, given their software is not capable of handling a dual auction in a fair manner to all bidders on both sides. All lots should be tied together, and the set bidders should be allowed to continue placing bids (even against themselves) if the individual lots exceed the set lot. But that's not how it was set up, so what they *should have done* isn't really relevant.

Heritage has two options. They can either allow the results to stand with the individual winners being awarded the cards, as they are the clear and rightful winners per the rules stated in the auctions, or they can recognize that the way they set up the dual format was stupid and resulted in Powell not being able to continue bidding even though he had been effectively "outbid", and they can extend the auction to allow all bidders to continue placing bids on all 13 lots. But they can't just award the set to Powell. That's not an option. He didn't win. Not according to the rules clearly stated in the auction. All he won was part A of a two part bidding process. But he lost part B, so he didn't win. He should have fallen asleep crossing his fingers that night. How he could have possibly assumed he had already won is beyond me. I certainly would have known better, were I in his shoes.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Hot take... And I apologize if this comes off harshly, because it almost certainly will. Please don't take this personally. But I feel this needs to be said.

First off, what a tran wreck! But this was all very predictable from the moment this auction was posted. The warning provided in each listing was clear as day:




To bid on the set and not on the individual lots as well was taking a huge gamble, if you wanted to win. You're taking a gamble that not only would you be willing to outbid the sum of the individual lots, but that someone else would too. If you read the listing, then you knew you'd lose if the individual lots outbid you. You backed the wrong horse. You should have been bidding on the individual lots, or on both, if you wanted to ensure a win. To only bid on the set was to back one horse in a two horse race.

Powell keeps declaring by fiat that him being the high bidder on the set at the time that lot closed somehow just magically nullifies the other individual auctions. This is of course ridiculous. He is just invoking this magical rule because it's the only way he wins. Nowhere is it stated that if the set stops receiving action that it will end the bidding for the individual lots as well. That is an assumption made by Powell, and we all know what they say about assumptions. The listing clearly states that the winner of the set listing will only be the true winner if the individual lot sums do not exceed the set hammer price. But they did. So Powell loses. It's pretty clear to anyone reading the listing. There is no scenario whatsoever that Heritage is going to award this lot to Powell. I'm sorry, but that's just not happening. And I'd be happy to place a side bet on that prediction, in case any of you hot shot lawyers want to put some money where your mouth is.

What if there were two bidders who really wanted the Joe Jackson and who were prepared to go to war over that card? The two of them battling it out all throughout the night, eventually bidding it up to $2 million. But at the time that the full set stopped receiving action, it was only at $50k. What then? Heritage is just supposed to cut in on their battle in the top of the 2nd inning and declare it over because the full set lot stopped getting action? Lol. I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. This is just wishful thinking. Anyone who read that listing should have read the disclaimer at the bottom and should have known they would lose if the individual lots received sufficient bids to overcome their set hammer price by the end of the night.

That said, this was a TERRIBLE strategy by Heritage to begin with, given their software is not capable of handling a dual auction in a fair manner to all bidders on both sides. All lots should be tied together, and the set bidders should be allowed to continue placing bids (even against themselves) if the individual lots exceed the set lot. But that's not how it was set up, so what they *should have done* isn't really relevant.

Heritage has two options. They can either allow the results to stand with the individual winners being awarded the cards, as they are the clear and rightful winners per the rules stated in the auctions, or they can recognize that the way they set up the dual format was stupid and resulted in Powell not being able to continue bidding even though he had been effectively "outbid", and they can extend the auction to allow all bidders to continue placing bids on all 13 lots. But they can't just award the set to Powell. That's not an option. He didn't win. Not according to the rules clearly stated in the auction. All he won was part A of a two part bidding process. But he lost part B, so he didn't win. He should have fallen asleep crossing his fingers that night. How he could have possibly assumed he had already won is beyond me. I certainly would have known better, were I in his shoes.

Finally, someone took time to eloquently state the obvious.

[Powell]

Respectfully, I disagree. The set lot closed and Heritage reported me as the winner both on the lot and in my account. It’s not by “fiat” or “hot shot” lawyering it’s the plain language of the rules and the inherent nature of an auction. Once the gavel drops and the set was sold it’s over. It’s absurd to say that individual lots could be bid to later overtake the set after the bidding on the set was locked out —that’s clearly wrong.

[brunswickreeves]

I’ll repost the below from my earlier post and inquire: has Powell receive the confirmation email and invoice for the lot? Or does he have a screenshot from the ‘You Won’ confirmation as evidence for HA evaluation and consideration?

According to HA Web Tips (linked below at end):

Heritage Live FAQ:
‘How do I know if I won the lot?

When the lot closes a message in green indicating you won will be displayed (see example below). In addition, you can check the item status in the "Realized Prices" tab.

You Won!’

HOWEVER, further down this reference page under Bidding Guidelines it states:

‘If you are the successful high bidder when the auction closes, you will receive an Email confirmation immediately following the auction followed by an E-mail invoice in the next few days for your winnings.‘

[Powell]

Respectfully, I disagree. The set lot closed and Heritage reported me as the winner both on the lot and in my account. It’s not by “fiat” or “hot shot” lawyering it’s the plain language of the rules and the inherent nature of an auction. Once the gavel drops and the set was sold it’s over. It’s absurd to say that individual lots could be bid to later overtake the set after the bidding on the set was locked out —that’s clearly wrong.

[brunswickreeves]

Originally Posted by Powell

Respectfully, I disagree. The set lot closed and Heritage reported me as the winner both on the lot and in my account. It’s not by “fiat” or “hot shot” lawyering it’s the plain language of the rules and the inherent nature of an auction. Once the gavel drops and the set was sold it’s over. It’s absurd to say that individual lots could be bid to later overtake the set after the bidding on the set was locked out —that’s clearly wrong.

Have you received the confirmation email confirming the win and invoice for the lot? Or do you have a screenshot from the ‘You Won’ confirmation as evidence for HA evaluation and consideration?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by brunswickreeves

Have you received the confirmation email confirming the win and invoice for the lot? Or do you have a screenshot from the ‘You Won’ confirmation as evidence for HA evaluation and consideration?

HA obviously knows what happened here, Powell doesn't need "evidence," good Lord. The issue is not whether they believe him, of course they do, it's what they choose to do.

[Powell]

I wired the full set price to Heritage this morning. I hope that they do the right thing. I appreciate the debate and everyone’s comments even those who disagree with my conclusions. I don’t think anyone disagrees the set lot should have closed if it wasn’t closed. I didn’t take any snap shots but Heritage know it recorded it in my account as a win and sometime Saturday morning changed it.
I had no doubt I won the set after the set lot closed and it was in my account as a win (I was underbidder on the Gherig and might well have gone for that if I wasn’t in a good place on the BG’s.). Bottom line I confirmed my win and went to sleep. I was shocked to learn the next morning from this board that the individual lots “won.”

[raulus]

It does seem like the general approach that Heritage chose to take, which kinda sorta seems like what is discussed in very vague terms in their terms is something like this:

Run the auction like we always do, with zero changes to format to accommodate the mechanics here. The next day when all the dust settles and all of the lots are closed, Heritage sits down and adds up all of the individual lots, and compare it to the lot for the set. Whichever total is the biggest, wins, and the other lot or lots are SOL.

Obviously that means that everyone is basically flying blind, and with zero ability to attempt to really compete on a level playing field. All of which can easily lead to the disagreements, angst, and a whole lot of pissed off people who thought they should have won. Cue the last 90% of this thread.

Then ratchet up the angst by a factor of 100x because these are some very desirable and incredibly rare pieces that a lot of people really, really want for their collection.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Powell

I wired the full set price to Heritage this morning.

You are a brave man. If nothing else, I applaud your chutzpah and determination to force the issue.

[Jewish-collector]

Originally Posted by raulus

chutzpah

Good one
beer chug.gifbeer chug.gifbeer chug.gif

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

You are a brave man. If nothing else, I applaud your chutzpah and determination to force the issue.

"Should I have the strength ... to force the moment to its crisis?"

T.S. Eliot

Sorry, back to the discussion.

[brunswickreeves]

Originally Posted by Powell

I wired the full set price to Heritage this morning. I hope that they do the right thing. I appreciate the debate and everyone’s comments even those who disagree with my conclusions. I don’t think anyone disagrees the set lot should have closed if it wasn’t closed. I didn’t take any snap shots but Heritage know it recorded it in my account as a win and sometime Saturday morning changed it.
I had no doubt I won the set after the set lot closed and it was in my account as a win (I was underbidder on the Gherig and might well have gone for that if I wasn’t in a good place on the BG’s.). Bottom line I confirmed my win and went to sleep. I was shocked to learn the next morning from this board that the individual lots “won.”

Clearly I’m in the wrong profession

[hcv123]

Well,

Like I think is a unanimous opinion around this, Heritage really messed up the mechanics here and poorly communicated the "process" (it was a unique situation for them and should have been much more explicitly communicated) - if the way it went down was what was intended. One thing that I would like to add that "should" have happened here in addition to all the BG lots staying open till none of them had bids for 30 minutes, is that the "current" bid of the set lot should have increased as the aggregate bids on the individual lots did - reflecting either a winning set bid or a losing one that could then be increased.

Based on the specific wording that has been clearly pointed out, I suspect this possibility may have been considered and determined to be too much trouble or expense to make the necessary software changes.

That said, like most - I think the situation SUCKS royally!! While I understand the point you are making Powell as well as why you would have gone to sleep thinking you won, I think the way the wording sits hurts your position.

[Johnny630]

Chose Long Term Happiness over Pleasure.... Make Peace with whatever happens....It's in Gods Hands

If it's meant to be it's meant to be if it's not it's not. Life Goes On Just Make Peace with whatever happens.

Either Way I wish you the best. It's only cards, you're happiness is more important.

[rjackson44]

Has heritage reached out to anyone concerning this issue ,,what are they waiting for??

[Rhotchkiss]

Here is an interesting hypothetical, and is nothing more than hypothetical considering (1) we don’t know if Powell had in a max bid that exceeded his last bid, and (2) it’s unlikely that Powell would have been able to bid against himself (in the complete set lot), but what happens in this situation:

Powell is high bidder on the set at $615k with a max bid placed of $640k. When the 30 minute timer on the set lot ends, Powell’s $615k bid is higher than the aggregate of the individual lots at $610. However, some of the individual lots remain open and one lot gets two more bids before it closes, pushing the aggregate to $620k. Powell has a $640k max bid placed, but his auction is closed, so his auction will not recognize the $640k max bid, which would have beat the $615k aggregate….

[Peter_Spaeth]

That's a good one. If nothing else I think that would give Heritage pretty good cover to award the lot to Powell based on an actual bid higher than the aggregate individual bids.

[Powell]

I did not put in a max bid. I waited until the lot closed and I was declared the winner. The acceptance of my bid and closing the lot was the completion of the contract. The actual performance trumps an interpretation of the “rules” as contract law makes it a deal. The deal was ratified when listed on my account as a win. That ratification was not necessary but I did double check that when I went to sleep.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Here is an interesting hypothetical, and is nothing more than hypothetical considering (1) we don’t know if Powell had in a max bid that exceeded his last bid, and (2) it’s unlikely that Powell would have been able to bid against himself (in the complete set lot), but what happens in this situation:

Powell is high bidder on the set at $615k with a max bid placed of $640k. When the 30 minute timer on the set lot ends, Powell’s $615k bid is higher than the aggregate of the individual lots at $610. However, some of the individual lots remain open and one lot gets two more bids before it closes, pushing the aggregate to $620k. Powell has a $640k max bid placed, but his auction is closed, so his auction will not recognize the $640k max bid, which would have beat the $615k aggregate….

Since the lot for the set was closed, I doubt having a max bid higher than the total of the individual card lots would have mattered. That seems to be the cause of the problem - there was no link between all of the lots that would keep them all open and also indicate what the total of the individual lots was so someone bidding on the set would know what they needed to bid to be ahead (and if they could actually increase their bid if no one else was bidding on the set as well).

Someone else mentioned that the lot for the set should have had its bid automatically increase to reflect the total of the individual lots as well as everything staying open until they all closed together. Clearly none of that happened.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Powell

Respectfully, I disagree. The set lot closed and Heritage reported me as the winner both on the lot and in my account. It’s not by “fiat” or “hot shot” lawyering it’s the plain language of the rules and the inherent nature of an auction. Once the gavel drops and the set was sold it’s over. It’s absurd to say that individual lots could be bid to later overtake the set after the bidding on the set was locked out —that’s clearly wrong.

Yes, you are the winner of the set lot. Congratulations!!! But if you had kept reading, you'd know that the winner of the set lot was not the winner of the cards.

I know it stings, and I'm sorry you lost. But you did lose unfair and square.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Powell

I did not put in a max bid. I waited until the lot closed and I was declared the winner. The acceptance of my bid and closing the lot was the completion of the contract. The actual performance trumps an interpretation of the “rules” as contract law makes it a deal. The deal was ratified when listed on my account as a win. That ratification was not necessary but I did double check that when I went to sleep.

What if, hypothetically, one or more of the other individual lots closed at the same time as yours and they too were notified by the software (which failed to link the set and individual lots) they had won?

[theshowandme]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Here is an interesting hypothetical, and is nothing more than hypothetical considering (1) we don’t know if Powell had in a max bid that exceeded his last bid, and (2) it’s unlikely that Powell would have been able to bid against himself (in the complete set lot), but what happens in this situation:

Powell is high bidder on the set at $615k with a max bid placed of $640k. When the 30 minute timer on the set lot ends, Powell’s $615k bid is higher than the aggregate of the individual lots at $610. However, some of the individual lots remain open and one lot gets two more bids before it closes, pushing the aggregate to $620k. Powell has a $640k max bid placed, but his auction is closed, so his auction will not recognize the $640k max bid, which would have beat the $615k aggregate….

I can find 10 people in a 50 foot radius of my office right now that would be able to write and handle that logic in any programming language that Heritage uses. I bet it could be done in less than 8 hours.

It is insane to me that these things were not linked for a company moving hundreds of millions of dollars worth of collectibles per year.

[molenick]

Or what if one of the individual lots closed before the set and that bidder was told they won first? Would that also be considered completion of the contract and would that person have a legal claim to the individual lot they "won".

Clearly Heritage was premature in saying anyone "won" anything until all the lots were closed.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Powell

I did not put in a max bid. I waited until the lot closed and I was declared the winner. The acceptance of my bid and closing the lot was the completion of the contract. The actual performance trumps an interpretation of the “rules” as contract law makes it a deal. The deal was ratified when listed on my account as a win. That ratification was not necessary but I did double check that when I went to sleep.

Only a lawyer could come up with this nonsense. Just read the listing. It's extremely clear. You are being blinded by your emotions. You can't possibly be this obtuse. You won the first heat of a two heat race. But you lost the second heat.

Hopefully Heritage allows the auctions to be extended for you. But that would be a major courtesy to you if they do. But to claim (yes, by fiat) that your lot ending also halts any bidding wars that might be taking place on the other individual lots is, of course, absurd. If you want to argue that you should have been given the opportunity to continue increasing your bid amount to compete against the individual lots, then that's a more fair argument to make. But to just claim that their action suddenly ends, while they're in the midst of a bidding war, is just wishful, silly, magical thinking.

[Johnny630]

Did heritage ever send you an invoice??? If not I'm curious why did you send them money?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

I can find 10 people in a 50 foot radius of my office right now that would be able to write and handle that logic in any programming language that Heritage uses. I bet it could be done in less than 8 hours.

It is insane to me that these things were not linked for a company moving hundreds of millions of dollars worth of collectibles per year.

They probably do not write their own auction software code. Most auction houses don't.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by molenick

Or what if one of the individual lots closed before the set and that bidder was told they won first? Would that also be considered completion of the contract and would that person have a legal claim to the individual lot they "won".

Clearly Heritage was premature in saying anyone "won" anything until all the lots were closed.

I don't know the timing but I am assuming that there was not continued bidding in all of the individual lots after the set lot closed, and if that's the case, it seems a fair assumption that other bidders received the same automatically generated notice as Powell.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by molenick

Or what if one of the individual lots closed before the set and that bidder was told they won first? Would that also be considered completion of the contract and would that person have a legal claim to the individual lot they "won".

Clearly Heritage was premature in saying anyone "won" anything until all the lots were closed.

Of course. Everyone was going to receive the "you won lot X" automated emails. Hence Heritage includes the warning strike given in each lot informing the bidder that winning the lot does not ensure a victory until all the chips have been counted. Someone was going to "win" and lose. That was the entire point of the warning message.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Did heritage ever send you an invoice??? If not I'm curious why did you send them money?

Because he thinks this is going to help his court case. It won't. At this point, he's just being a sore loser. I suspect the kicking and screaming will continue all the way to the courtroom now. I also suspect the judge will recognize it as such.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Because he thinks this is going to help his court case. It won't. At this point, he's just being a sore loser. I suspect the kicking and screaming will continue all the way to the courtroom now. I also suspect the judge will recognize it as such.

It's not Snow you're correct. This is so silly I hope he makes peace with it and moves on he obviously has the money..... just be happy with your collection you have. Geez it's just cards.

[brunswickreeves]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Because he thinks this is going to help his court case. It won't. At this point, he's just being a sore loser. I suspect the kicking and screaming will continue all the way to the courtroom now. I also suspect the judge will recognize it as such.

Will be interesting to see if the wire is accepted or rejected and what that might signal to substantiate or refute in this situation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Because he thinks this is going to help his court case. It won't. At this point, he's just being a sore loser. I suspect the kicking and screaming will continue all the way to the courtroom now. I also suspect the judge will recognize it as such.

Once Heritage ships the cards around the country, rendering a claim for specific performance impractical, I don't see where this goes in court. There doesn't seem to be a damages claim here at first blush. Powell's best hope is Heritage does something now to rectify the situation it caused.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

It's not Snow you're correct. This is so silly I hope he makes peace with it and moves on he obviously has the money..... just be happy with your collection you have. Geez it's just cards.

Why is it silly? Powell clearly got screwed from a fairness standpoint and it is something that means a lot to him.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why is it silly? Powell clearly got screwed from a fairness standpoint and it is something that means a lot to him.

Didn't receive an invoice, I would not send without so.

[Powell]

Thank you Peter. I don’t appreciate being called a “sore loser.” I have lost thousands of lots over the years with no complaint. I believe I won legitimately and I don’t think anyone thinks it was fair to close the set lot if I didn’t win and the battle “wasn’t over” even though I believe it was.

[Yoda]

At a minimum, Powell should receive a phone call from Chris Ivy today to discuss this dizzying issue. These are large sums of money involved here and Chris should in charge of trying to make it right. If Heritage accepted Powell's payment after, I guess, it was their computer that told him he had won the lot, then the contract has ben fulfilled and he is the winner of all the BG's.
In my many years in and out of the hobby, I have never seen such a boondoggle.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why is it silly? Powell clearly got screwed from a fairness standpoint and it is something that means a lot to him.

I agree he got screwed but if I was looking to spend $750,000 on something I really, really wanted, I think in the 3 weeks before the end of the auction I would have called my contact at Heritage and questioned how the auction worked and that I wanted a call if my set bid was beaten so I would have a chance to bid again before the auction closed rather than counting on a formatted auction to take care of me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rand1com

I agree he got screwed but if I was looking to spend $750,000 on something I really, really wanted, I think in the 3 weeks before the end of the auction I would have called my contact at Heritage and questioned how the auction worked and that I wanted a call if my set bid was beaten so I would have a chance to bid again before the auction closed rather than counting on a formatted auction to take care of me.

Sounds like hindsight. Seems reasonable to assume the biggest auction house on earth would set it up right.

[Powell]

I have bought in auctions for 20 years. I have never called in advance. I trust the website.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sounds like hindsight. Seems reasonable to assume the biggest auction house on earth would set it up right.

It was reasonable, just not true.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sounds like hindsight. Seems reasonable to assume the biggest auction house on earth would set it up right.

Yes and no. Personally, if it were me, I would have looked immediately at the individual lots once my Full set lot closed and declared me the winner. I would not need to tabulate the totals of all 12 cards, but could see that one or more remained open with clocks still running. This would alert me that something was amiss and I would be on the phone at once.

Sounds like the real loser was the consignor, as some pretty meaningful $$$ were left on the table due the bungling manner that this was set up and explained.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Geez it's just cards.

I don’t think we’re allowed to say that around here.

[Mark17]

A couple years ago when several AH were having "glitches" with their sites going down in the final minutes, I was declared the winning bidder on some items, only to be told later that, because some bidders had been unable to get bids in, the auction would resume the next day. Everyone who thought they had won..... hadn't.

Using Powell's analogy, I was the winning bidder. I had the high bid when time for those lots expired, the site declared the lot closed, and declared me the winner.

Later I found out I wasn't. I realize the circumstances (and dollar amount) are different in this case. I'm just saying, it's not the first time an AH has declared winners and later pulled the proverbial rug out from under them.

[notfast]

This isn’t the first time an auction has ran as a set and individually, right?

I feel like a high grade 52 Topps set was run like this fairly recently.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by notfast

This isn’t the first time an auction has ran as a set and individually, right?

I feel like a high grade 52 Topps set was run like this fairly recently.

It's probably the first time this type of auction was run in an "individual lot closing" format. That's the issue here.... Heritage's software was not properly equipped to handle the overtime bidding.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by Mark17

A couple years ago when several AH were having "glitches" with their sites going down in the final minutes, I was declared the winning bidder on some items, only to be told later that, because some bidders had been unable to get bids in, the auction would resume the next day. Everyone who thought they had won..... hadn't.

Using Powell's analogy, I was the winning bidder. I had the high bid when time for those lots expired, the site declared the lot closed, and declared me the winner.

Later I found out I wasn't. I realize the circumstances (and dollar amount) are different in this case. I'm just saying, it's not the first time an AH has declared winners and later pulled the proverbial rug out from under them.

Mark, I had the same thing happen to me on several lots. I can’t remember which AH it was but I was not a happy camper 😟

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Powell

I wired the full set price to Heritage this morning. I hope that they do the right thing.

If you were never formally invoiced, how did you know how much money to send them? I know you could figure out the total after the 20% BP, but what about the sales tax/shipping/insurance? Did you just guess at the amount due?

[mordecaibrown]

Using this situation as a reference, then Heritage should reopen these lots for bidding.

The set lot that Powell was bidding on closed - he couldn’t enter any more bids (I feel like this keeps getting lost). So, because of a software “glitch” and everyone NOT being able to bid, the lots should be reopened.

I’m also blown away by the “victim blaming” - Powell should have checked to see that the other lots were still open, etc… and done what? Placed a bid in his closed auction item? I don’t think he (or individual winners) did anything wrong - and blame shouldnt be placed with them. Any vitriol towards them is mind boggling.

And yes, it’s just cards, but I can’t comprehend going to bed and assuming you had won a once in a lifetime set and woken up to this mess.

In my opinion, the solution is to reopen the lots and perform the auction as was intended. Individual versus set competing.

Originally Posted by Mark17

A couple years ago when several AH were having "glitches" with their sites going down in the final minutes, I was declared the winning bidder on some items, only to be told later that, because some bidders had been unable to get bids in, the auction would resume the next day. Everyone who thought they had won..... hadn't.

Using Powell's analogy, I was the winning bidder. I had the high bid when time for those lots expired, the site declared the lot closed, and declared me the winner.

Later I found out I wasn't. I realize the circumstances (and dollar amount) are different in this case. I'm just saying, it's not the first time an AH has declared winners and later pulled the proverbial rug out from under them.