It's Closing Night of a Great Vintage Auction

[parkplace33]

I think it is safe to discuss auctions with anyone. Nothing (IMO) gets by any collector these days.

[Kco]

Typically yes, it avoids us running each other up for no beneficial reason. Typically there are some items each may be going "all out" for and those we all agree to let the other have it, then there are some items we all want but aren't in win-at-all-costs mode. It is more beneficial than hurtful 100% of the time. In a very small number of instances where 2 people equally want something then it's good ole fashioned who's willing to pay what mode and thats just fair market.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

Then No, I never do.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[babraham]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Then No, I never do.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

Driving 56mph in a 55mph zone in unlawful too.

.

[CardPadre]

Originally Posted by Leon

Driving 56mph in a 55mph zone in unlawful too.

.

So is smoothing out a crease on a card. Wait, no it's actually not. The hypocrisy of what ethics people here choose to embrace is...errrrr...something.



.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

[raulus]

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by raulus

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

Conversely, am I colluding with the seller to increase the price when I tell my buddy that a card he wants for his collection is available at XYZ auction house that he is not aware of?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Conversely, am I colluding with the seller to increase the price when I tell my buddy that a card he wants for his collection is available at XYZ auction house that he is not aware of?

Of course not. There's no agreement between potential competitors in that case.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by raulus

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

There would have to be a conversation. Collusion has to be a concerted effort between multiple parties. Deciding on your own not to bid is not that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

Structurally it's the same thing as bid rigging. Of course it's de minimus in this case, but still not the best look ethically either IMO. And people who think it's cool might feel differently if it was on a pricey card THEY had consigned.

[Kco]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

Respectfully disagree on it being collusion between a couple of friends and fellow collectors to choose not to bid on an item the other is truly after.

The reality is one person not bidding probably doesn't change the price much if at all, considering the hundreds of thousands to millions of additional consumers in the marketplace that you aren't in contact with that may also have interest in that item.

With how front and center auctions are now, my buddy Bob electing not go go after an item to not bid against a friend is unlikely to have any material change on the market value of that piece. If only you and Bob were willing to fight for the item in the first place, and it goes for a very low price, then the market wasn't really much of a market to begin with and you'd have been overpaying.

If something is too good of a deal, a dealer or flipper will bid in principal to grab a deal and flip it.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

Then I have never once done it. Now if it wasn't illegal the answer would be yes all the time. I collect some silly rare items and knowing and talking with the other top collectors is usually a good thing I would imagine.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

I'm guessing you're just bringing that up because there are some laws regarding that topic. I wasn't aware of that.

I've talked to hobby buddies that I know are looking for certain cards and I just refrain from bidding on those cards because I'd rather see my collecting buddy get it for a reasonable price. If there are other bidders, then they'll bid it up. It just wouldn't be me bidding it up. What's the harm in that? It's my choice.
It would be interesting to see someone try to prove that type of collusion.

I think I get it, but it's not like shill bidding.