Rogue REA employee on eBay?

[Jim VB]

I've removed my previous comments because I'm now as confused as Barry. Because of that, I shouldn't be "explaining" anything, to anyone.

Are we now of the belief that hobbyguynj and smgsmg1968 are two different people?

[canjond]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

I've removed my previous comments because I'm now as confused as Barry. Because of that, I shouldn't be "explaining" anything, to anyone.

Are we now of the belief that hobbyguynj and smgsmg1968 are two different people?

Jim - I agree. Totally confused by the facts. I had thought the same person had two different IDs - guess that's not the case after all?

[Wesley]

The initial post was somewhat confusing, and at first glance, I thought the allegation was shill bidding. Now I understand this has nothing to do with shill bidding.

[Jim VB]

The links in the original post seem to show (I emphasize "seem") that a M116 Clarke and a C56 Moran were on the same PSA submission. One (Clarke) was later sold on Ebay by hobbyguynj. The other (Moran) was sold on Ebay by smgsmg1968. In this auction, is appears that hobbyguynj was the underbidder.

What am I not getting here?

[botn]

Not sure this has any reflection or should have any reflection on Rob and I also see no problem with Dean selling cards. Think that Rob does not permit him or any of his employees to do so through REA. Again, as Peter stated it is far worse and completely ignored by most here, that the owner of a grading company is selling cards and even worse when it includes expensive cards graded by his grading service.

But I am confused...

DJR claims that smgsmg1968 is Dean. eBay id hobbyguynj's identity is unknown, right? If you scan through the feedback for hobbyguynj there are 4 or 5 instances in which the person leaving feedback refers to hobbyguynj by name and the name used is Dean. smgsmg1968 and hobbyguynj have left feedback for one another.

[Jim VB]

Rob emailed me that he is 100% convinced that hobbyguynj and smgsmg1968 are different people, but have done business with each other.

If that's the case, I don't have a big problem here. I find it difficult to believe that people connected with our hobby, be it auction house employees or grading company employees, would have no interested in the hobby itself. I realize that leaves some potential for a conflict of interest, but I don't see any way around it.

If Rob is incorrect or has been lied to about these Ebay ID's, then there is an even bigger problem.

Maybe David R can jump back on here and clarify. I'm not very familiar with the Cardtarget website. Does that show definitively that those PSA numbers were on the same submission, or does it just show that they went through the system close together?

[barrysloate]

So let me pose this hypothetical, and it in no way has anything to do with Dean or REA:

We all agree it is unacceptable for an auction employee to bid with the company he works for, even if he only wants to buy something for his own collection. The reason is he has inside information concerning other bidders that would give him an unfair advantage.

So wouldn't an employee of a major auction house have access to the mailing list and contact information of all the auction house's key clients, something he wouldn't have if he were not an employee? And couldn't he contact these key clients with cards for sale? And suppose the deals didn't go so well- couldn't the clients call the auction owner and lodge a complaint about that employee?

So even if selling cards is not a direct conflict of interest, if I owned an auction house with employees I think I would tell them to focus on their day to day work, and not sell the same product the auction house sells.

[oriolesbb6]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

So let me pose this hypothetical, and it in no way has anything to do with Dean or REA:

We all agree it is unacceptable for an auction employee to bid with the company he works for, even if he only wants to buy something for his own collection. The reason is he has inside information concerning other bidders that would give him an unfair advantage.

So wouldn't an employee of a major auction house have access to the mailing list and contact information of all the auction house's key clients, something he wouldn't have if he were not an employee? And couldn't he contact these key clients with cards for sale? And suppose the deals didn't go so well- couldn't the clients call the auction owner and lodge a complaint about that employee?

So even if selling cards is not a direct conflict of interest, if I owned an auction house with employees I think I would tell them to focus on their day to day work, and not sell the same product the auction house sells.

Sorry read earlier post, before later clarification.

[barrysloate]

Oriolesbb66- it's fine that you disagree with me but I have no idea why. Should I assume you changed your mind and deleted your post? No big deal either way, just curious.

Also, this thread is not about Rob. It's about an employee of REA who used bad judgment on ebay. I spoke with Rob today at length and it goes without saying he preferred this never happened. But he has spoken to Dean and considers it over with. I doubt that will put an end to this discussion, but I wanted to share my conversation.

[autograf]

Tim......love the animated gif........VERY APPROPRIATE

[benchod]

With all due repect to Rob Lifson this isn't an isloated event with Dean using questionable judgement. In fact I have had a personal experience involving Dean on Ebay and found him to be an underhanded, immoral, backstabbing liar. Ask me how I really feel about him.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benchod

With all due repect to Rob Lifson this isn't an isloated event with Dean using questionable judgement. In fact I have had a personal experience involving Dean on Ebay and found him to be an underhanded, immoral, backstabbing liar. Ask me how I really feel about him.

The facts underlying these feelings?

[benchod]

Sure Peter
In 2004 I won a KBats team card on ebay.
I paid immediately after the auction with paypal.

Hobbyguynj (Faragi) emailed me saying he was the underbidder and wanted to know if I wanted to sell him the card. I told him no thanks. He then emailed me saying he heard from the seller that I couldn't pay for the card and he was going to send payment. This obviously was all b.s. as I had already paid. He also emailed the seller telling him I wasn't going to pay.

Fortunately the seller was an upright person and I have the card in my collection. It just amazes me how low a person will stoop for a piece of cardboard or for money

[Peter_Spaeth]

So both of these IDs are Dean's and he is "buying" his own cards and leaving feedback for himself?

[benchod]

Sorry Perter the beginning of the thread was too convoluted for me to follow but when I saw Faragi's name I wanted the board to know what kind of person they are dealing with. Hobbyguynj is Dean Faragi and I have saved the emails I received from him

[HRBAKER]

Lord, I love this hobby.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So both of these IDs are Dean's and he is "buying" his own cards and leaving feedback for himself?

Not sure. We know based on feedback which was left for hobbyguynj, in which he was addressed as Dean and now an account Craig that hobbyguynj is Dean. I am unclear whether or not smgsmg1968 is also Dean. Rob L has posted saying there was absolutely no shill bidding on ebay involving Dean and he has emailed Jim saying the same thing. So who is smgsmg1968? Maybe David, who started this post can come back out from hiding and tell us one way or another if smgsmg1968 is also Dean.

Then I would like to know why Rob would come on here and post there was no shill bidding prior to fully investigating. Dean has put Rob in a bad spot.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The C56 Moran (no pun intended) was sold by smgsmg1968 (Dean responds to emails at this account) and the winning bidder was none other then hobbyguynj if you are still following along with this tangled web.

[yomass]

So as a result of "blowing the whistle" on this, 1) the set registry guy doesn't get the cards he needs and wants, 2) Dean doesn't make a profit selling the cards to the registry guy and 3) the seller doesn't get a higher price by selling to Dean. Everyone is worse off.

It is hard to argue that Dean has a moral obligation to let the registry guy know the cards are on eBay without compensation. The opportunity for profit gave him an incentive him to take action that would make everyone better off. I really don't see a problem here.

It is nice of Rob to apologize, but I don't see why.

[teetwoohsix]

Sounds like all of this could've been avoided had Dean offered to buy the cards back from his friend outside of eBay.

I don't feel Rob needs to appologize for anything,he had nothing to do with this,other than being a nice enough guy to employ Dean.