Heritage Auction

[3and2]

Originally Posted by Heritage Sports

Everybody loves a scandal, we understand, but putting a $1700 bid on a $4000 Babe Ruth autograph a week before an auction closes just isn’t going to qualify. Please don’t hesitate to ask questions if this distinction isn’t as simple as most people believe it is.

I do appreciate Heritage being specific in how they bid on items during auctions, however, I don't fully understand the reason for them to do this. If Heritage didn't bid on the Babe Ruth item ($1700) the week prior, then what would it sell for? $2500, $3,000..how much do they think?

Perhaps, Heritage feels bidders need a little push to keep the bidding going, by placing a few bids here and there. If this is the case I really don't think that is fair to the other bidders. I know that auction houses just can't let an item go below market value, however, If your auctioning premium items then it will realize a premium price.

Basically, heritage bidding on the items seems disrespectful to the collector. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say...

[calvindog]

I don't like what Heritage does with their bidding on lots but it's open and transparent and legal. In the scheme of things, this is as good as it gets in the auction world. I do think that the condescending tone is really uncalled for, however. Why are auctioneers so condescending? You'd think they'd just invented the AIDS vaccine or something.

[bijoem]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I don't like what Heritage does with their bidding on lots but it's open and transparent and legal. In the scheme of things, this is as good as it gets in the auction world. I do think that the condescending tone is really uncalled for, however. Why are auctioneers so condescending? You'd think they'd just invented the AIDS vaccine or something.

Jeff -

I like Heritage and their auctions - but reading their first response - I was left with the same feeling. why be condescending?


"The distinction is so clear to us, and to most people within the hobby, that perhaps we have failed to spell it out in its simplest terms. So, if you’ll allow me, here is the difference between Heritage’s policy of placing house bids, and the illegal practice of shill bidding:"

[David Atkatz]

I'm not condoning Heritage's actions, but I think you guys are misinterpreting. HA is not trying to "bid the item up" for the consignor; rather they're hoping to win an item or two for themselves at a low price. What have they to loose? Place a lowball bid on a large number of pieces, and perhaps one will be overlooked and they'll win. That's why they place bids in their competitors' auctions as well.

[calvindog]

David, if that's all it is then I agree, there's nothing done wrong. I think the concern is that the bids will be placed further along in the auction. Is there any way to determine when the Heritage bids are placed? Either during or after an auction?

[David Atkatz]

They say they only bid up to the beginning of the last week.

[calvindog]

Well, if that's what it is, what is the harm (or even purpose) of that? The evils of shill bidding usually are contained within the near end of an auction, unless a ceiling bid is run up early on. As Barry noted above, it seems really innocuous -- so why do it at all? Just opens them up for unwarranted criticism.

[DJR]

.

[barrysloate]

Jonathan- thanks for coming on and explaining Heritage's policy in great detail. I do understand that your practices are legal, and that the company is bidding in good faith- by that I mean if you win a lot you will honor your bid and pay the consignor.

But there are other issues besides legal ones. There are just some auction practices that collectors really hate, and one is when employees of auction houses bid. I know it's done in other places- when I worked at Sotheby's I was allowed to bid on Halper lots even though I catalogued the collection. It was not an issue and they even have contracts written up solely for this purpose.

But that is the legal justification for it. On a public relations level, it is a disaster. I guess when you sell $600 million a year of memorabilia it may not matter. But I'm certain that is the issue that rankles the people reading this. Again, it's rare for an auction house to come into this lion's den with a fair and reasonable explanation.

[Heritage Sports]

Greetings all. I know everyone has been awaiting a Heritage response, and I hope you’ll all understand that, this being the absolute last day of proofing before sending our November Signature Auction catalog to the printer, we’ve all been otherwise heavily engaged.

It’s tough to know where to start.

The thing I find probably most annoying in this whole mess is that Heritage will not stand behind their employee, Mr Gutierrez. What is the point of having executive employees rendering opinions on authenticity if the auctioneer won't stand by that opinion.

I guess I’ll begin with the notion of a Heritage employee “guaranteeing authenticity” of an autograph. It’s an easy place to begin, as it is simply not accurate. Heritage is not an authentication firm. We do not issue letters of authenticity for autographs, and we do not charge for our opinions. We employ third party experts to authenticate our autographs, both PSA/DNA and James Spence, the most widely respected experts in the field. I’m not entirely certain whether or not some members of this board believe, if a Heritage employee offers his personal opinion on a piece (which we all do dozens of times a day, hundreds of times a month) that Heritage should be held somehow financially accountable for that free opinion in the event of a mistake. If that were the general assumption I suppose Heritage would need to rethink supplying this complimentary service. But I have to believe that the vast majority of hobbyists are more reasonable than that.

Jonathan- if Heritage bids so low that they virtually never win anything, why conduct this practice at all? On the positive side you win virtually nothing and accomplish little; on the negative side you create a great deal of suspicion and a boatload of bad will, since nearly 100% of your customers would likely hate this practice.

I believe you when you say it is done a week before the auction closes, and I understand the distinction you make between placing early bids and shilling. But how could Heritage risk the reputation it has built over decades, with the only thing to show for it is a few stray lots that slip between the cracks?

Sounds like the risk far outweighs the reward.

As to the tangential issue of house bids, it is an interesting dilemma that the policy could be misconstrued. It’s heartening that many of you appear to understand the difference between placing early house bids at wholesale prices Heritage would be willing to pay, and late shill bidding intended only to make a winning bidder pay more. But since it’s clear that the entirety of the hobby doesn’t fully grasp the distinction, it’s worthy of further consideration. We will revisit this policy, and perhaps it will be changed. As I am not a member of the executive team, I couldn’t promise any more than that. It is interesting to note however that when consignors have raised the issue of house bids in our auctions, we let them know that if they would prefer that we not place any bids on their items, then we can certainly comply with that request on their lots. Interestingly, we have yet to have anyone make that request.

“Also, I'm not sure I follow the distinction he makes - the difference between this and shilling is that these bids come in before competitive bidding starts and shill bidding takes place after? Before/After the start of "competitive bidding is an imaginary line.”

The issue is not when the bid was placed, although placing the bid early without knowledge of any other bids on the item is an important distinction, the real issue is the intent. We are placing a bid at which we are willing to pay for the item. Shill bidders are bidding on material with no intention of winning or paying for the item, simply with the intention of pushing up the prices. If we win the item, then we pay for the item with the buyer’s premium included and most importantly: The consignor is paid for the item at settlement.


1910 T229 Pet Cigarettes Chas. Willard SGC 60 EX 5
Oct 1, 2009: $448.13
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...6&Lot_No=81539
Jan 24, 2010: $167.30
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...4&Lot_No=44114

Would you (HA) really pay $448.13 (-19.5%) for this card again?

I’m not sure what the point of your post is as your links are for two different cards and Heritage neither owned or won either of them. That being said, if you have the time and the desire, I’m sure that you could search our expansive prices realized database to find an example of a lot that Heritage may have won at auction, then offered in a later auction or on eBay and sold at a loss. If we bid on an item and win it, then we write a check for that item including the 19.5% BP into the cost basis and the consignor is paid at settlement. Our money is at risk in the same manner that it would be if any other collector or dealer had won an item and decided to re-sell it. There is no doubt we have made some mistakes with purchases in the past.


I am well educated (like most on the board) but still having a very hard time understanding the distinction between someone on eBay shill bidding up their own item(s), winning and reslisting vs. HA's policy. Would it make a difference if the eBay bidder stated shill bidding was OK if the fine print?

From what I can tell, this is the only distinction. Maybe I am wrong? Is it semantics or something else? People usually do not accuse me of being slow but maybe I just don't get it. Since Jonathan asked for people that still do not get to ask questions, that is all I am requesting. Crickets, crickets...

Here is the simple distinction. An eBay shill bidder owns the material he auctions and therefore has no interest in buying it. Conversely, Heritage does not own the material it auctions, and has interest in buying it. Anything we already do own that goes to auction would be sold with a posted reserve if we were to “bid” on our own material. And shill bidding is a criminal offense, so stating it is “OK in the fine print” wouldn’t quite get it done. Our policy is legal, and clearly stated. So it is far more than semantics, I’m sure we can all now agree.

And, in closing, to put the genesis of this thread in its proper perspective, this sender of 120+ emails (and dozens of phone calls) sent yet another email to our Chairman, warning that he intended to start multiple accounts and place fake bids to ruin our auctions, and to hire “hackers” to crash our system. This email has, of course, been forwarded to the proper authorities. Again, it’s always tempting to take the side of the little guy when he complains about a big company, but the smart folks will take a step back and see that Heritage truly is a leading force for good within this hobby.

Heritage makes our auctions as transparent as possible and we state our rules in our T&C because we have nothing to hide. We are the only large sports auction firm that publishes reserves. We make all of our past results readily available in our auction archives. We have paid every consignor on time, every time over our 35 year history and we have sold collections on behalf of the FBI, DEA, and IRS. Heritage just strikes me as an odd target in a hobby with no shortage of legitimate ones. And, again, remember, this thread began because a guy who has absolutely flooded Heritage with over 100 emails got free advice for a $1500 baseball that didn’t pan out, then threatened a cyber-terrorist attack in retaliation.

Providing quality auctions is a service business and we understand that. Heritage has grown to be the world’s third largest auctioneer with over $600,000,000 in annual sales because of the trust and relationships that we have built over 35 years of quality service to our clients. This year is the first that Heritage Sports will be the largest sports auction firm as well, with over $12,000,000 in sales for 2010. If anyone has any additional questions from this post then please feel free to email me directly because I will not be able to post regularly.

By the way, Heritage will be launching its incredible November Signature Auction any day now, so be on the look out for it.

[Matt]

Not to distract from the interesting legal discussion on the table currently (Rob - that might be the best pop-culture reference on topic I've seen in a while), but I'd also like one other question answered:

Originally Posted by Heritage Sports

The issue is not when the bid was placed, although placing the bid early without knowledge of any other bids on the item is an important distinction, the real issue is the intent. We are placing a bid at which we are willing to pay for the item. Shill bidders are bidding on material with no intention of winning or paying for the item, simply with the intention of pushing up the prices. If we win the item, then we pay for the item with the buyer’s premium included and most importantly: The consignor is paid for the item at settlement.

Thanks for responding. You said you pay the BP on lots you win, thereby removing any advantage you would have in the bidding. Who do you pay the BP to?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Matt

Who do you pay the BP to?

The right hand, of course.

[Bridwell]

When I won a card last year, they charged me a 19.5% buyers fee and also 8.25% sales tax since I live in Texas. If their 'internal' bidder bidding against me wins the lot, does he pay the sales tax? Usually if an item is being bought by a wholesaler for resale in Texas, they can agree to waive the tax. From my point of view, the 'internal' bidder at Heritage may have an advantage of 27.75% in bidding against me.

[benjulmag]

As I see it, Heritage is in fact "paying" a BP for items it buys itself even though it is paying it to itself. The reason is opportunity cost. Say it buys an item for $10,000. The BP would be $1,950. And say the underbid was $9,500. The BP for that underbid would be $1,852.50. By buying the item itself, Heritage is forgoing that $1,852.50. That forgone BP is a real cost to them, an opportunity cost in economic parlance. Even though it is real, though, it is less that than the BP a non-Heritage winning bidder would be paying. In the example I give, Heritage's BP is 18.525% ($1,852.50/$10,000). So they do have a bit of a competitive advantage over the underbidder. If Heritage really wants to make this clean from a PR perspective, they might consider remitting the $97.50 to the consigner. That way, via the $1,852.50 BP "paid" via opportunity cost and the $97.50 extra paid to the consigner, they really are "paying" the full BP.