This looks interesting indeed

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by iggyman

James,
By the way, the four Topps 1952 high numbers sold for:

$202.50 *minus eBay/paypal fees = $181.75
$100.00 *minus eBay/paypal fees = $89.60
$371.00 *minus eBay/paypal fees = $333.23
$138.50 *minus eBay/paypal fees = $124.20
------------------------------------------
$812.00 *minus eBay/paypal fees = $728.78

Based on the H&S lot selling for $822.50, I believe the final bid was $700. So the "profit" was $28.78? Had they let the previous bid of $650 take the auction, they would have received $113.75 in juice.

Or is my math off here?

[iggyman]

Erick,

It's tough to speculate, because we are waist high in murky water. For example, did House of Cards place the $600 bid? Thus, the $650 second place bidder might have conceivably won the lot at $550.

Lovely day...

[Jaybird]

Originally Posted by iggyman

Erick,

It's tough to speculate, because we are waist high in murky water. For example, did House of Cards place the $600 bid? Thus, the $650 second place bidder might have conceivably won the lot at $550.

Lovely day...

I agree. Very murky at this point. To me, it doesn't even matter anymore. The murkiness is all brought about by the fact that one entity owned and operated by the same person is bidding on items owned and operated by that same person. It's murky because it's murky.

Only way to clean up the waters is to have H&S (employees, subsidiaries, owners, etc.) stop bidding on their own auctions.

[atx840]

Originally Posted by t206hound

Based on the H&S lot selling for $822.50, I believe the final bid was $700. So the "profit" was $28.78? Had they let the previous bid of $650 take the auction, they would have received $113.75 in juice.

Or is my math off here?

No Erick you are correct. H&S will always be out the profit of the previous increments BP amount if HOC wins.

Im 99% certain H&S would make HOC pay the BP as each lot required effort to scan, detail, receive, ship and process the funds.

HOC then is in the same boat as all of us, paying a 20% premium on lots and have to find a way to make a profit on the flip. Now maybe its just a risk they take while trying to bump up auctions and occasionally win but I doubt this as your one example shows a significant loss of profit.

[Jaybird]

Even if I were willing to accept the notion that one hand paying the other is not a competitive advantage (which I don't), what about all the auctions that they bid on and don't win. Those lot prices are driven up putting more Money in H&S hands. They could look at the lots they win as collateral damage

[atx840]

Yes collateral damage is the risk they could be taking.

I can't seen any advantage in paying a BP from one hand to the other. Keeping it simple.

You have $20 in your right hand.

Right hand gives the $20 to the left hand, you still have $20.
Right hand does not give $20 to the left hand, you still have $20

-$20 spent + $20 made = $0 profit
$20 saved + -$20 earned = $0 profit

[ValKehl]

Paying the BP from one company to the other obviously affects how much profit each company makes at the end of the day/month/year. Even if the same individuals own both companies, this will make a difference in each individual's profit, unless each of the individuals owns the same percentage of both companies, which I doubt is the case.
Val

[mordecaibrown]

Chris -

I mean no disrespect, but I think you are over simplifying this and not looking at whole picture.

1) Does H&S take a percentage from the consigner? Lets just assume its 10% (as I have no idea if they do and if so, what the percentage would be - simple assumption for illustration purposes).

They bid $600 on it, but it only cost them $540, because they got $60 from consignor. All of a sudden that profit Erick showed earlier just grew from $28 to $88.

2) When HOC bids in a H&S auction, the only possible scenarios is H&S benefits.

Either - they increase the bid amount; therefore, directly increasing the buyers premium. If current bid is $200 (H&S makes $39 - 19.5% buyers premium). If they make a bid of $300 and are outbid by another bidder max bid, the new high bid is $330 (H&S makes $64.35 on buyers premium). They just made $25 by simply making a bid. Do you make $25 (or any money) by making a bid in the auction? This profit amount increases with the value of the item.

OR - they win the item at a discount versus other bidders. If they win an item at $200 and pay the 19.5% buyers premium and receive a consignors fee of 10%, then total cost = $239 - $20 = $219. Also, this assumes that they do pay the buyers premium, if you dont think they do because the two places are owned by the same person - then the savings increase!

When a bidder can only benefit from bidding in an auction thats a conflict of interest.

Any.y K.enne.dy

[vintagechris]

Originally Posted by mordecaibrown

Chris -

I mean no disrespect, but I think you are over simplifying this and not looking at whole picture.

1) Does H&S take a percentage from the consigner? Lets just assume its 10% (as I have no idea if they do and if so, what the percentage would be - simple assumption for illustration purposes).

They bid $600 on it, but it only cost them $540, because they got $60 from consignor. All of a sudden that profit Erick showed earlier just grew from $28 to $88.

2) When HOC bids in a H&S auction, the only possible scenarios is H&S benefits.

Either - they increase the bid amount; therefore, directly increasing the buyers premium. If current bid is $200 (H&S makes $39 - 19.5% buyers premium). If they make a bid of $300 and are outbid by another bidder max bid, the new high bid is $330 (H&S makes $64.35 on buyers premium). They just made $25 by simply making a bid. Do you make $25 (or any money) by making a bid in the auction? This profit amount increases with the value of the item.

OR - they win the item at a discount versus other bidders. If they win an item at $200 and pay the 19.5% buyers premium and receive a consignors fee of 10%, then total cost = $239 - $20 = $219. Also, this assumes that they do pay the buyers premium, if you dont think they do because the two places are owned by the same person - then the savings increase!

When a bidder can only benefit from bidding in an auction thats a conflict of interest.

Any.y K.enne.dy

Hi Andy,
I'm not sure what you mean by over simplifying or the point that I am over simplifying is, but I agree with everything you are saying. For the record, I am of the opinion that this is a major conflict of interest and I am skeptical as to why HOC would buy those 1952 Topps cards to try and resell as they say.

Maybe I didn't do a good job of explaining how I feel about this, but I think I am seeing the big picture. To me, it is a big conflict of interest and I personally don't buy the two different businesses they are trying to sell to people on the board.

Ahhh, I see you were talking about Chris B

ch...s Sh..-re-v..e

[Jaybird]

Originally Posted by atx840

Yes collateral damage is the risk they could be taking.

I can't seen any advantage in paying a BP from one hand to the other. Keeping it simple.

You have $20 in your right hand.

Right hand gives the $20 to the left hand, you still have $20.
Right hand does not give $20 to the left hand, you still have $20

-$20 spent + $20 made = $0 profit
$20 saved + -$20 earned = $0 profit

0 profit but they have a $20% advantage over the person bidding next to them. So, if they get any item at a 20% discount, how do they not win that battle? And why would I play a game where the house has a 20% advantage? This isn't vegas and the potential to "win big" isn't even there.

They are able to own an item at a 20% savings over anyone else. If they take the next increment over anyone, bidding it up 10%, they still get the item at 10% less than previous bidder. Not a level playing field.

In math terms, the item is $1000 (bid by outside bidder). He stops because he knows he has to pay $1200. Auction house bids up to $1100. Since they don't have to pay premium, they still get it at $100 less than previous "REAL" bidder.

[atx840]

Im keep it simple on the BP side only as to clarify there is very little advantage to not paying a BP.

In theory HOC gets a lot for 20% less but then H&S is out that 20% buyers fee that every 3rd party bidder pays or would pay if they win.

So if H&S gets 10% of the hammer price from the consigner, who do you think pays that on the lots that HOC wins? HOC, so its not profit, either they get 10% from me or they get it from HOC. If they don't take their 10% and no BP then yes HOC gets the cards for 90% of the hammer price and a 20% BP savings. But now H&S is out that 10% and the 20%. I think its all even.

Now if they bid up and up and still don't win, then yes HOC is making H&S a profit on the 10% hammer price and the 20% BP for every increment they can raise it by.

[ValKehl]

Josh & James - It's nice of you to attempt to do "damage control" for H&S and HOC, but it would be much more meaningful for Bill Huggins to address these issues himself on Net54, rather than inviting anyone who is concerned (MANY Net54ers are CONCERNED!) to call him to discuss.

It has long been my assumption that pretty much the same individuals own both H&S and HOC, with Bill owning a majority interest in both companies. FWIIW, I have known Bill since the mid-1980s, and I have always believed him to be a person of high integrity.

I would prefer that auction houses, their retail affiliates, and/or their employees be precluded from bidding in their own auctions. But, personally, I have no problem with auction houses, their retail affiliates, and/or their employees (1) putting their own items in their auctions, and (2) bidding on items (except their own) in their auctions, PROVIDED this is very clearly made known to us bidders. By this, I mean that each item so owned should be clearly noted, both in the auction catalog and online; and furthermore, each lot on which the auction house, their retail affiliate, and/or their employees bid should be clearly noted online during the course of the auction along with whether or not the auction house, their retail affiliate, and/or their employee is the current high bidder. This could still lead to shill bidding by auction houses, especially on those lots with higher maximum bids, but I seldom leave maximum bids because of this concern.
Val