This looks interesting indeed

[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.