This looks interesting indeed

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Dan -- fear of backlash. I know this from private communications. EDIT TO ADD If H&S were really "shilling" HOC wouldn't be winning anything -- it would just be a house account used to bump other bidders to their max bids.

That's not true..their software is set up to not show max bids, but it may not be anonymous and they may know the bidding patterns of their customers..some guys are win at all cost, and others are cautious, and wait until extended bidding to do their work. They IMO were looking at lots that they believed they could make money on with their ebay account..they may have been bidding to win, but in the process the house was running up bids...which is illegal regardless of intent.

At first I couldn't tell if you were playing Devil's Advocate or looking for work. But now I think you're being serious that you see nothing wrong with what they were doing. I just don't understand how anyone could look at the situation and be okay with this.

[ullmandds]

Yes Dan...agreed?! WTF is wrong with everyone?!

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am being serious. I don't consider placing a bid with the hope of winning the lot to be running anyone up. It's a different issue if you don't believe that's what H&S was really up to, but that's more a factual than a philosophical question.

Dan, do you object to hidden reserves also? Or consignors buying back their own cards? Just curious.

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Dan, do you object to hidden reserves also? Or consignors buying back their own cards? Just curious.

A hidden reserve is a static target placed on a lot before the auction opens, which is very different than the scenario with H&S.

Owners bidding on their own lots is also shill bidding. Are you ok with owners bidding on their own items?

[Peter_Spaeth]

My instinct is against consignors bidding on their own lots, but on the other hand what is the difference I wonder between a hidden reserve of X on a lot and the consignor placing a bid of X-1 increment? Either way, you can't win the card for less than X, and the consignor gets it back if the bidding doesn't go that high.

Of course in a sense none of these things we are debating matter much. If an auction house wants to, it can ask a friendly third-party to do its bidding, and if a consignor wants to, he can ask a friend.

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My instinct is against consignors bidding on their own lots, but on the other hand what is the difference I wonder between a hidden reserve of X on a lot and the consignor placing a bid of X-1 increment? Either way, you can't win the card for less than X, and the consignor gets it back if the bidding doesn't go that high.

Of course in a sense none of these things we are debating matter much. If an auction house wants to, it can ask a friendly third-party to do its bidding, and if a consignor wants to, he can ask a friend.

I have to agree with all of that. My thought is that it boils down to the principle. One is a static target placed at the outset while the other is a bit more arbitrary in that it can be adjusted as the auction unfolds (at least my understanding is the hidden reserve is not adjusted after an auction has begun). In the end, I'm not sure it matters much because the hammer price can be manipulated in many ways. Discussing principle is one thing, but policing reality is completely another.

[mordecaibrown]

Personally, I always assumed that auction houses (or employees of the house) were not allowed to bid on the items due to a potential conflict of interest. This whole thread got me thinking, is Huggins and Scott the only auction house that WAS allowing employees to bid on items.

I know many on here often mention REA as the gold standard of auctions and on their website they clearly state that, "The auction house should not own any of the material, set any secret hidden reserves, permit its employees and executives to bid in the auction, provide inaccurate descriptions, make undisclosed restorations to the material, or intentionally not disclose any conflicts of interest."

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/about/index.html

I did a real basic search of some other auction house rules and I had a hard time finding any statements concerning the topic of employee bidding - either way, allowed or not. I was surprised by this - only one auction house (that my admittedly caveman search found) addresses this topic...

Does anyone on here know factually where some of the other auction houses stand on this topic? If so, I think it would be good information to share with everyone.

A.ndy K.en.n.edy

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by mordecaibrown

Does anyone on here know factually where some of the other auction houses stand on this topic? If so, I think it would be good information to share with everyone.

A.ndy K.en.n.edy

6. Subject to exceptions relating to credit considerations, all qualified bidders in good standing are eligible to bid on any lot in the auction. Legendary Auctions as a Company, as well as all of its employees (including executives and principals), are ineligible to bid in our auctions. Passive outside investors are eligible to bid.
15. Although Legendary Auctions employees, executives and principals are prohibited from bidding in the auction, from time to time they will own items that are consigned to the auction. In those cases (1) It will be clearly disclosed and (2) On these particular items customers will have a 7 days “no questions asked” return policy.
http://legendaryauctions.com/rules.aspx

I searched both Sterling and Brockelman & Luckey Auctions and found nothing in writing per web sites pertaining to employee bidding in writing but I thought Leon has repeated they cannot bid in their auction I believe...
http://www.b-lauctions.com/terms.html
http://www.sterlingsportsauctions.com/rules.aspx