Wow - Genuine Action in Cleaning Up the Hobby

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I agree with Steve M. on your list, Jim. I have no issue except on 1. As long as it's disclosed up front then I have no issue with employees bidding but there does need to be added oversight into not letting that employee have any access to the bids and bidders being placed in the whole auction. I wouldn't be surprised if we see this kind of thing happen in the very near future ie... stronger written rules by auction houses pertaining to themselves. In my opnion what MEARS is doing is great but just a little too heavy handed and too strict with regard to any exceptions whatsoever. Life, and the hobby, are not black and white....Overall, except for that first clause I am in agreement.....However, I will say I don't personally have an issue with those very first levels of altering a card...removing dirt, erasing a light pencil mark etc....but for an auction house it's probably better to not even go there thus avoiding the controversy...The good will doesn't outweigh the negative press.......regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Barry's point is the problem here: just because an auction house agrees to these rules does not mean any of them will actually abide by them without some sort of independent oversight - and that is not happening anytime soon.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Steve and Leon,

I am proposing we try to reach a consensus that a significant number of collectors can and will sign onto. If there is a cinsensus against point bone than we shouled take it out.

Jeff,

Agreed but I think there are enough smart collectors in the hobby that if an auction house was flagrantly breaking the rules that there would be evuidence of it.
There would be a system unless they cease and desisted that they would be dropped from the list of auction houses who have signed onto the agreement to follow the rules of our group.

Any other ideas?

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jim, the one way the oversight idea would work would be for collectors to simply identify cards that they know (or have owned at one point) that have been reholdered or altered. But how do you handle the conflicts of interest? Who would be able to have independent information to reveal this?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Jeff,

In my opinion this is not the only way this would work.

If someone for example saw a psa 8 T206 Ty Cobb green background in an auction and was positive it was the same sgc 92 he once owned, notification would then go out to the dealer to verify and add the information if true.

Similarly if a collector saw a card in an auction that he knew had been altered or rejected by a grading company as having been altered, notification would be sent out to the auction house to see if this could be confirmed and disclosed.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

So let's say a dealer agrees to all these terms and signs a contract. He then conducts an auction. How does anybody know whether he abided by the rules, and if there is any doubt about, how will one look into it? Are you going to ask for the auction house computer and audit all the bids placed?

It all boils down to the honor system, which doesn't always work that well in our hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

I don't envision it being a contract--more signhing on to agree to a series of business practices.

There will be elements of this where you have to trust a dealers integrity but there are also parts which can be documented. The person who will break the rules on what can be documented is likely to break the rules on everything.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Barry,

MEARS has at least partially addressed your question about the honor system. Part of what they will require is that the auction houses allow short-notice audits to demonstrate compliance.

So the houses would have to retain records for each bid on each lot for a set period of time, or something like that. MEARS actually gives a generic description of the records in their policy, linked above. These records would have to be made available to MEARS for review to assure that the bids were kosher, so to speak.

But if MEARS can do it, so can any other body that wants to enforce a policy. You require records and you audit. Period. The records disappeared or aren't available? Boom. Failed the audit. Believe me, it happens each and every day out there - our factories get audited all the time by seemingly everybody - customers, regulatory agencies, etc. I have to have records of everything from tests and inspections to lot control to training to engineering change dates - you name it.

To be honest, my company usually doesn't need to keep these records around too long after they are generated - at least not for our purposes. But we do need to keep them around because we know that the auditors will need to see them to **confirm that we are adhering to their requirements and policies**. Just like MEARS is proposing.

The bottom line is that it is really fairly easily enforced commerically, and does not at all need to rely on the honor system.

The problem is that the auditor does have to have some power over the auditee - so the auditee is motivated to allow the audit and live with the results. MEARS has flexed its muscle, and we'll see where it leads. Anyone else willing to flex similar muscle would just help the process along.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

But I could agree to everything on your list and be printing up T206's in my basement as we speak. I like the idea of some kind of governing body but it still boils down to honesty.

Edited to add I just saw Joann's post. An auction house could easily get past an audit. For example, they could bid on their own lots using a fabricated account that wouldn't be detected.

I like the idea, I'm just trying to figure out how it can be truly enforced.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The point I am trying to make is if someone is honest he doesn't have to sign anything and agree to anything because he will be guided by his conscience and do the right thing anyway.

But if a dealer is dishonest he can sign and agree to every rule in the book and then figure a way to circumvent them.

Hate to be so skeptical, but that is my nature.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

I think this is a great thread and I think it is important to move in the direction in which everyone seems to be progressing but I would like to point out a few things about this from an auction/dealer (is there really much of a difference anymore) perspective.

1. This relates to the other thread about conflicts of interest but no one has discussed the key role of super low minimum bids in the shilling process. My experience has been that many consignors, if they feel the minimum bids are too low, will themselves or have a freind run up the bids. I mentioned this here as an auction house can agree to everything and then some (and believe they are out there) unscrupulous bidder will make a mockery of everything you guys are working so hard to put together. I can state that at Clean Sweep we work very hard to police this and have removed consignor shill bids on many occasions. Our experience is that once this is done, this GREATLY reduces the problem. If other people sincerely tried this, it would help things tremendously.

2. MEARS. I was speaking to someone this weak in the industry and they made an interesting point. According to this system, MEARS would have access to customer records. MEARS, as they openly disclose, are dealers first and authenticators second. This could well then be a suicide pact for someone to give a potential competitor access to bidding records and info.

3. Provenance of graded cards. I have on many occasions voice my support for Jim Crandall's approach and I am very sympathetic with him; however, (A) someone consigns to me a T206 Cobb 7 or 8; how would I be able to find out the provenance of it aside from the word of the consignor?, (B) we all this is a cutthroat competitive business, what is to stop a competitor or just an angry person from posting false info on this blog or someplace about a card (ie, I owned this very Cobb as 5 years ago) to harm what may be a fully original card from being sold for reasonable market value.

Again, I FULLY support the thrust of this and plan on signing to this on some level but it just needs to make sense and be fully thoughout...

Respectfully - Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

But part of the problem is that not everyone considers all of these practices to be dishonest. Someone's good character would not get past the fact that they don't see a problem with cleaning a card, or resubmitting for multiple grades. They would do all of these things and not necessarily have bad character.

If someone says that they won't do business with a house that engages in these practices - even if the house does not believe that they are wrong or unethical - then the standard of behavior is established, and it is the same for everyone instead of based on the individual ethics of each business.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I don't see the correlation between low minimum bids and shilling.

I try to keep my minimums low because I want to get as many qualifiers on a lot as possible. Once several people bid the low minimum is gone. The lot typically stays low for a couple of days only, then reaches a reasonable level.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Saucier

"With respect to cards and similar items, trimming, pressing, or the removal of stains, glue, gum, etc… or writing that are designed to improve the appeal of an item or return it an improved state."



In respect to cards, how would they know if a card has been altered? Will they be relying solely on the grading companies? Or as Jim suggested, will they only know if they have proof from previous owners? If there is one thing most of us have learned, altered cards in holders are not a rarity by any means.

Leon may be correct; they should modify the part they are not experts in. Also true is the fact it really is not always black and white, many times it comes down to an experienced opinion. Then again, maybe they have in-house card experts. Does anyone know?

One thing is for sure; they are making a valiant effort!

___________________________________________

"However, I will say I don't personally have an issue with those very first levels of altering a card...removing dirt, erasing a light pencil mark etc"


Just thinking, now that would be an interesting thread (seriously)...Show us your level one alterations .

You may find that if they were reholdered after a level one alteration, the bumps would be more than one grade.



Kevin Saucier

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

So are there people ready to sign onto these six points or are there other changes recommended?

We can hardly go forward with the meager response to date.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I'll sign anything- I won't even read it first.

On a more serious note I may not agree with all your points (or Mears), specifically if an auction employee has a collection I have no problem with him placing a bid, but overall I think your proposition is fair. But I would still like to know how it will be enforced.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

You and me and the rest of us are the enforcers--the "eyes and ears" of the hobby.

Jim