STAR WARS #1 0

[Mr 9.8]

Now over $1,300 with 12 hours left.

Wow!

[GACollectibles]

For those that have been tracking, what was the action on the last two 9.8 results($2000 & $2500 after the $1944 ow-w result), were they suspected shill auctions as well?

[jsilverjanet]

I sold mine about a month ago 9.8 (white) for $1891

 

 

[joe_collector]

These prices for such an ultra-common book are absolutely insane, and I predict that not only will CGC be inundated with copies and the Census will explode, but lots of "investors" will absolutely lose their shirts and pants on this one.

 

I don't even collect Star Wars comics, and I have multiple #1's first-prints just from toss-in freebies over the years. I gave away all the reprints.

[BrianR]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

[Mr 9.8]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

I hate shills.

[Key Largo Comics]

Won by a zero feedback bidder. Yikes.

[delorean1981]

This should be interesting

[GACollectibles]

This should be interesting

 

I'm hoping not.

[Mr 9.8]

This should be interesting

 

I'm hoping not.

Let us know if the buyer pays up or not.

[Jaydogrules]

Unfortunately this is happening to a lot of sellers of this book on ebay.

 

-J.

[rjrjr]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

[Jaydogrules]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

[NP_Gresham]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

Not seeing any of this. Where are you getting this information from?

[GACollectibles]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

 

I have had plenty of zero bidder winners that paid, so that attitude is not how I operate nor did I for this listing. Since I did have concerns that one of the other bidders and the zero feedback bidder might be related I called eBay and they told me they weren't even in the same state. That would not guarantee an above boards bidder, but I felt gave it some potential validity. eBay's information turned out to be incorrect.

 

I will update once the dust settles.

Edited July 14, 2015 by GACollectibles

[Jaydogrules]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

Not seeing any of this. Where are you getting this information from?

 

Hit the "show automatic bids" and it will show when the shill first placed hi max bid.

 

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=161758004772&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

 

-J.

[Broke as a Joke]

If he gets paid it's a non issue. Shills can drive up prices but somebody else must think it's worth that amount if they bid, win and pay.

[NP_Gresham]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

Not seeing any of this. Where are you getting this information from?

 

Hit the "show automatic bids" and it will show when the shill first placed hi max bid.

 

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=161758004772&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

 

-J.

Who is the shill?

The winner is zero feedback, the $1000 bid is not the same bidder.

I see where zero feedback can be suspicious, but that does does not make every other bid suspicious.

Your post still makes no sense to me.

[Jaydogrules]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

Not seeing any of this. Where are you getting this information from?

 

Hit the "show automatic bids" and it will show when the shill first placed hi max bid.

 

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=161758004772&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

 

-J.

Who is the shill?

The winner is zero feedback, the $1000 bid is not the same bidder.

I see where zero feedback can be suspicious, but that does does not make every other bid suspicious.

Your post still makes no sense to me.

 

I understand that you are not seeing what I am talking about. But trust me, it's there. The shill placed a max bid starting at the $1000 mark, and whatever his max shill bid was is what ultimately "won". (thumbs u

 

-J.

[canickus]

It looks like some jackwagon is trying to skew the auction results or at least make it look fishy.

 

It was looking good right up 'til that last bidder.

 

 

Not really. The shill placed his max bid way back at $1000. It was his fake bid that the legit buyers were competing against and, once again, artificially driving up the price. Frankly the seller should have canceled the bid the moment it was placed.

 

-J.

Not seeing any of this. Where are you getting this information from?

 

Hit the "show automatic bids" and it will show when the shill first placed hi max bid.

 

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=161758004772&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

 

-J.

Who is the shill?

The winner is zero feedback, the $1000 bid is not the same bidder.

I see where zero feedback can be suspicious, but that does does not make every other bid suspicious.

Your post still makes no sense to me.

 

I understand that you are not seeing what I am talking about. But trust me, it's there. The shill placed a max bid starting at the $1000 mark, and whatever his max shill bid was is what ultimately "won". (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

J, I think that I am looking at the same data that you are looking at but coming up with a different conclusion. I think the only thing we agree on is that the zero feedback winning bidder e***c placed his initial bid at $1025.

 

There is always a risk with a zero feedback bidder, particularly on a high dollar item. We will see what happens in this case. Seriously, you have to stop throwing the "shill" word around with no evidence because you disagree with the current market value of this book. Just because someone has zero feedback does not automatically make them a shill. I, like every other ebay user in history, was a zero feedback buyer at one time and I was not a shill.

 

Your writing that all these auctions are shilled accuses a lot of good sellers unfairly. You should stop doing it. If it were my book and auction, I wouldn't react so nicely to you. I would tell you to go pound sand. You should also realize that there were two separate underbidders - g***l at $2150 and z***t at $2100 who are high feedback bidders bidding serious coin for this book. I know this doesn't fit your theory that this book should be a few hundred dollars (or less?) but at what point do you start to question if your belief of the current market is just flat wrong. How many bidders/buyers/books do you need to see before you realize that this is not a $500 book in today's market?