Question for Heritage and comiclink reps wrt Burkey admission 2 2

[KPR Comics]

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

 

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

 

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

 

Good luck certifying a class on the "facts" presented.

[Peter G]

Mike, on your post (#9114012 - 01/20/16 02:29 AM) you stated "i've worked out numerous deals with other collectors to get a hundred or so back if I felt the prices at auction were undervalued and I could sell it for more on my website in the future if I just give it time"...

 

Help me understand how you did this...

.

 

 

Mike, you owe the board an explanation....we are waiting

 

Mitch,

 

You will be waiting a long time because Mike will not be posting on this subject any more. Surely he has spoken with counsel and will say no more on this subject. Jaybuck and Chris have been pretty revealing in their posts that we should all just go away now.

.

 

That is why the donation by Mike, coupons from auction houses would have gotten some type of justice or repair... And to play fair...we all have to be more vilgent in our "blind" purchases from here on out...lession learned

 

 

 

Please... I know that everyone has their perceptions/ opinions/ experience but please wait for him to either respond or stay silent regarding how the "deals" were worked out.

 

Again....

 

Mike, on your post (#9114012 - 01/20/16 02:29 AM) you stated "i've worked out numerous deals with other collectors to get a hundred or so back if I felt the prices at auction were undervalued and I could sell it for more on my website in the future if I just give it time"...

 

Help me (us) understand how you did this...

 

You will only hear radio silence from Mike from here on out.

 

 

[jaybuck43]

Because they are two very different things. I'm not doing anything to defend Mike's actions. I think shill bidding, for whatever reason (either as a defense from selling the piece at a loss, or to make more money) is always wrong. You want to sell, you take the risk and sell it. If you have to eat the loss, you do that. Mike was wrong to shill his auctions. I have said that, I will continue to say that.

 

Downplaying case viability is also called setting expectations.

[AnWARtheart-migration]

Because they are two very different things. I'm not doing anything to defend Mike's actions. I think shill bidding, for whatever reason (either as a defense from selling the piece at a loss, or to make more money) is always wrong. You want to sell, you take the risk and sell it. If you have to eat the loss, you do that. Mike was wrong to shill his auctions. I have said that, I will continue to say that.

 

Downplaying case viability is also called setting expectations.

 

You only need to downplay case viability to your client. No one here is your client. The least people on this forum could expect from you would be to give both sides of the coin. The only side you have taken in your arguments are expressing sentiments AGAINST case viability (which I wholly disagree with). Why are you so biased in your analysis?

[Mxwll Smrt]

Mike, on your post (#9114012 - 01/20/16 02:29 AM) you stated "i've worked out numerous deals with other collectors to get a hundred or so back if I felt the prices at auction were undervalued and I could sell it for more on my website in the future if I just give it time"...

 

Help me understand how you did this...

.

 

 

Mike, you owe the board an explanation....we are waiting

 

Mitch,

 

You will be waiting a long time because Mike will not be posting on this subject any more. Surely he has spoken with counsel and will say no more on this subject. Jaybuck and Chris have been pretty revealing in their posts that we should all just go away now.

.

 

That is why the donation by Mike, coupons from auction houses would have gotten some type of justice or repair... And to play fair...we all have to be more vilgent in our "blind" purchases from here on out...lession learned

 

 

 

Please... I know that everyone has their perceptions/ opinions/ experience but please wait for him to either respond or stay silent regarding how the "deals" were worked out.

 

Again....

 

Mike, on your post (#9114012 - 01/20/16 02:29 AM) you stated "i've worked out numerous deals with other collectors to get a hundred or so back if I felt the prices at auction were undervalued and I could sell it for more on my website in the future if I just give it time"...

 

Help me (us) understand how you did this...

 

You will only hear radio silence from Mike from here on out.

 

 

If that's the case, how about every person that would like to know simply post the question as its written:

 

Mike, on your post (#9114012 - 01/20/16 02:29 AM) you stated "i've worked out numerous deals with other collectors to get a hundred or so back if I felt the prices at auction were undervalued and I could sell it for more on my website in the future if I just give it time"...

 

Help me (us) understand how you did this...

 

Additionally, if interested, please also send him a PM with the title "Question" and post the same request in the content portion.

 

 

 

[BCarter27]

Hello,

 

In light of the recent, public admission of shill bidding by Mike Burkey aka Romitaman, I would like to request a list of all lots this seller has consigned to Heritage for the last 3 years.

 

I would also request that any lots being consigned by this seller, both currently and in future auctions, be marked as such in their Description.

 

The above information will allow me to determine if I was affected by this activity, allow me to adjust FMV data for "comps", and also allow me to re-establish good faith in your auction house in advance of the upcoming Comic Signature Auction.

 

Thank you for your attention.

 

Just emailed to HA. Feel free to send your own.

[BCarter27]

Can anyone familiar with Romitaman's past inventory determine if he has any consignments in the current auction?

[AnWARtheart-migration]

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

 

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

 

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

 

Good luck certifying a class on the "facts" presented.

 

Agreed that CA might not be the way to go. That said, there are several statutes upon which a case can be brought . My point was that lawyer shopping the facts is a good next step if cooperation of restitution is not forthcoming. Jaybucks assertion that you need a bankroll to bring this case is disingenuous. Lawyers take cases all the time on contingency. Has Jaybucks never heard of a legal contingency fee? Jaybucks is intentionally? being disingenuous about the uphill nature of litigation for his own agenda driven purpose. What type of lawyer just says don't bother, its going to be hard? Especially without a full understanding of each prospective plaintiffs possible exposure. Heck, one poster said he spent $100k last year. You get several such collectors together and you have a serious case with possibly large real damages.

[comicwiz]

Hello,

 

In light of the recent, public admission of shill bidding by Mike Burkey aka Romitaman, I would like to request a list of all lots this seller has consigned to Heritage for the last 3 years.

 

I would also request that any lots being consigned by this seller, both currently and in future auctions, be marked as such in their Description.

 

The above information will allow me to determine if I was affected by this activity, allow me to adjust FMV data for "comps", and also allow me to re-establish good faith in your auction house in advance of the upcoming Comic Signature Auction.

 

Thank you for your attention.

 

Just emailed to HA. Feel free to send your own.

 

I share a lot of these concerns and the overall sentiment of your inquiry.

 

Following your lead, I am going to preempt what I'm about to say by emphasizing this hypothetical scenario I'm about to describe should not be construed as speculating on how the terms were negotiated allowing no reserve terms to be used on the auctions where shill bidding was used to enforce a "soft" or "hidden" reserve.

 

What I think should be discussed is some of the instruments and incentives the auction companies are using to solicit inventory to include in their event auctions. While the commissions aren't really something that I think will change with this revelation, I do feel that instruments like offering cash advances on the terms/conditions where the consignor agrees to the risk of offering their pieces at no reserve should be more carefully scrutinized.

 

In a word, anyone who agrees to take an advance, and then shill bids on the auction because they don't want to sell the piece too low should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it too.

 

What I'd like to see is the auction companies do a little more to protect everyone, including the buyers, and one of the ways they can do this is by either bloating the advances on "no reserve" terms, reducing the advances if the consignor insists on a "reserve" with a nominal "administrative fee" tacked on if it doesn't sell, and asking for the cash advances to be returned and use the OA as collateral on delinquent accounts or consignors not keeping on their end of the deal.

 

I understand the auctioneer potentially loses on the comission/BP when it doesn't sell, but there's enough to ponder from this revelation to consider how blame lands squarely on both the auction company and the consignor when such loop holes are exposed.

 

There's also something to be said about catching a glimpse of activity that demonstrates consignors unwilligness to see a piece sell for less than what they want, and to this point auction companies and consignors should be more vigilant in preventing their systems from being gamed in this manner.

 

While these suggestions may seem to be impossible to implement, or may not necessarily incent pieces to hit the auction block, simply put, the people that make these systems viable are buyers, and the status quo does nothing to allay people's concerns, nor does it help bolster confidence. Rather, more safeguards to protect the integrity of the bidding, past sales data, and the perception of market health will return some of the lost confidence from this revelation.

[comix4fun]

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

 

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

 

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

 

Good luck certifying a class on the "facts" presented.

 

Agreed that CA might not be the way to go. That said, there are several statutes upon which a case can be brought . My point was that lawyer shopping the facts is a good next step if cooperation of restitution is not forthcoming. Jaybucks assertion that you need a bankroll to bring this case is disingenuous. Lawyers take cases all the time on contingency. Has Jaybucks never heard of a legal contingency fee? Jaybucks is intentionally? being disingenuous about the uphill nature of litigation for his own agenda driven purpose. What type of lawyer just says don't bother, its going to be hard? Especially without a full understanding of each prospective plaintiffs possible exposure. Heck, one poster said he spent $100k last year. You get several such collectors together and you have a serious case with possibly large real damages.

 

 

What was your name again? You know? For the class action?

 

That's pretty basic information, right? It's a Stock question. No need to evade.

[BCarter27]

While these suggestions may seem to be impossible to implement, or may not necessarily incent pieces to hit the auction block, simply put, the people that make these systems viable are buyers, and the status quo does nothing to allay people's concerns, nor does it help bolster confidence. Rather, more safeguards to protect the integrity of the bidding, past sales data, and the perception of market health will return some of the lost confidence from this revelation.

 

I'm with you, but I am not sure influencing the buyer/seller fee terms is a possible goal at this point. That is how the auction houses are competitive with one another (along with website ease of use, marketing, and advertising.)

 

As devil's advocate, and without a way to confirm, both HA and Romitaman stated his shills paid their buyer's fees. No mention of a negative seller's fee and I don't think anyone's confirmed that HA offers this (unless I missed a post.)

 

However, as the comic art market is now maturing (both in dollars and cultural significance) and the Old West mentality is pushed out, these are important points moving forward.

 

If someone can post some tips on how to cross-reference current lots with Romitaman's past inventory (via wayback), I am sure we can all pitch in to help.

[eewwnuk]

Jaybucks is intentionally? being disingenuous about the uphill nature of litigation for his own agenda driven purpose. What type of lawyer just says don't bother, its going to be hard? Especially without a full understanding of each prospective plaintiffs possible exposure. Heck, one poster said he spent $100k last year. You get several such collectors together and you have a serious case with possibly large real damages.

 

actually a lot of lawyers do. nothing wrong with that. they assess whether something has merit and is worth pursuing.

[Funnyslover]

Todd from Heritage has responded on the "Wierd HA results" thread. Good unambiguous clarification. I'll be back bidding with them.

 

[Kreton]

I did in fact contact Heritage via email Sunday evening ( my particular situation is summarized about 10 pages back) and got a call from the person that handles consignments on Monday. He said they did review my purchase and that the bid beneath me and the winning bid (which ended up being vacated) were from bidders he was familiar with and that he considered legitimate.

 

For what it's worth, he did say he was familiar with these threads and with the situation and would be reviewing all of the art consigned by Romitaman.

 

As for what that means...people will have opinions on that. They very well could be doing that. I suppose it's possible that it's just spin and they are hoping this goes away quickly. It would be interesting to hear from other folks that feel they've been affected and what communication they have with Heritage.

 

 

 

Did Heritage offer any reason why the "winning bid" by a bidder that is familiar to them did not follow through. I would think a familiar name would not back out of a deal. Are there any repercussions from not paying for an item you win? I know if that happened around my way...the person would no longer be allowed to participate in future auctions.

[Funnyslover]

Good point.

[Funnyslover]

On reflection, didn't mike say that his buddies did actually follow thru and paid & then he later picked up the tab plus from his friend. So . . . HA would have absolutely no reason to query a " paid for winning auction". Hail H...A

[LordRahl]

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

 

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

 

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

 

Good luck certifying a class on the "facts" presented.

 

Agreed that CA might not be the way to go. That said, there are several statutes upon which a case can be brought . My point was that lawyer shopping the facts is a good next step if cooperation of restitution is not forthcoming. Jaybucks assertion that you need a bankroll to bring this case is disingenuous. Lawyers take cases all the time on contingency. Has Jaybucks never heard of a legal contingency fee? Jaybucks is intentionally? being disingenuous about the uphill nature of litigation for his own agenda driven purpose. What type of lawyer just says don't bother, its going to be hard? Especially without a full understanding of each prospective plaintiffs possible exposure. Heck, one poster said he spent $100k last year. You get several such collectors together and you have a serious case with possibly large real damages.

 

If this is your opinion, you don't deal with many lawyers. They absolutely will refuse to take a case to court if they do not feel they have a good chance of winning. And by good chance I don't mean 50/50, not even 60/40. Especially on a contingency fee. Granted I deal with corporate lawyers so probably a slightly different beast but they tell me all the time that bringing a formal complaint won't happen because it isn't worth the money to litigate when they don't think they have a very good chance of winning.

[Kreton]

On reflection, didn't mike say that his buddies did actually follow thru and paid & then he later picked up the tab plus from his friend. So . . . HA would have absolutely no reason to query a " paid for winning auction". Hail H...A

 

Still curious as to why a known bidder is backing out of a deal.

[Funnyslover]

excellent point. Duuhhh I shan't repeat myself

[CJT5150]

I did in fact contact Heritage via email Sunday evening ( my particular situation is summarized about 10 pages back) and got a call from the person that handles consignments on Monday. He said they did review my purchase and that the bid beneath me and the winning bid (which ended up being vacated) were from bidders he was familiar with and that he considered legitimate.

 

For what it's worth, he did say he was familiar with these threads and with the situation and would be reviewing all of the art consigned by Romitaman.

 

As for what that means...people will have opinions on that. They very well could be doing that. I suppose it's possible that it's just spin and they are hoping this goes away quickly. It would be interesting to hear from other folks that feel they've been affected and what communication they have with Heritage.

 

 

 

Did Heritage offer any reason why the "winning bid" by a bidder that is familiar to them did not follow through. I would think a familiar name would not back out of a deal. Are there any repercussions from not paying for an item you win? I know if that happened around my way...the person would no longer be allowed to participate in future auctions.

 

He said that the bid was made in error, and that the bidder called and discussed it with them and did say he would pay since he did submit the bid, but at that point they decided to check with me and see if I wanted the lot at my max bid. I don't know enough to know if this is on the up and up...its plausible I suppose. It's just that those circumstances coupled with these threads raise some flags.