Question for Heritage and comiclink reps wrt Burkey admission 2 2

[Buzzetta]

In light of recent events where Burkey has admitted to shilling many consignments through one or more third parties, do your organizations plan on accepting future consignments from Mike? Do your organizations plan on allowing him to bid in your auctions?

 

Question for the group: will any of these revelations, and what the auction houses may or may not do in response, affect your willingness to bid in the upcoming auctions?

 

Yes - here is one reason...

 

While I have bid on and won comic books at high dollar amounts, I did so knowing that if I approached any dollar amount that I felt uncomfortable with in regards to pricing per grade, I could walk away and that book could eventually be found again. With original art, if I do not pick it up, then most likely, I will never see it again. Therefore I am more likely to grit my teeth, settle in, and pull the trigger and brown bag it to lunch for the foreseeable future if there is something I really, really want. Knowing that Mike is pulling the strings in some auctions to manipulate the strength of the market for artwork makes me turn away from participating in a system that is really only there to benefit him.

 

 

 

 

[ComicConnect.com]

Hello CGC Forum Members,

 

We have answered many of you privately but we wanted to post here for the rest of you to read. With the exception of a few items of lower value (approximately $300 or less), everything Mike Burkey consigned with ComicConnect had a reserve. Those lots either hit reserve and sold or did not hit reserve and remained unsold. Mike Burkey did not bid on any of his consignments in ComicConnect auctions. Furthermore, the ComicConnect site prevents such occurrences from happening. If you have any further questions please contact us. Thank you.

 

Stephen Fishler

CEO

 

[Funnyslover]

Hello CGC Forum Members,

 

We have answered many of you privately but we wanted to post here for the rest of you to read. With the exception of a few items of lower value (approximately $300 or less), everything Mike Burkey consigned with ComicConnect had a reserve. Those lots either hit reserve and sold or did not hit reserve and remained unsold. Mike Burkey did not bid on any of his consignments in ComicConnect auctions. Furthermore, the ComicConnect site prevents such occurrences from happening. If you have any further questions please contact us. Thank you.

 

Stephen Fishler

CEO

[malvin]

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.

 

Let me add that this is plausible since it happened to me. I posted about it awhile ago. I don't think its the same piece since I don't thinl Burkey consigned it. I wanted to bid on a Silke Betty Nile piece, and when the piece before it ended (Sienkz Elektra) the Silke piece showed up so I went to the bid button and clicked. Unfortunately, one of those "dings" happened where stye re-open a close lot and the sienkz piece appeared as I clicked. I won it for around 2K, whereas the piece I was after was $500. I emailed HA and they didn't make me purchase the Sienkz. In hindsight I should have bought it though, Sienkz Elektra Assin page are hard to come by

 

Malvin

Edited February 1, 2016 by malvin

[OldGuy]

In light of recent events where Burkey has admitted to shilling many consignments through one or more third parties, do your organizations plan on accepting future consignments from Mike? Do your organizations plan on allowing him to bid in your auctions?

 

Based on Heritage practices I don't see why they would have a problem with this type of behavior.

[Funnyslover]

In light of recent events where Burkey has admitted to shilling many consignments through one or more third parties, do your organizations plan on accepting future consignments from Mike? Do your organizations plan on allowing him to bid in your auctions?

 

Based on Heritage practices I don't see why they would have a problem with this type of behavior.

 

Are you serious ? Shilling thru 3rd parties is not permitted - albeit undetectable. Shilling by the seller is permitted if incorporated in the T&A 's.

[aokartman]

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid

by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

 

This from February 2016 Signature terms and conditions. David

[OldGuy]

In light of recent events where Burkey has admitted to shilling many consignments through one or more third parties, do your organizations plan on accepting future consignments from Mike? Do your organizations plan on allowing him to bid in your auctions?

 

Based on Heritage practices I don't see why they would have a problem with this type of behavior.

 

Are you serious ? Shilling thru 3rd parties is not permitted - albeit undetectable. Shilling by the seller is permitted if incorporated in the T&A 's.

 

Yes, I'm serious.

[Funnyslover]

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid

by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

 

This from February 2016 Signature terms and conditions. David

 

 

Hi. This is major. So, it's not simply the seller/consignor but also his or her agents who can legally bid.

 

So mike was working within the rules.

 

 

Now all the witch hunters can pull up their tents and off.

[OldGuy]

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid

by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

 

This from February 2016 Signature terms and conditions. David

 

 

Hi. This is major. So, it's not simply the seller/consignor but also his or her agents who can legally bid.

 

So mike was working within the rules.

 

 

Now all the witch hunters can pull up their tents and off.

 

Agreed. I don't see why anyone dealing with Heritage would let something like this upset them. It's par for the course.

[vodou]

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid

by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

 

This from February 2016 Signature terms and conditions. David

So mike was working within the rules.

No "was" about it. Unless similar language "was" in past sale terms too (each and every one of them).

 

Ah but why focus on the negative when the really good news is that Mike and his friends can shill away the February sale with HA's blessing!

For that matter, so can we all!! At least (now) everybody knows

[Funnyslover]

It was. Look at those T&A.

 

 

G'nite. Doubtless talk again tomorrow.

 

Enjoy some unfettered fact free trolling

 

 

[Marwai]

Mike's words were,

"I also want to say that I apologize for this profusely as it made many art collectors i've dealt with throughout the years question my integrity, and this issue will not happen again...."

 

But his supporters/agents are contradicting Mike by saying it is not an issue because it's working within the rules and has the right to do this in the upcoming February 2016 HA auction.

 

I really can't trust what Mike said and his apology then.

 

[Meeley Man]

Mike's words were,

"I also want to say that I apologize for this profusely as it made many art collectors i've dealt with throughout the years question my integrity, and this issue will not happen again...."

 

But his supporters/agents are contradicting Mike by saying it is not an issue because it's working within the rules and has the right to do this in the upcoming February 2016 HA auction.

 

I really can't trust what Mike said and his apology then.

 

I don't think those looking to sweep this under the rug for Mike have thought that hard about what they are doing and saying.

[Funnyslover]

see 15

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

[Meeley Man]

see 15

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

 

Nothing there says what he did wasn't immoral. Nothing said there doesn't disprove his line of being "one of the most honest and trusted sellers" as now false. All it tells me, is that HA is as corrupt and immoral as Mike has shown himself to be in this. So, HA and Mike are both to not longer be trusted. Nothing more.

[Funnyslover]

see 15

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

 

Nothing there says what he did wasn't immoral. Nothing said there doesn't disprove his line of being "one of the most honest and trusted sellers" as now false. All it tells me, is that HA is as corrupt and immoral as Mike has shown himself to be in this. So, HA and Mike are both to not longer be trusted. Nothing more.

 

Indeed. Don't let the facts get in the way. G'nite xxx

[Meeley Man]

see 15

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

 

Nothing there says what he did wasn't immoral. Nothing said there doesn't disprove his line of being "one of the most honest and trusted sellers" as now false. All it tells me, is that HA is as corrupt and immoral as Mike has shown himself to be in this. So, HA and Mike are both to not longer be trusted. Nothing more.

 

Indeed. Don't let the facts get in the way. G'nite xxx

 

[Funnyslover]

Before going to sleep read condition 15 again at http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

G'nite xxx

[Meeley Man]

Before going to sleep read condition 15 again at http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

G'nite xxx

 

Your "facts" change nothing.

 

Let me say it nice and slow, so you can get it:

 

What Mike did is immoral. It is wrong. That HA will allow it, doesn't mean it isn't. It just means Mike will face no repercussions from HA for having done it. But it is still Immoral. Shilling is still wrong. And no site's "rule" that lets you get away with it changes that. And it doesn't change that Mike can no longer claim to be one of the "most honest and trusted sellers." He's lost that title, by his own hand. Shilling is wrong and it's always wrong, no matter who would allow you to get away with it on their site. And if you think that suddenly makes shilling "okay and moral," then you are just another part of the problem.