Collusion in the OA Market - Right or Wrong?

[drdroom]

Will everyone please refrain from bidding on the Amazing Spider-Man 151 cover isted in the May auction? I am hoping to win it for less than $10k

 

 

 

I promise not to bid

 

Thanks Bill !

 

I, too, promise not to bid on this lot!

[Terry Doyle]

Will everyone please refrain from bidding on the Amazing Spider-Man 151 cover isted in the May auction? I am hoping to win it for less than $10k

 

 

 

You're supposed to be Bats-Fan, not Spidey-Fan, so shouldn't qualify as grail-material!

[MyNameIsLegion]

Will everyone please refrain from bidding on the Amazing Spider-Man 151 cover isted in the May auction? I am hoping to win it for less than $10k

 

 

 

I promise not to bid

 

Thanks Bill !

 

I, too, promise not to bid on this lot!

 

I too hereby declare my formal pledge to abstain from supporting this art auction candidate. I approve this message.

[batman_fan]

Will everyone please refrain from bidding on the Amazing Spider-Man 151 cover isted in the May auction? I am hoping to win it for less than $10k

 

 

 

You're supposed to be Bats-Fan, not Spidey-Fan, so shouldn't qualify as grail-material!

 

I'm a "true" collector whose grail changes on a weekly bases so look for me offering it up for sell a week after I get it for 2x what I paid.

[Claudio]

[Mmehdy]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for your piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

[comix4fun]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for you piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

 

You think one person refraining from bidding in an open auction scenario, staged globally, on the internet, on the phone, live and in person, with catalogs and emails and marketing and thousands of registered bidders will result in the seller getting $1 for his item? Really?

 

Sometimes the examples of delusions of grandeur that happen in this hobby are utterly astounding.

[Claudio]

So, your buddy tells you that a piece just came up for auction and it is his grail piece... It is the cover to the first comic he ever read and he absolutely loves it! You think it is really cool but you have a better example. You were planning on bidding but it would not have really affected you had you lost. Do you still put in your max bid? When you win, do you tell him?

[Mmehdy]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for you piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

 

You think one person refraining from bidding in an open auction scenario, staged globally, on the internet, on the phone, live and in person, with catalogs and emails and marketing and thousands of registered bidders will result in the seller getting $1 for his item? Really?

 

Sometimes the examples of delusions of grandeur that happen in this hobby are utterly astounding.

.

 

That is the hook of an auction ... If it truly no reserve... And all of us have probably bought items under market.. The dollar was an example, well under market price... As the seller you take the risk to be under market ... You don't need a "gentleman's agreement "

to make it riskier.

[Claudio]

 

You think one person refraining from bidding in an open auction scenario, staged globally, on the internet, on the phone, live and in person, with catalogs and emails and marketing and thousands of registered bidders will result in the seller getting $1 for his item? Really?

 

Sometimes the examples of delusions of grandeur that happen in this hobby are utterly astounding.

Exactly...

[Terry Doyle]

Will everyone please refrain from bidding on the Amazing Spider-Man 151 cover isted in the May auction? I am hoping to win it for less than $10k

 

 

 

You're supposed to be Bats-Fan, not Spidey-Fan, so shouldn't qualify as grail-material!

 

I'm a "true" collector whose grail changes on a weekly bases so look for me offering it up for sell a week after I get it for 2x what I paid.

 

Ah, that makes perfect sense!

 

Grail today, flipped tomorrow.

 

I won't compete . . . who am I to stand in the way of such honourable motivations!

 

[suspense39]

The only time I've really only lost money on any pieces is art I bought from dealers and later put at auction. I really doubt it's due to a couple friends colluding, more like dealer prices being above FMV.

[JadeGiant]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for your piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

If I were the seller, I would accept that nobody has any obligation to bid on an auction for ANY reason and ANY reason that causes them not to bid is their decision and prerogative. I would consider it UNFAIR for me to expect that any potential buyer would be obligated in any way to bid on my item. For me, this sounds like a very entitled perspective for listing an auction.

 

This is NOT colluding and where did ‘no reserve’ and selling the item for $1 come into play?

 

What if I am planning to bid on an item and my wife comes to me and says that she is planning a huge European vacation for the month of August and that she wanted it to be a surprise but found out about the auction and asked if I would hold off from bidding due to the expense of the trip. Has she colluded with me to defraud you of your deserved final auction price? Has she committed a wrong doing? According to the line of thinking, it surely sounds like she is wrong for asking and being unfair to you.

 

[Bill C]

So, your buddy tells you that a piece just came up for auction and it is his grail piece... It is the cover to the first comic he ever read and he absolutely loves it! You think it is really cool but you have a better example. You were planning on bidding but it would not have really affected you had you lost. Do you still put in your max bid? When you win, do you tell him?

 

According to some here, there are several options for both potential bidders:

1) tar and feather

2) dip in boiling oil

3) drawn and quartered

4) use medival torture device "the pear" on them

5) drown them to see if they're witches

 

Or, for those a bit more radical:

Nuclear missle to each of their respective cities

It's the only way to be sure

[Mmehdy]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for your piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

If I were the seller, I would accept that nobody has any obligation to bid on an auction for ANY reason and ANY reason that causes them not to bid is their decision and prerogative. I would consider it UNFAIR for me to expect that any potential buyer would be obligated in any way to bid on my item. For me, this sounds like a very entitled perspective for listing an auction.

 

This is NOT colluding and where did ‘no reserve’ and selling the item for $1 come into play?

 

What if I am planning to bid on an item and my wife comes to me and says that she is planning a huge European vacation for the month of August and that she wanted it to be a surprise but found out about the auction and asked if I would hold off from bidding due to the expense of the trip. Has she colluded with me to defraud you of your deserved final auction price? Has she committed a wrong doing? According to the line of thinking, it surely sounds like she is wrong for asking and being unfair to you.

.

 

 

Going on a family vacation is not the same as colluding with you buddies to get the lowest price on a seller who trusts the fair market system. Why does it seem that everybody takes the buyer side of things ... Who is one to not to say that the seller had to sell for a life theating operation ... And he needs every penny to pay hospital bills.. Who are you to coluude it away...I see a double standard here. The trade off here between buyer and seller implied by a free market auction is this... The seller does not bid up or have his friend bid up the piece... It's called shilling... The other side of the fence is you and your buddies keep the price down on the piece by colluding not to bid on it..artificially reducing the price ..folks... Both are the same idea and are PRICE manipulation and not fair to everybody who plays by the rules.

[comix4fun]

I don't believe that stepping aside is as bad as "pump and dump" creating a artificial value according to the " pump and dumpers " personnel value as opposed to market forces. However if I buy into the no reserve auction game... I expect real item bidding and interest based upon the art and the free open market not a phone call from your buddy, his pet dog, or his mommy to "lay off". You can call it anything but I call it unfair manipulation of a action piece price by collusion. Legal or not... It is not either right, or fair to the seller who assumes a real market price for his art.

 

If pump and dump is the shilling scenario - I agree and don't see much of a point of contention on that topic.

 

As for the "request" scenario, I still don't see what is unfair about a potential (stressing the word) bidder deciding not to bid for ANY reason. Does this definition of fair equate to an obligation to bid for anyone who has given consideration to the auction item? To flip this, would a potential (stressing this word) seller who has any item that they are considering selling have an obligation to list the item under all circumstances? If not, would that be unfair to the buying community? What if your friend advised that they were selling a very similar page from the same issue? Would you feel it unfair to consider this information as part of your decision to list? Would this be unfair to the buying community?

 

I try to act fairly and refrain from doing the 'wrong' thing and find the posit that by asking friend to consider not bidding or doing a favor for a friend is unfair or wrong very confusing.

 

I am not trying to jab at you, I am genuinely curious as the logic doesn't resonate.

 

 

 

.

 

If you were the seller , the guy that takes a chance on a fair and honest system to get fair market value for your piece you would understand a lot better. On a private sale so be it ... Walk , agree not to buy ... I can understand that... But when a seller risks getting one dollar for a the Price At a no reserve auction he deserves better than the buddy buddy system. What makes you and your buddy so special to collude the price down... Because it's your friend...no reserve auction should equal FREE market price... The seller deserves the credit for taking a chance and the right to a free and open opportunity to get the highest market price.

Sure it's good for your buddy.. Who gets the piece cheaper... You feel like you did someone a favor... I ask you to think if you were on the other end... The seller... What is fair for him...

 

If I were the seller, I would accept that nobody has any obligation to bid on an auction for ANY reason and ANY reason that causes them not to bid is their decision and prerogative. I would consider it UNFAIR for me to expect that any potential buyer would be obligated in any way to bid on my item. For me, this sounds like a very entitled perspective for listing an auction.

 

This is NOT colluding and where did ‘no reserve’ and selling the item for $1 come into play?

 

What if I am planning to bid on an item and my wife comes to me and says that she is planning a huge European vacation for the month of August and that she wanted it to be a surprise but found out about the auction and asked if I would hold off from bidding due to the expense of the trip. Has she colluded with me to defraud you of your deserved final auction price? Has she committed a wrong doing? According to the line of thinking, it surely sounds like she is wrong for asking and being unfair to you.

.

 

 

Going on a family vacation is not the same as colluding with you buddies to get the lowest price on a seller who trusts the fair market system. Why does it seem that everybody takes the buyer side of things ... Who is one to not to say that the seller had to sell for a life theating operation ... And he needs every penny to pay hospital bills.. Who are you to coluude it away...I see a double standard here. The trade off here between buyer and seller implied by a free market auction is this... The seller does not bid up or have his friend bid up the piece... It's called shilling... The other side of the fence is you and your buddies keep the price down on the piece by colluding not to bid on it..artificially reducing the price ..folks... Both are the same idea and are PRICE manipulation and not fair to everybody who plays by the rules.

 

 

It doesn't matter why the seller is selling and it doesn't matter why the bidder is not bidding.

 

This isn't a closed loop of known bidders, it's a fully open public group of unknown bidders. It doesn't make a material difference whether someone doesn't bid because their internet access fails or because they don't want to compete against a friend. The result is the same...a -1 to the bidder pool.

 

You don't know, can't articulate, and can't prove that any one person abstaining from bidding for any reason whatsoever has a material impact on the final price of any piece at auction in a wide open format. You don't and you can't. So please, PLEASE, stop stating "pulled from the rectum assumptions" as if they were established facts.

 

There is ZERO compulsion of people to bid on anything at any time, period.

 

Your entire argument is woven out of whole cloth.

 

 

[eewwnuk]

why does this thread have so many comments? seems like something that isn't really debatable. friends stepping aside for other friends seems like common sense.

[comix4fun]

why does this thread have so many comments? seems like something that isn't really debatable. friends stepping aside for other friends seems like common sense.

 

 

Some people see "stepping aside" and replace it with "grand conspiracy".

[Bronty]

People want to legislate their perception of fair.

 

All auction participants owe each other is 'no funny business.'

 

Material facts disclosed.

 

No bidding on your own items.

 

Pay the lady at the end of the auction.

 

That's about it.

[Nexus]

Going on a family vacation is not the same as colluding with you buddies to get the lowest price on a seller who trusts the fair market system. Why does it seem that everybody takes the buyer side of things ... Who is one to not to say that the seller had to sell for a life theating operation ... And he needs every penny to pay hospital bills.. Who are you to coluude it away...I see a double standard here. The trade off here between buyer and seller implied by a free market auction is this... The seller does not bid up or have his friend bid up the piece... It's called shilling... The other side of the fence is you and your buddies keep the price down on the piece by colluding not to bid on it..artificially reducing the price ..folks... Both are the same idea and are PRICE manipulation and not fair to everybody who plays by the rules.

 

So if the seller who needs a life-saving operation asks another seller not to consign a similar item in the same auction so he has a better chance at achieving a higher result without the competition...is that OK?