<< <i>That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
And I'm saying that I believe the reserve was placed with the sell order and that Stacks is controlling when it is invoked and posted. To me, that's questionable behavior. To not to initially invoke the reserve is probably just a marketing ploy to attract more bidders.
Either sell an item at a listed price or auction it to the highest bidder. A reserve is nothing more than a hidden bid by the seller to protect himself. To me it borders on shill bidding by the fact that it is a seller's bid. While completely legal it is still wrong. Sellers should not be able to put a reserve price in an auction. Reserves enable sellers to go fishing. They should be required to set an opening bid that they are willing to live with. At a minimum the existence of a seller's reserve should be noted before an auction begins. >>
And I'm saying that my guess is that your guess is wrong.
The owner of the coin probably placed a late reserve, as opposed to Stack's having sat on it and exercised it at the end of the sale. The latter would not serve any purpose other than to increase the odds of the coin NOT selling.
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house.
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
Under your scenario, the consignor wouldn't be able to withdraw the coin at the last minute. He could complain, kick and scream, but wouldn't be in a position to do anything about it.
<< <i> The owner of the coin probably placed a late reserve, as opposed to Stack's having sat on it and exercised it at the end of the sale. The latter would not serve any purpose other than to increase the odds of the coin NOT selling. >>
By holding back on posting a reserve, it is my opinion more bidders would participate.
Having never consigned with an aution house: (1) Do they allow consignors to place a reserve after the auction has begun? (2) Can any forum member confirm that they listed with an auction house, with a reserve, only to see that reserve placed after the auction began, at the discretion of the auction house?
Surprised to see all this animosity directed at Stacks. My own experience with them over 3 decades has been uniformly pleasant. In the two instances a problem occurred it was resolved amicably and swiftly.
From Stacks terms:
Stack’s reserves the right to establish the opening bid for any lot, to establish bidding increments, and to refuse any bid. Stack’s reserves the right to place bids on behalf of the consignor up to the amount of a reserve price established by the consignor. Stack’s will not accept a reserve price from a consignor above the high estimated value shown in the catalog for the auction and any exceptions to this rule will be announced at the auction prior to the opening of bidding on the material. Stack’s shall make reasonable efforts to properly enter and execute bids received by mail or by other means. However, Stack’s shall not be liable for any errors for incorrectly entered or incorrectly executed bids.
further:
Cash advances may have been made to some consignors in anticipation of auction proceeds. Stack’s may consign items to this auction and may participate as a bidder. Stack’s or the consignor may bid for their own account at the auction and may have information not otherwise available to the bidders regarding reserves, bid values, and other material facts relating to the lots opened for bidding at the auction. When a lot is sold to the book, it may be sold, passed over, withdrawn from the auction, returned to the owner or bought by Stack’s. Any consignor may bid on any lot, including lots containing coins consigned by the consignor.
I see no limitation above as to when a reserve may be set, further if Stacks chooses to bid for their own account they can set a de facto reserve on any lot simply by bidding.
Same thing happened to me. I bid on a NO RESERVE lot, was listed as the high bidder until moments before the auction began, and then I saw it was bid up to another amount, about 30% over my bid, and it read RESERVE NOT MET. I wasn't about to up the bid. No, no, no. All the juice was squeezed at that point. Still, I feel misled, and that my time was wasted.
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
Under your scenario, the consignor wouldn't be able to withdraw the coin at the last minute. He could complain, kick and scream, but wouldn't be in a position to do anything about it. >>
Aren't all these issues covered in Stack's standard contract that the consignor is required to sign and abide by?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Voltaire: Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero.
In the recent Americana auction I had the same experience. I bid over $7000 on a lot marked no reserve. I was notified that the high bid was $6500 and the lot did not sell. I am curious as to why it didn't say the high bid was $7000. So that makes two of us. How many more? Dave W
derryb wrote: Either sell an item at a listed price or auction it to the highest bidder. A reserve is nothing more than a hidden bid by the seller to protect himself. To me it borders on shill bidding by the fact that it is a seller's bid. While completely legal it is still wrong. Sellers should not be able to put a reserve price in an auction. Reserves enable sellers to go fishing.
At least for consignments to Heritage, as I read it, if a consignor places a reserve and the reserve is not met, the consigner has to pay the 15% buyer's premium on top of the reserve amount to get their coin back. If they place the reserve after the deadline, they pay not only the 15% buyer's premium, but the 10% seller's commission as well. I'm assuming this takes place after the grace period in which an item remains for sale at the reserve price, post auction close.
My take on this is that it's as expensive for a consigner to place a timely reserve as it is for someone else to bid. I don't see this as a conflict of interest, it's putting the consigner on equal footing with the bidders, which seems fair to me. After the reserve window has passed it's more expensive to the consigner to place a reserve than for a third party to bid. This is a de facto penalty on the consigner and suggests at a minimum that the auction company is trying to dissuade this sort of behaviour. Also fair and legit.
This is clearly subjective, but I'd like to hear arguments why this isn't fair.
When Chris and I were both independent dealers several months ago, we complained to each other about the sniping reserve. There are quite a few complaints about the late reserves besides yours and mine.
Don't look for an announcement. It, like much else in their merged operation, will show up well done and not as soon as you, I or Chris, would like.
Changes in the contract would be needed, and a few old friends told to knuckle under. This is where transparency helps all stakeholders. I don't think it's just wishful thinking.
A couple of years ago when there was a lot of confusion in NY I had a client ready to pay $50,000 over the "no reserve" price on a $250,000+ coin. The next day brought a $100,000 jump and "reserve not met". They will change the policy. Chris doesn't wan't to lose a chance to do business with my client. Or many others like him.
DaveE seems really off-base on trustworthiness. He's forgotten seeing Chris trade great coins and great collections in the millions with TDN, and deals handled between friends and CN in the $10,000,000's. TDN will always welcome Chris's call with something special. So would every single player of any brains or substance.
Stacks-Bowers is now a brand, a marquee name. That QDB is still active is a bonus for the combined firm and a gift to us all. This is a Spectrum/Anderson deal keeping the best of Stacks/ANR. Is this any way to treat Blondie?
IT'S NOT STACKS TO THE MAX ANY MORE.
That's done.
As of now:
IT'S A WHOLE NEW CLEAN SLATE.
That being said, as fascinating as the real low-down on all the dirt that's not appearing at your local B&M may be, which will affect you not, except in a good way, in the very least, perhaps we will discuss coins?
DaveE will see almost all the superstar glitterati knocking themselves out battling for what they need in the Stacks-Bowers ANA sale. A few will be watching consignments for clients being sold, and everyone will be laughing all the way to the bank. DaveE will watch another round of Crazy 8's play out and walk away smiling at what S-B is doing. I'd bet a nice Masa O-toro omikase on it
I'd rather see more images of the 1913 $20 Proof
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Colonel, Many of us have been burned by Stack's auction shenanigans in the past. It will take some time for us to feel comfortable bidding in their auctions.
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house. >>
I don't understand the black and white thinking. All this is in the contract. You want to pull a coin, there's a kill fee same as the buyback price. 3% or so. No one blows a relationship when the boundaries are defined and understood. It's just one coin.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house. >>
I don't understand the black and white thinking. All this is in the contract. You want to pull a coin, there's a kill fee same as the buyback price. 3% or so. No one blows a relationship when the boundaries are defined and understood. It's just one coin. >>
Talking about auction houses and stated policy in general. No specific house or contract referenced.
<< <i>derryb wrote: Either sell an item at a listed price or auction it to the highest bidder. A reserve is nothing more than a hidden bid by the seller to protect himself. To me it borders on shill bidding by the fact that it is a seller's bid. While completely legal it is still wrong. Sellers should not be able to put a reserve price in an auction. Reserves enable sellers to go fishing.
At least for consignments to Heritage, as I read it, if a consignor places a reserve and the reserve is not met, the consigner has to pay the 15% buyer's premium on top of the reserve amount to get their coin back. If they place the reserve after the deadline, they pay not only the 15% buyer's premium, but the 10% seller's commission as well. I'm assuming this takes place after the grace period in which an item remains for sale at the reserve price, post auction close.
My take on this is that it's as expensive for a consigner to place a timely reserve as it is for someone else to bid. I don't see this as a conflict of interest, it's putting the consigner on equal footing with the bidders, which seems fair to me. After the reserve window has passed it's more expensive to the consigner to place a reserve than for a third party to bid. This is a de facto penalty on the consigner and suggests at a minimum that the auction company is trying to dissuade this sort of behaviour. Also fair and legit.
This is clearly subjective, but I'd like to hear arguments why this isn't fair. >>
With Heritage and most other auction houses, typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus you mentioned above. If a consignor did nothing wrong and was charged that, they were treated very poorly.
Sometimes consignors don't have to pay a fee for coins which don't meet reserve. It depends on things such as the level of the reserves, the size of the consignment, the commission rate for items that do sell, how much of the total value meets reserve, etc. That can all be negotiated as part of the consignment agreement.
And most sellers don't have to pay a 10% commission, on top of the 15% buyer's premium that the auction house gets. Some pay no seller's premium, and others even get part of the 15% buyer's premium, thus ending up with more than 100% of hammer.
typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus
Mark, I was paraphrasing (interpreting) a consignment contract which I personally just signed with Heritage. Maybe as a private collector I get a worse deal than you do, but I wasn't pulling those numbers from thin air. I'd quote the document directly if I wasn't bound by a confidentiality agreement.
<< <i> With Heritage and most other auction houses, typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus you mentioned above. If a consignor did nothing wrong and was charged that, they were treated very poorly.
Sometimes consignors don't have to pay a fee for coins which don't meet reserve. It depends on things such as the level of the reserves, the size of the consignment, the commission rate for items that do sell, how much of the total value meets reserve, etc. That can all be negotiated as part of the consignment agreement.
And most sellers don't have to pay a 10% commission, on top of the 15% buyer's premium that the auction house gets. Some pay no seller's premium, and others even get part of the 15% buyer's premium, thus ending up with more than 100% of hammer. >>
Thanks Mark. Sounds pretty much like consigment terms themselves are up for auction.
<< <i>Colonel, Many of us have been burned by Stack's auction shenanigans in the past. It will take some time for us to feel comfortable bidding in their auctions. >>
I have been doing business with all the regimes back to 1974. By 1980 I was picking them off so consistently I had no fear. I was run up by the "book" to 60% of what I would be willing to pay because I knew how to grade and they didn't. I got trapped a few times.
So many things looked hinky we auction sluts would go nuts trying to out-think Stacks. I don't blame lots of people who feel that way. I've seen up-close-and-personal the way abuses have been handed out.
But this is like blaming Bob Simpson for how the Rangers did in 2008.
TOTALLY NEW DEAL. AND IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH STACKS, REMEMBER BOWERS IS RUNNING THE NEW DEAL.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
<< <i>typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus
Mark, I was paraphrasing (interpreting) a consignment contract which I personally just signed with Heritage. Maybe as a private collector I get a worse deal than you do, but I wasn't pulling those numbers from thin air. I'd quote the document directly if I wasn't bound by a confidentiality agreement. >>
I am hoping that your" paraphrasing (interpreting)" of a 15% plus fee for a coin that doesn't meet reserve is a misunderstanding on your part. That sounds quite a bit too high, whether you are a private collector or not.
You might consider contacting your State Attorney General Office and see if they have any protections offered. Many states have some sort of deceptive trade practices legislation that provide treble damages if found in violation.
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
<< <i>The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) addresses sales by auction in UCC Article 2-328.
In paragraph 3, it states that all auction sales are "WITH RESERVE unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve, the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale. In an auction without reserve, after the auctioneer calls for bids on an article or lot, that article or lot cannot be withdrawn unless no bid is made within a reasonable time. In either case a bidder may retract his bid until the auctioneer's announcement of completion of the sale, but a bidder's retraction does not revive any previous bid."
The bottom line ... if the auction does not specifically state "without reserve", "no reserve", "absolute" or words to that effect, the lot has a reserve, whether it is stated or not.
If an auction states that the lot has "no reserve", the auctioneer has no legal right to refuse to sell to the high bidder once a bid had been accepted.
Hope this helps clarify. >>
I would like to hear Stack's explanation as to how the OP's lot was handled was in compliance with the UCC. Should be interesting.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
And I'm saying that I believe the reserve was placed with the sell order and that Stacks is controlling when it is invoked and posted. To me, that's questionable behavior. To not to initially invoke the reserve is probably just a marketing ploy to attract more bidders.
Either sell an item at a listed price or auction it to the highest bidder. A reserve is nothing more than a hidden bid by the seller to protect himself. To me it borders on shill bidding by the fact that it is a seller's bid. While completely legal it is still wrong. Sellers should not be able to put a reserve price in an auction. Reserves enable sellers to go fishing. They should be required to set an opening bid that they are willing to live with. At a minimum the existence of a seller's reserve should be noted before an auction begins. >>
And I'm saying that my guess is that your guess is wrong.
The owner of the coin probably placed a late reserve, as opposed to Stack's having sat on it and exercised it at the end of the sale. The latter would not serve any purpose other than to increase the odds of the coin NOT selling.
<< <i>
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house.
Rampant currency debasement will be the most important investment trend of this decade, and it will devastate most people.
- Nick Giambruno Buy dollar insurance now, because the policy will cost more as the dollar becomes worth less.
<< <i>
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
Under your scenario, the consignor wouldn't be able to withdraw the coin at the last minute. He could complain, kick and scream, but wouldn't be in a position to do anything about it.
<< <i> The owner of the coin probably placed a late reserve, as opposed to Stack's having sat on it and exercised it at the end of the sale. The latter would not serve any purpose other than to increase the odds of the coin NOT selling. >>
By holding back on posting a reserve, it is my opinion more bidders would participate.
Having never consigned with an aution house:
(1) Do they allow consignors to place a reserve after the auction has begun?
(2) Can any forum member confirm that they listed with an auction house, with a reserve, only to see that reserve placed after the auction began, at the discretion of the auction house?
Rampant currency debasement will be the most important investment trend of this decade, and it will devastate most people.
- Nick Giambruno Buy dollar insurance now, because the policy will cost more as the dollar becomes worth less.
From Stacks terms:
Stack’s reserves the right to establish the opening bid for any lot, to establish bidding increments, and to refuse any bid. Stack’s reserves the right to place bids on behalf of the consignor up to the amount of a reserve price established by the consignor. Stack’s will not accept a reserve price from a consignor above the high estimated value shown in the catalog for the auction and any exceptions to this rule will be announced at the auction prior to the opening of bidding on the material. Stack’s shall make reasonable efforts to properly enter and execute bids received by mail or by other means. However, Stack’s shall not be liable for any errors for incorrectly entered or incorrectly executed bids.
further:
Cash advances may have been made to some consignors in anticipation of auction proceeds. Stack’s may consign items to this auction and may participate as a bidder. Stack’s or the consignor may bid for their own account at the auction and may have information not otherwise available to the bidders regarding reserves, bid values, and other material facts relating to the lots opened for bidding at the auction. When a lot is sold to the book, it may be sold, passed over, withdrawn from the auction, returned to the owner or bought by Stack’s. Any consignor may bid on any lot, including lots containing coins consigned by the consignor.
I see no limitation above as to when a reserve may be set, further if Stacks chooses to bid for their own account they can set a de facto reserve on any lot simply by bidding.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
Under your scenario, the consignor wouldn't be able to withdraw the coin at the last minute. He could complain, kick and scream, but wouldn't be in a position to do anything about it. >>
Aren't all these issues covered in Stack's standard contract that the consignor is required to sign and abide by?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Voltaire: Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero.
David J Weygant Rare Coins. www.djwcoin.com
When the sale ended I read: "did nto meet reserve".
Stacks, people you can trust-NOT!
Dave, Dave, Dave...
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I bid in that sale too. I bid on a coin that had no reserve.
When the sale ended I read: "did nto meet reserve".
Stacks, people you can trust-NOT!
Dave, Dave, Dave... >>
I guess Dave is unaware that Legend had tried to buy Stack's.
At least for consignments to Heritage, as I read it, if a consignor places a reserve and the reserve is not met, the consigner has to pay the 15% buyer's premium on top of the reserve amount to get their coin back. If they place the reserve after the deadline, they pay not only the 15% buyer's premium, but the 10% seller's commission as well. I'm assuming this takes place after the grace period in which an item remains for sale at the reserve price, post auction close.
My take on this is that it's as expensive for a consigner to place a timely reserve as it is for someone else to bid. I don't see this as a conflict of interest, it's putting the consigner on equal footing with the bidders, which seems fair to me. After the reserve window has passed it's more expensive to the consigner to place a reserve than for a third party to bid. This is a de facto penalty on the consigner and suggests at a minimum that the auction company is trying to dissuade this sort of behaviour. Also fair and legit.
This is clearly subjective, but I'd like to hear arguments why this isn't fair.
Don't look for an announcement. It, like much else in their merged operation, will show up well done and not as soon as you, I or Chris, would like.
Changes in the contract would be needed, and a few old friends told to knuckle under. This is where transparency helps all stakeholders. I don't think it's just wishful thinking.
A couple of years ago when there was a lot of confusion in NY I had a client ready to pay $50,000 over the "no reserve" price on a $250,000+ coin. The next day brought a $100,000 jump and "reserve not met". They will change the policy. Chris doesn't wan't to lose a chance to do business with my client. Or many others like him.
DaveE seems really off-base on trustworthiness. He's forgotten seeing Chris trade great coins and great collections in the millions with TDN, and deals handled between friends and CN in the $10,000,000's. TDN will always welcome Chris's call with something special. So would every single player of any brains or substance.
Stacks-Bowers is now a brand, a marquee name. That QDB is still active is a bonus for the combined firm and a gift to us all. This is a Spectrum/Anderson deal keeping the best of Stacks/ANR. Is this any way to treat Blondie?
IT'S NOT STACKS TO THE MAX ANY MORE.
That's done.
As of now:
IT'S A WHOLE NEW CLEAN SLATE.
That being said, as fascinating as the real low-down on all the dirt that's not appearing at your local B&M may be, which will affect you not, except in a good way, in the very least, perhaps we will discuss coins?
DaveE will see almost all the superstar glitterati knocking themselves out battling for what they need in the Stacks-Bowers ANA sale. A few will be watching consignments for clients being sold, and everyone will be laughing all the way to the bank. DaveE will watch another round of Crazy 8's play out and walk away smiling at what S-B is doing. I'd bet a nice Masa O-toro omikase on it
I'd rather see more images of the 1913 $20 Proof
Many of us have been burned by Stack's auction shenanigans in the past. It will take some time for us to feel comfortable bidding in their auctions.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house. >>
I don't understand the black and white thinking. All this is in the contract. You want to pull a coin, there's a kill fee same as the buyback price. 3% or so. No one blows a relationship when the boundaries are defined and understood. It's just one coin.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>. . . . .That said, I still agree that reserves should not be allowed to placed after bidding has commenced. It can cause bidders some of the problems already mentioned and it lends itself to manipulation. >>
Just to play devil's advocate, let's say you are the auction house, and a consignor wants to put a reserve on a coin at the last minute, and if you don't allow this, he/she will remove the lot from the auction. Which one is the better choice? >>
If you have a stated policy that does not allow reserves to be added after an auction has begun, then the consignor should be free to remove the lot from active auction with the full understanding that they he will never again be a consignor with that auction house. >>
I don't understand the black and white thinking. All this is in the contract. You want to pull a coin, there's a kill fee same as the buyback price. 3% or so. No one blows a relationship when the boundaries are defined and understood. It's just one coin. >>
Talking about auction houses and stated policy in general. No specific house or contract referenced.
Rampant currency debasement will be the most important investment trend of this decade, and it will devastate most people.
- Nick Giambruno Buy dollar insurance now, because the policy will cost more as the dollar becomes worth less.
<< <i>
<< <i>I bid in that sale too. I bid on a coin that had no reserve.
When the sale ended I read: "did nto meet reserve".
Stacks, people you can trust-NOT!
Dave, Dave, Dave... >>
I guess Dave is unaware that Legend had tried to buy Stack's.
Are you absolutely sure? I never knew that! Is that why TDN sold the 1913 5c? He wanted to own the casino rather than just play in it?
<< <i>derryb wrote: Either sell an item at a listed price or auction it to the highest bidder. A reserve is nothing more than a hidden bid by the seller to protect himself. To me it borders on shill bidding by the fact that it is a seller's bid. While completely legal it is still wrong. Sellers should not be able to put a reserve price in an auction. Reserves enable sellers to go fishing.
At least for consignments to Heritage, as I read it, if a consignor places a reserve and the reserve is not met, the consigner has to pay the 15% buyer's premium on top of the reserve amount to get their coin back. If they place the reserve after the deadline, they pay not only the 15% buyer's premium, but the 10% seller's commission as well. I'm assuming this takes place after the grace period in which an item remains for sale at the reserve price, post auction close.
My take on this is that it's as expensive for a consigner to place a timely reserve as it is for someone else to bid. I don't see this as a conflict of interest, it's putting the consigner on equal footing with the bidders, which seems fair to me. After the reserve window has passed it's more expensive to the consigner to place a reserve than for a third party to bid. This is a de facto penalty on the consigner and suggests at a minimum that the auction company is trying to dissuade this sort of behaviour. Also fair and legit.
This is clearly subjective, but I'd like to hear arguments why this isn't fair. >>
With Heritage and most other auction houses, typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus you mentioned above. If a consignor did nothing wrong and was charged that, they were treated very poorly.
Sometimes consignors don't have to pay a fee for coins which don't meet reserve. It depends on things such as the level of the reserves, the size of the consignment, the commission rate for items that do sell, how much of the total value meets reserve, etc. That can all be negotiated as part of the consignment agreement.
And most sellers don't have to pay a 10% commission, on top of the 15% buyer's premium that the auction house gets. Some pay no seller's premium, and others even get part of the 15% buyer's premium, thus ending up with more than 100% of hammer.
Mark, I was paraphrasing (interpreting) a consignment contract which I personally just signed with Heritage. Maybe as a private collector I get a worse deal than you do, but I wasn't pulling those numbers from thin air. I'd quote the document directly if I wasn't bound by a confidentiality agreement.
<< <i> With Heritage and most other auction houses, typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus you mentioned above. If a consignor did nothing wrong and was charged that, they were treated very poorly.
Sometimes consignors don't have to pay a fee for coins which don't meet reserve. It depends on things such as the level of the reserves, the size of the consignment, the commission rate for items that do sell, how much of the total value meets reserve, etc. That can all be negotiated as part of the consignment agreement.
And most sellers don't have to pay a 10% commission, on top of the 15% buyer's premium that the auction house gets. Some pay no seller's premium, and others even get part of the 15% buyer's premium, thus ending up with more than 100% of hammer. >>
Thanks Mark. Sounds pretty much like consigment terms themselves are up for auction.
Rampant currency debasement will be the most important investment trend of this decade, and it will devastate most people.
- Nick Giambruno Buy dollar insurance now, because the policy will cost more as the dollar becomes worth less.
<< <i>Colonel,
Many of us have been burned by Stack's auction shenanigans in the past. It will take some time for us to feel comfortable bidding in their auctions. >>
I have been doing business with all the regimes back to 1974. By 1980 I was picking them off so consistently I had no fear. I was run up by the "book" to 60% of what I would be willing to pay because I knew how to grade and they didn't. I got trapped a few times.
So many things looked hinky we auction sluts would go nuts trying to out-think Stacks. I don't blame lots of people who feel that way. I've seen up-close-and-personal the way abuses have been handed out.
But this is like blaming Bob Simpson for how the Rangers did in 2008.
TOTALLY NEW DEAL. AND IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH STACKS, REMEMBER BOWERS IS RUNNING THE NEW DEAL.
<< <i>typically, the consignment contract/agreement includes specifics about how much the consignor has to pay the auction house, in the event that a coin does not meet a reserve. It is usually in the 3% to 5% range, and nowhere near the 15% plus
Mark, I was paraphrasing (interpreting) a consignment contract which I personally just signed with Heritage. Maybe as a private collector I get a worse deal than you do, but I wasn't pulling those numbers from thin air. I'd quote the document directly if I wasn't bound by a confidentiality agreement. >>
I am hoping that your" paraphrasing (interpreting)" of a 15% plus fee for a coin that doesn't meet reserve is a misunderstanding on your part. That sounds quite a bit too high, whether you are a private collector or not.
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
Thomas Paine
Rampant currency debasement will be the most important investment trend of this decade, and it will devastate most people.
- Nick Giambruno Buy dollar insurance now, because the policy will cost more as the dollar becomes worth less.
Why can't it be done that way by Stacks, uh Bowers uh Stacks-Bowers and all others?
<< <i>The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) addresses sales by auction in UCC Article 2-328.
In paragraph 3, it states that all auction sales are "WITH RESERVE unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve, the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale. In an auction without reserve, after the auctioneer calls for bids on an article or lot, that article or lot cannot be withdrawn unless no bid is made within a reasonable time. In either case a bidder may retract his bid until the auctioneer's announcement of completion of the sale, but a bidder's retraction does not revive any previous bid."
The bottom line ... if the auction does not specifically state "without reserve", "no reserve", "absolute" or words to that effect, the lot has a reserve, whether it is stated or not.
If an auction states that the lot has "no reserve", the auctioneer has no legal right to refuse to sell to the high bidder once a bid had been accepted.
Hope this helps clarify. >>
I would like to hear Stack's explanation as to how the OP's lot was handled was in compliance with the UCC. Should be interesting.