Options
The shill bidding from the consignment places is ridiculous
olb31
Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭✭✭
1982 Topps Ripken #21 for $1,200. Why would you pay that when there were dozens listed for hundreds less? Maybe even $500 less. The manipulation using ebay needs to come to an end. Anyone with me?
Work hard and you will succeed!!
0
Comments
It's been discussed here before, but how do stop it if Ebay looks the other way.
Maybe this is thread we all try to figure it out. Maybe we do a march/protest outside of EBAY. At a minimum it's market manipulation. We will shill bid up a Ripken rookie and at the same time we will buy up the lessor priced ones. So in the case, maybe there were maybe 8 topps Ripken's listed on EBAY when the manipulation began and as the price kept going up, the organization just purchased the others. And then once the market has been manipulated (the ripken acution ends at $1,200 and no few if any other 10's are listed , they release (auction the ones they purchased) several at once. If you notice, some of them do have several auctions of the same exact item going at once. I used to think that made no sense, but it fits with my market manipulation plan because they would need to get rid of these items rather quickly.
See the Michael Jordan craze. Once their manipulation (inventory) comes to end, they go to another good rookie card.
I refused to bid on the items and I let the consignor know. I know they reacted in some way based on an email I received from the original seller but I don't know what was done about it.
I don't know if any of those cards were consigned by board members, but if the payment shows up, I don't think you can call it a shill. Let's see some of these show up at the next auction.
You don't have to identify your cards, but if any consignors care to confirm if payment was made, please post.
I had a few items in the last auction and will confirm if a check shows up.
Some people don't even try to hide it. A seller I purchased a few cards from let me know that he sent some of the other cards he knew I was interested in to one of the main consignors on eBay. I put them in my watch list and then looked to see who the high bidder was and I recognized it to be very similar feedback score as the original seller. I sent the original seller a note asking if/why he was bidding on his own items. He admitted it right away, saying there was nothing wrong with it as he would be stuck with the fees if he won them.
I refused to bid on the items and I let the consignor know. I know they reacted in some way based on an email I received from the original seller but I don't know what was done about it.
Kudos to you sir for putting in the extra effort and reporting him! This is what needs to happen. It's going to have to be a collective effort to curb people from doing this. Obviously it will always happen to some degree, as people will always find a new loop hole.
LaJoie Portrait 3+, Cy Young Bare Hand 3+
Ty Cobb Bat Off 4+, ANY Red & Green Portrait
If you have VCP go on there and look up 1955 Clemente rookies and see who is bidding on PSA 7's and 8's the last month and not winning them and always just missing them. How does one have 50 retractions in one month?? How he has not been shut off I don't know.
Late 60's and early to mid 70's non-sports
If someone chooses to bid all PSA 8 Clemente RCs up to certain levels but doesn't have a relationship with the seller or the person that consigned the card is that shilling?
I always assumed shilling required some form of collusion if the person shilling an auction was not the card owner.
Robb
Is it shilling if the person bidding is not affiliated in any way shape or form with the consignor or consignee?
If someone chooses to bid all PSA 8 Clemente RCs up to certain levels but doesn't have a relationship with the seller or the person that consigned the card is that shilling?
I always assumed shilling required some form of collusion if the person shilling an auction was not the card owner.
Robb
Certainly that does happen. If you own the card you would want it to go up as high as you can. But it would probably take more than one of that person to get the card from $600 to $1200 overnight. So if you are asking if "collusion" is possible than I would day yes. Scratch my back and I will scratch yours mentality, probably exists.
Is it shilling if the person bidding is not affiliated in any way shape or form with the consignor or consignee?
If someone chooses to bid all PSA 8 Clemente RCs up to certain levels but doesn't have a relationship with the seller or the person that consigned the card is that shilling?
I always assumed shilling required some form of collusion if the person shilling an auction was not the card owner.
Robb
Not if they are willing to pay and won't retract a bid. Nothing wrong with being a market maker in a certain type of cards or a specific one.
The minute you play this game and not honor your bids I think it falls into the shilling category.
Is it shilling if the person bidding is not affiliated in any way shape or form with the consignor or consignee?
If someone chooses to bid all PSA 8 Clemente RCs up to certain levels but doesn't have a relationship with the seller or the person that consigned the card is that shilling?
I always assumed shilling required some form of collusion if the person shilling an auction was not the card owner.
Robb
It's still price manipulation, and it's still slimy. I envision a scenario where a guy keeps bidding up everyone else's Clemente 8s in order to bolster the price of the 9 he's getting ready to sell. If people don't think that happens all the time, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
I have seen kind of the opposite side of this too where a guy bid up his own card he had consigned since the market seemed to dip on that particular card. He ended up winning the auction. He paid though. So the end result was he got the card back but of course he has more in it now.
The tale of an 'honest' shiller?
I have seen kind of the opposite side of this too where a guy bid up his own card he had consigned since the market seemed to dip on that particular card. He ended up winning the auction. He paid though. So the end result was he got the card back but of course he has more in it now.
The tale of an 'honest' shiller?
Now, that's an oxymoron if I ever heard one...sort of like jumbo shrimp, lol..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I have seen kind of the opposite side of this too where a guy bid up his own card he had consigned since the market seemed to dip on that particular card. He ended up winning the auction. He paid though. So the end result was he got the card back but of course he has more in it now.
The tale of an 'honest' shiller?
Now, that's an oxymoron if I ever heard one...sort of like jumbo shrimp, lol..
Perhaps you would prefer 'failed price manipulator'
How would you like for your wife to go to a car lot to buy you your dream car - say a 67 Vette. When she gets there they have a price of $32k on it which is what she wants to pay. Now when she gets there another guy comes up and says he is interested in the car and will pay $34k for it. Your wife then says she will pay $37k and the dealer sells it to her - $5k more than the original. After she signs the papers and leaves the dealer gives the guy who raised the price $1000 for helping to get more money for the car. Anyone see anything wrong with this scenario?
Kendall I will give you an example of what I think Robb was referring to. Take me. I will use a 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 8 Andre The Giant in this example. I have bid on every single one that has hit EBAY. I already own six of them and will bid for example 80% of the last sale. Do I think I will win? No not really. But if I do I am totally fine with it. I have no bid retractions and no non payer strikes. I have also had what was discussed recently where someone cancels a bid and I am the max and honored those every time. I see nothing wrong with this strategy. I just posted a link to a lot of 100 PSA 9 Rickey Henderson's. You have to be bidding on a lot of auctions to acquire that many and the motives of the buyer are his or her prerogative as long as they play by the rules in my view.
I think your case is different in that you are bidding a percentage of the market price and hoping to win the card at that price and will pay for it. You are not retracting bids and artificially driving the price up. Now say a PSA 10 Bruiser Brody comes up with a pop of 2 or 3 and you need one for your collection. Prices are hypothetically $1k for the card. Another collector owns the other 2 and is selling this one through a well known auction house. You win the card but find out the seller of the card bid this card up from your bid of $700 to over $1500. Bidding stopped at $700, but he had a buddy of his keep goosing the card by $50 every time you bid. Where do you stand on this scenario?
Kendall I will give you an example of what I think Robb was referring to. Take me. I will use a 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 8 Andre The Giant in this example. I have bid on every single one that has hit EBAY. I already own six of them and will bid for example 80% of the last sale. Do I think I will win? No not really. But if I do I am totally fine with it. I have no bid retractions and no non payer strikes. I have also had what was discussed recently where someone cancels a bid and I am the max and honored those every time. I see nothing wrong with this strategy. I just posted a link to a lot of 100 PSA 9 Rickey Henderson's. You have to be bidding on a lot of auctions to acquire that many and the motives of the buyer are his or her prerogative as long as they play by the rules in my view.
I think your case is different in that you are bidding a percentage of the market price and hoping to win the card at that price and will pay for it. You are not retracting bids and artificially driving the price up. Now say a PSA 10 Bruiser Brody comes up with a pop of 2 or 3 and you need one for your collection. Prices are hypothetically $1k for the card. Another collector owns the other 2 and is selling this one through a well known auction house. You win the card but find out the seller of the card bid this card up from your bid of $700 to over $1500. Bidding stopped at $700, but he had a buddy of his keep goosing the card by $50 every time you bid. Where do you stand on this scenario?
That sounds like collusion.
Quite frankly there was a card I needed for my set that went off last night through PWCC that I suspected foul play and I didn't bid on it.
I think there is a little overreaction happening here. If anyone followed the Mastro case, the auction house itself was doing the bidding and in some cases knew the max bid of the other bidders. That probably did more to distort the market at the time than any of the current issues. I also think a couple of other auction houses were implicated but never prosecuted.
Seems like a lot of work to trick people into thinking items in your collection are more popular than they actually are.[/q
Is this directed at me?
Kendall I will give you an example of what I think Robb was referring to. Take me. I will use a 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 8 Andre The Giant in this example. I have bid on every single one that has hit EBAY. I already own six of them and will bid for example 80% of the last sale. Do I think I will win? No not really. But if I do I am totally fine with it. I have no bid retractions and no non payer strikes. I have also had what was discussed recently where someone cancels a bid and I am the max and honored those every time. I see nothing wrong with this strategy. I just posted a link to a lot of 100 PSA 9 Rickey Henderson's. You have to be bidding on a lot of auctions to acquire that many and the motives of the buyer are his or her prerogative as long as they play by the rules in my view.
I think your case is different in that you are bidding a percentage of the market price and hoping to win the card at that price and will pay for it. You are not retracting bids and artificially driving the price up. Now say a PSA 10 Bruiser Brody comes up with a pop of 2 or 3 and you need one for your collection. Prices are hypothetically $1k for the card. Another collector owns the other 2 and is selling this one through a well known auction house. You win the card but find out the seller of the card bid this card up from your bid of $700 to over $1500. Bidding stopped at $700, but he had a buddy of his keep goosing the card by $50 every time you bid. Where do you stand on this scenario?
That sounds like collusion.
Quite frankly there was a card I needed for my set that went off last night through PWCC that I suspected foul play and I didn't bid on it.
I think I was watching that one expecting you to be all over it and now understand why you weren't.
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? - ACD
Occam's razor on a message board? Now we are getting deep!
You see nothing wrong with bidding on your own items, DPeck? You're pretty curious to me - claim to just own wrestling cards but you pimp every single uptick in the graded card market to no end....and now you say "nothing wrong with being a market maker." Uh huh. Ethics much?
Do you have reading comprehension issues? Where do you see me saying that is okay?
Bidding on your items is shilling in my view. The statement was cards that aren't yours or someone you are affiliated with but already own.
I have never sold a card through anyone else and have sold cards direct or through EBAY and my user ID is just the same dpeck100.
In terms of a market maker. How would you prefer me state that? Essentially in the old days of specialists they would bid for stock under the market. Bidding 80% or whatever number it turns out to be is just like that.
The nice thing about this strategy is that in $0.99 cent auctions sometimes people don't battle it out and you win cards at prices that are very good.
You caught me. I am the ring leader of the "buying group". LOL
Just like the market itself.
Kendall I will give you an example of what I think Robb was referring to. Take me. I will use a 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 8 Andre The Giant in this example. I have bid on every single one that has hit EBAY. I already own six of them and will bid for example 80% of the last sale. Do I think I will win? No not really. But if I do I am totally fine with it. I have no bid retractions and no non payer strikes. I have also had what was discussed recently where someone cancels a bid and I am the max and honored those every time. I see nothing wrong with this strategy. I just posted a link to a lot of 100 PSA 9 Rickey Henderson's. You have to be bidding on a lot of auctions to acquire that many and the motives of the buyer are his or her prerogative as long as they play by the rules in my view.
I think your case is different in that you are bidding a percentage of the market price and hoping to win the card at that price and will pay for it. You are not retracting bids and artificially driving the price up. Now say a PSA 10 Bruiser Brody comes up with a pop of 2 or 3 and you need one for your collection. Prices are hypothetically $1k for the card. Another collector owns the other 2 and is selling this one through a well known auction house. You win the card but find out the seller of the card bid this card up from your bid of $700 to over $1500. Bidding stopped at $700, but he had a buddy of his keep goosing the card by $50 every time you bid. Where do you stand on this scenario?
That sounds like collusion.
Quite frankly there was a card I needed for my set that went off last night through PWCC that I suspected foul play and I didn't bid on it.
I think I was watching that one expecting you to be all over it and now understand why you weren't.
Turns out it was legit. A real buyer using a different EBAY ID. The games that get played on EBAY can either help sellers or hurt sellers.
ID's that you don't normally recognize and bid percentages with the seller don't always mean something is array.
That was the case here and I am glad to hear that.
Board members need to stop touting record breaking prices before checking that the bidding is legit. Sure there's a grey area here but if a low feedback eBay user with many bid retractions is the one that underbid then it's pretty black or white.
Shilling is rampant right now. If you don't have the money to lose, stay away. Let the big boys fight it out for awhile.
Virtually guaranteed if your bidding on those Clemente's and high end cards at Heritage, you will be shilled.
You all need to re-assess your bidding if your going after high dollar cards. Assume you will be shilled. Place a bid you are comfortable with and let it go. You might get lucky and win.
And most importantly, don't come on these boards (Net54 and here) and b**** about over bidding and getting shilled. Look in the mirror for someone to blame.
Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks.
Prefer to buy in bulk.
1. Savvy buyer realizes all kinds of card forum members are going nuts over rampant shilling accusations.
2. Savvy buyer creates 2nd (3rd, 4th, etc.) eBay account - critical to maintain low/zero feedback
3. Savvy buyer find auction of something they want to purchase
4. Savvy buyer uses one of the extra accounts and tries to make it look like someone is shilling that auction (chip bids, retracts bids, exposes others maximum, etc.)
5. Savvy buyer laughs when that auction gets called out on card forums w/declarations to avoid this auction (and even if it doesn't, it would still scare off many astute buyers from bidding)
6. Savvy buyer uses real account to place a winning snipe after having scared off at least a portion of potential competition, ideally winning for under market, but almost definitely for less than it could potentially have been with all interested bidders participating. This doesn't always work, but still furthers the cause by having more people concerned about shilling and having less competition increases their chances of winning.
Note: I do not condone any of this activity, but it's well enough known at this point that I don't think it's going to do any further damage and helps increase awareness of all sides of the games being played.
Nothing is black and white in an active auction, only different shades of grey.
Low feedback buyers with many bid retractions should simply not be able to bid. It just takes some simple vigilance by both buyers and sellers to deal with a majority of shillers.
Not a new game, but being used much more frequently these days:
1. Savvy buyer realizes all kinds of card forum members are going nuts over rampant shilling accusations.
2. Savvy buyer creates 2nd (3rd, 4th, etc.) eBay account - critical to maintain low/zero feedback
3. Savvy buyer find auction of something they want to purchase
4. Savvy buyer uses one of the extra accounts and tries to make it look like someone is shilling that auction (chip bids, retracts bids, exposes others maximum, etc.)
5. Savvy buyer laughs when that auction gets called out on card forums w/declarations to avoid this auction (and even if it doesn't, it would still scare off many astute buyers from bidding)
6. Savvy buyer uses real account to place a winning snipe after having scared off at least a portion of potential competition, ideally winning for under market, but almost definitely for less than it could potentially have been with all interested bidders participating. This doesn't always work, but still furthers the cause by having more people concerned about shilling and having less competition increases their chances of winning.
Note: I do not condone any of this activity, but it's well enough known at this point that I don't think it's going to do any further damage and helps increase awareness of all sides of the games being played.
Nothing is black and white in an active auction, only different shades of grey.
Spoken like a Savvy Seller.
"Savvy Buyer buys card under market.."? I think your in the wrong thread. This is the Savvy Buyer pays 3x over VCP for card thread.
The thread for Buyers buying vintage high grade cards under market value is in the Unicorn section.
Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks.
Prefer to buy in bulk.
I like crayons.
Do you know what items these bidders have retracted their bids on? Do you know that the under bidder would not in fact pay if they won? I would think Brett and Probstein would have almost no tolerance for winning bidders not paying for these high dollar cards.
These theories are assuming quite a bit of collusion by the consignees (I assume we are talking primarily about PWCC and Probstein here since they generally get the highest prices on ebay and the most desirable items). That is a huge leap and not sustained by any actual facts just a whole lot of speculation based on incomplete information.
Has anyone asked Brett or Probstein what their policy is on people that retract bids on high profile auctions? Since we are talking about very high profile cards here (PSA 8 Clemente RC for example).
Or we are simply seeing momentum in the card market. Higher prices beget higher prices. I know I put in some crazy high snipes on a couple 72 Staubach PSA 8s and didn't win any of them. After losing the last one I decided to sit out for a bit. There is no shilling, no collusion, no nothing going on. I wanted to buy one when the price started going up and I chose to put in some higher than ever sold before snipes to do it and still lost. Apparently some other collectors decided to do the same thing as me. Those cards did not show up in the next PWCC auction and presumably the winning bidder paid for it and received it. Might they be planning on sending them to PSA to see if they bump and then reconsigning them afterwards? Sure and if they do I am confident some on this board will then say, look this card is back up for auction that shows the previous sale was "fake'. Yet those people would be wrong.
The issue with the theories being presented is that they are based on incomplete information and are no more viable than alternate theories.
Robb
"The fuel for the sports fan is the ability to have private theories."
Jack Nicholson
IG: goatcollectibles23
The biggest lesson I've learned in this hobby, and in life, is that if you have a strong conviction, you owe it to yourself to see it through. Don't sell yourself, or your investments, short. Unless the facts change. Then sell it all.
Prices are still strong- VERY STRONG. I typically buy mor in AH's, but outrageous prices on many things. Heritage just opened up and it didn't take long to see BIG $$$ still rolling
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
The solution, as I said, is to call out these bidding practices to the seller and then for the seller to take an active roll in policing their auctions when one is called out.
It's pretty simple. And it's better for the hobby.
Actually when you said "that is bad" it no longer is a fact but an opinion. Additionally low feedback winners or under bidders with multiple bid retractions being shillers is an opinion not a fact. You seem to be confused what a fact actually is, facts are indisputable. It is certainly highly likely that a user with low feedback with multiple bid retractions is not legitimate but that is not the same as being a fact.
Anyway I don't think you presented a single fact in your three posts.
"Board members need to stop touting record breaking prices before checking that the bidding is legit." -- not a fact
"Sure there's a grey area here but if a low feedback eBay user with many bid retractions is the one that underbid then it's pretty black or white. " -- not a fact
"Yes plenty is black and white." -- not a fact
"Low feedback buyers with many bid retractions should simply not be able to bid." -- not a fact
"It just takes some simple vigilance by both buyers and sellers to deal with a majority of shillers." - not a fact
"What I pointed out is a fact not a theory." -- not a fact
"When members claim that a certain card is selling at a record price based on a single eBay auction where the underbidder has low feedback and high retractions that is bad." -- not a fact
"The solution, as I said, is to call out these bidding practices to the seller and then for the seller to take an active roll in policing their auctions when one is called out. " -- not a fact
"It's pretty simple." -- not a fact
"And it's better for the hobby." -- not a fact
Please note it doesn't mean I disagree with all the opinions you have. I think shilling is bad for the hobby and should be rooted out by the major
consignees whenever possible. However detecting and preventing shilling is more difficult than folks on this board seem to understand. You
pull up a couple simple examples and say look this is so simple to fix.
Robb