Stack's. Grrrrrr.

harasha · February 20, 2007 6:56PM

Something new to add to my gripes about this firm. Because they are one of the few houses that offer items that interest me in their auctions, I periodically place bids. So, I am bidding on certain items in their latest mail and internet bid sale. I decide that I want to increase my maximum bid on an item on which I already am the high bidder. Much to my dismay, when I go to confirm, I note that my current bid would be outbid by myself! Needless to say, I did not increase my maximum bid.

Stack's. Never fails to suprise.

MacCrimmon · February 21, 2007 12:22AM

Maybe some of eBay's or Heritage's software code guys would enjoy living in Manhattan, eh?

cacheman · February 21, 2007 12:43AM

Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too....

MrEureka · February 21, 2007 2:00AM

Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too..

Do the terms of sale state that they will always reduce your bids if possible? If not, what's the problem? Your unreasonable expectations?

laurentyvan · February 21, 2007 2:04AM

Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too....

The only coin I ever won from Stack's went for double the money when I sold it, without original satisfactory attribution from them.

I was fortunate; selling a coin properly by accident is almost worse than selling a coin (with proper results ) through deception.

I sense a complete acceptance of potential buyer "self-serving beliefs" on a lot of Stack's coins. I was lucky, some may not be. A reputation is a terrible thing to lose...

cacheman · February 21, 2007 4:29AM

<< Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too..

Do the terms of sale state that they will always reduce your bids if possible? If not, what's the problem? Your unreasonable expectations? >>

And how might my expectations be seen as unreasonable? If I were standing on the floor bidding wouldn't they take my next bid as the highest bid according to the established bid increments? How many people present do you think are high bidders and at the sound of the auctioneer's "going twice" bid the remainder of their reserve in order to assure the win at hammer even when no one else is interested? Not many methinks...so why should bidders not present at the auction be treated differently? This practice is far to prevalent in Europe and the U.S. and requires the common 'Joe collector' to have an 'agent' present in order to be treated fairly. Apparently dealers don't have a problem with this it seems.

SYRACUSIAN · February 21, 2007 4:29AM

<< Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too..

Do the terms of sale state that they will always reduce your bids if possible? If not, what's the problem? Your unreasonable expectations? >>

Andy, aren't they claiming that they are using proxy bidding like everyone else? If so, they have severe software issues.

Udo · February 21, 2007 5:23AM

<< 

<< Their unsavory habit of taking your highest bid regardless of actual winning bid increment is unethical at best too..

Do the terms of sale state that they will always reduce your bids if possible? If not, what's the problem? Your unreasonable expectations? >>

And how might my expectations be seen as unreasonable? If I were standing on the floor bidding wouldn't they take my next bid as the highest bid according to the established bid increments? How many people present do you think are high bidders and at the sound of the auctioneer's "going twice" bid the remainder of their reserve in order to assure the win at hammer even when no one else is interested? Not many methinks...so why should bidders not present at the auction be treated differently? This practice is far to prevalent in Europe and the U.S. and requires the common 'Joe collector' to have an 'agent' present in order to be treated fairly. Apparently dealers don't have a problem with this it seems. >>

Well said

MrEureka · February 21, 2007 5:33AM

And how might my expectations be seen as unreasonable? If I were standing on the floor bidding wouldn't they take my next bid as the highest bid according to the established bid increments? How many people present do you think are high bidders and at the sound of the auctioneer's "going twice" bid the remainder of their reserve in order to assure the win at hammer even when no one else is interested? Not many methinks...so why should bidders not present at the auction be treated differently? This practice is far to prevalent in Europe and the U.S. and requires the common 'Joe collector' to have an 'agent' present in order to be treated fairly. Apparently dealers don't have a problem with this it seems.

Did I say I left mail bids? No. I just implied that I wouldn't expect anything more than was promised.

Lynch · February 21, 2007 1:09PM

<< Do the terms of sale state that they will always reduce your bids if possible? If not, what's the problem? Your unreasonable expectations? >>

It seems to me that any coin dealer who does not reduce high bids to about 5% or so above the second highest bid is engaging in unethical behavior. If I suspect that my high bids are being abused, the offending dealer will never get another bid from me.

Expecting honest dealing as the normal method of doing business hardly seems "unreasonable" to me.

MrEureka · February 21, 2007 2:03PM

It seems to me that any coin dealer who does not reduce high bids to about 5% or so above the second highest bid is engaging in unethical behavior.

Why? Seriously, why?

Lynch · February 21, 2007 8:04PM

<< It seems to me that any coin dealer who does not reduce high bids to about 5% or so above the second highest bid is engaging in unethical behavior.

Why? Seriously, why? >>

The answer is so simple, so clear and so obvious that I can only conclude that you are playing devil's advocate. It's like asking why it is wrong to steal.

Let's suppose that I am holding a coin auction. As a floor bidder, you have a lot you would like to buy and the maximum amount that you are willing to pay is $10,000.

I call out for bids and the bidding stops at $6,000. I then ask for a bid $6500 and you raise your bidder card and win the lot for $6500, even though you would have been willing to pay $10,000 if necessary.

Now you are a bidder in my mail bid sale. You submit your maximum bid of $10,000 to me. The second highest bid is once again $6,000. Only now, your bid is not reduced and your invoiced cost from me is $10,000 plus shipping.

Are you happy with this result? Do you truly believe that I have acted in an honest and ethical manner in my dealing with you?

Let's suppose that the position is reversed and you charge me the full $10,000 instead of reducing it to a roughly 5-10% increment over the second-highest bid.

Somehow the New York Times finds out that you did this. Are you comfortable with the thought of having that become the lead story on the front page of the NYT? If not, then why not?

cacheman · February 22, 2007 5:31AM

I just called Stacks to see how I did on the two pieces I bid on as nothing is appearing on their website. Guess what, I won both pieces...Guess what again, both took my maximum bid. Will wonders ever cease?

I must be friggin' psychic or something...okay, I want my own TV show...

satootoko · February 22, 2007 5:49AM

<< 

<< It seems to me that any coin dealer who does not reduce high bids to about 5% or so above the second highest bid is engaging in unethical behavior.

Why? Seriously, why? >>

The answer is so simple, so clear and so obvious that I can only conclude that you are playing devil's advocate. It's like asking why it is wrong to steal.

Let's suppose that I am holding a coin auction. As a floor bidder, you have a lot you would like to buy and the maximum amount that you are willing to pay is $10,000.

I call out for bids and the bidding stops at $6,000. I then ask for a bid $6500 and you raise your bidder card and win the lot for $6500, even though you would have been willing to pay $10,000 if necessary.

Now you are a bidder in my mail bid sale. You submit your maximum bid of $10,000 to me. The second highest bid is once again $6,000. Only now, your bid is not reduced and your invoiced cost from me is $10,000 plus shipping.

Are you happy with this result? Do you truly believe that I have acted in an honest and ethical manner in my dealing with you?

Let's suppose that the position is reversed and you charge me the full $10,000 instead of reducing it to a roughly 5-10% increment over the second-highest bid.

Somehow the New York Times finds out that you did this. Are you comfortable with the thought of having that become the lead story on the front page of the NYT? If not, then why not? >>

I'm glad I rechecked the thread before hitting the "Reply" button - you said what I wanted to, but much more eloquently!

Writersblock · February 23, 2007 9:26AM

<< I just called Stacks to see how I did on the two pieces I bid on as nothing is appearing on their website. Guess what, I won both pieces...Guess what again, both took my maximum bid. Will wonders ever cease? >>

Obviously when you are dealing with a Stacks auction in the future, you are going to have to do so using an agent bidding for you from the floor.

Stack's. Grrrrrr.

Comments