the list (of criminals) is revealed

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My name appears on the list of "shill bidders" on one transaction where my friend, Ron Goldberg, was the consignor. I don't view myself as a shill bidder, nor do I believe Ron did anything inappropriate. I have no doubt that some of you will disagree, and candidly I have shared this with a few people I respect a lot and they come out different ways. In any event, these are the facts.

In 2007, Ron had a valuable but relatively low demand oddball set (one of the Red Men sets). At some point he was talking to Doug and Doug asked if he would consider consigning the set. Ron said that he would but that because it was an oddball set, he was reluctant to do so unless a reserve could be placed on the auction., particularly since one of Ron's lots had sold well below his expectations in a previous auction. Doug said that he would not place a formal reserve, but instructed Ron that he could achieve the same result if he had a friend bid the reserve amount. Doug insisted, however, that if the friend won the auction, Ron would have to pay the buyer's premium.

Ron then asked me if I would bid for him. After thinking it over, I agreed. My thinking at the time was that Ron was not going to consign the set anyhow without a de facto reserve (so that there really was no scenario of a no reserve auction where someone could have won the set for a pittance), and that because Ron was going to have to pay the buyer's premium if I won, the result would be the same as if I paid for the set and then flipped it back to Ron.

As it turned out, Ron's fear was correct and nobody outbid me, even though Ron expected the set to go much higher than my bid and in fact sold it for 20k more eventually. So he paid the premium and the set was returned to him. It worked out exactly the same as if there had been a reserve, or higher opening bid. No victim. Nobody "run up." To be clear, Ron had no idea who else had bid or whether they had placed a top all. I am pretty sure, by the way, that many of the lots identified by the government as allegedly involving shill bidding (including multiple lots consigned by other Net 54 board members whose names have not been mentioned yet) are of the same character. Some, on the other hand, doubtless are lots where Mastro and Allen knew the top alls and bid them up themselves, or told the consignor.

I understand there are different ways to view the transaction. We have, in fact, debated this issue before at least in the abstract. I understand the other side, and have no doubt many of you folks will vilify Ron and me. So be it. I have nothing to hide. And apologies for the delay in posting, but I needed to verify the facts with the consignor.

If you are going to vilify Ron, by the way, please be sure to include the other board members identified as consignors on multiple lots, it would be very unfair to single him out.

Thanks for posting the explanation Peter. I understand, and see how things can happen. That was 2007. I think you'll agree that everyone now is edgey and ready for zero tolerance

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Stonepony

Thanks for posting the explanation Peter. I understand, and see how things can happen. That was 2007. I think you'll agree that everyone now is edgey and ready for zero tolerance

Yes, and after discussing this with some people I respect, I do see the gray area.

[sflayank]

well peter admits to being a shill...how nice
so he believes theres nothing wrong with making the public believe the value of that item is what he bid when in fact there was no one willing to actually pay that price...ie the most anyone person was willing to pay lets says is 1800 and he puts in 2000...but the 1800 bidder actually would have won the lot for 1200 as the 3rd bidders hi bid was only 1100...and he doesnt see anything wrong with that....if your consignor friend ron wants at least x dollars then he should consign it to an AH that will start the bidding at x dollars...this is nothing more than artificially upping the perceived value in the eyes of the public...but theres nothing wrong with that....hmmmmm

[Buythatcard]

This list just shows 2007-2008. Can you imagine what the list would look like if it included all the years that Mastro was in business? You know that it doesn't end with Mastro. I am sure that this is still going on within many AH's today. I am not saying that the AH are involved but there must be shilling done by individuals that have a connection with the consignor.

I have won 21 items from Mastro between 2005-2009 for a total of $34,000. The list shows that I was shilled only once in 2007 on a lot of 38 Colgan Chips. It makes me wonder how many other times they shilled me.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Buythatcard

This list just shows 2007-2008. Can you imagine what the list would look like if it included all the years that Mastro was in business? You know that it doesn't end with Mastro. I am sure that this is still going on within many AH's today. I am not saying that the AH are involved but there must be shilling done by individuals that have a connection with the consignor.

I have won 21 items from Mastro between 2005-2009 for a total of $34,000. The list shows that I was shilled only once in 2007 on a lot of 38 Colgan Chips. It makes me wonder how many other times they shilled me.

theres also the issue the other way....maybe if you not bid that top bid..someone else was prepared to bid the exact amount as you in that bidding slot so they didn't bid it because you already beat them there.....hence they would of been the underbidder as well to fill up all those shill bids up to your winning bidding slot......just saying its not like if all the shill bidders disappeared the lot would of been won every time at the amount the apparent 'winning bid' the victim was going to pay free of shilling....basically whatever the amount they calculated the victims lost...the real amount would of been lower..but yeah I know its like I a thief saying he stole 3,000 and not 5,000 that the homeowner claims was stolen (and told the insurance company)


By the way when is someone going to post a picture with a bunch of people holding pitchforks with something funny stated on it.....you net54 guys are good at that stuff

[Jeff1970Red]

The fact is there was never any intention to purchase the lot.

My opinion is that this was not the first time this occurred.

What I ask is to stop the BS gray area talk, no excuses, the same conversation I have with my kids and myself, daily.

No pitchfork just advice.

Jeff D'Errico

[brianp-beme]

How was it determined shill bidding occurred on all these lots? Many of them are obvious, such as the ones listed as the shiller being the auction house or an employee, and ones from consigners with multiple lots, each having the same shilling bidder, but how about the other one-offs? Are there records of 'shill agreements' that wasn't obvious in this document? Being a non-lawyer, I refused to read the whole document.

Brian

[Leon]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

How was it determined shill bidding occurred on all these lots? Many of them are obvious, such as the ones listed as the shiller being the auction house or an employee, and ones from consigners with multiple lots, each having the same shilling bidder, but how about the other one-offs? Were there records of 'shill agreements' that wasn't obvious in the listing?

Brian

I will take a stab at a guess. I guess they might have used bidding records, boxes sent to bidders who didn't win anything, boxes sent to consignors, admissions of rats, emails, texts, phone calls.....and I imagine the list goes on. But again, as Sgt Schultz would say, I know nothing.