Maybe Kenny, I'd have to think about that although my general understanding is that the plaintiff who has the burden of proof has to have a non-speculative damages theory and simply assuming there wouldn't have been any other bids in the but-for world of no shill bids seems awfully speculative to me. In any event, mine was less an observation about the mechanics of an actual trial than an observation that just academically speaking it's not an accurate measure of loss just to take the high bid and remove the shills.
__________________
Four phrases I have coined that sum up today's hobby:
No consequences.
Stuff trumps all.
The flip is the commoodity.
Animal Farm grading.
Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 05-03-2018 at 10:45 PM.
|