Quote:
Originally Posted by oldjudge
Great story, Henry. Just one question--what if instead of bidding $5000 you had entered a "top all" bid? This is why auction houses today don't allow those and why it is hard to believe that Alan allowed those. Could it have just been a case of special treatment for a preferred client?
|
I think you may have hit the nail on the head there Jay with your last statement. And what is even more surprising is that if someone did put in a "Top All Bids" bid, wouldn't you think the people answering the phones would/should have known about it as well? Just like when bidders today put in a max bid on something, another bidder immediately gets told their bid is not the high bid, which then prompts them to bid again, pushing the price up even higher.
Had the rep on the phone simply told hank_jp he was not the high bidder at $5,000, sounds like there was a good chance that he would have bid even higher, thus making even more money for the item's owner. And from everything I've ever heard and read about the main party involved, they were definitely all about the money. So, doesn't it seem especially strange that someone would voluntarily give up money by having this somewhat weird "Tops All Bids" option in their auctions? And I assume this "Tops All Bids" option was only available for items the auction seller themself owned and was putting up for sale/auction, because if I were a consignor and found out someone I had consigned an item to was doing that kind of crap and potentially costing me money on an item I was selling through them, well......................
I had never heard about this "Tops All Bids" thing in regards to anyone's auctions before. But just now reading this, something clearly does not smell right. It would appear to indicate that someone doing this may have already had some pre-arranged sales agreement with another party, which would have made the actual auction/sale nothing more than a farce as certain items were never intended to be sold to those honestly bidding. I do not know if the party in question was an actual licensed auctioneer, or other type of licensed selling, but had they been, it would seem to me that there might be some question as to the legitimacy of such a practice. Also, they may have been extremely lucky that no one ever took them to court over something like this, where they'd have to explain how they could publicly advertise something for sale, that was in actuality, never really for sale to the bidders. Seems like they may have been using people just to set the price they then got from someone else they had already effectively sold the item(s) to. Not sure but, sounds to me like there might have been an element of fraud in what they were doing then as well. Maybe one of the attorneys on here will chime in.