hypothetical major problem with well respected board member

[sflayank]

no need to mention the other party...the deal was outlined in emails
however since the items that he collects are limited to less than a handful of collectors the odds of him having any dealings on this board are very small
the only items he needs are extremely rare and only show up once in a blue moon in major auctions
i have no intention of legal action whatsoever after all its just cardboard
as far as those concerned of collusion...thats ridiculous...it was a 19 card lot of which he only needed 12...so offering to sell the dupes is perfectly ethical
it happens in every auction by bidders all the time

[jb67]

Nicely stated!!

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by sflayank

no need to mention the other party...the deal was outlined in emails
however since the items that he collects are limited to less than a handful of collectors the odds of him having any dealings on this board are very small
the only items he needs are extremely rare and only show up once in a blue moon in major auctions
i have no intention of legal action whatsoever after all its just cardboard
as far as those concerned of collusion...thats ridiculous...it was a 19 card lot of which he only needed 12...so offering to sell the dupes is perfectly ethical
it happens in every auction by bidders all the time

Huh? You start a thread asking "What would you do?" and many of us told you that we would out the seller for the benefit of other board members. Why ask what we would do if you already knew what you would do? At this point, I don't understand the point of the thread.

[sflayank]

i read all your thoughts and came to that decision
whats to understand?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by sflayank

i read all your thoughts and came to that decision
whats to understand?

8 different members said here that you should out him. Unless I overlooked it, nobody said you shouldn't disclose the name. So how exactly did you come to that decision? What was your decision based on?

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Huh? You start a thread asking "What would you do?" and many of us told you that we would out the seller for the benefit of other board members. Why ask what we would do if you already knew what you would do? At this point, I don't understand the point of the thread.

OP is probably hoping the other party responds to this thread privately and works out an amicable solution.

[ruth-gehrig]

Originally Posted by sflayank

no need to mention the other party...the deal was outlined in emails
however since the items that he collects are limited to less than a handful of collectors the odds of him having any dealings on this board are very small
the only items he needs are extremely rare and only show up once in a blue moon in major auctions
i have no intention of legal action whatsoever after all its just cardboard
as far as those concerned of collusion...thats ridiculous...it was a 19 card lot of which he only needed 12...so offering to sell the dupes is perfectly ethical
it happens in every auction by bidders all the time

If the entire deal was clearly outlined in emails and so obviously one sided, you shouldnt have any reason to not "out" this member.

[cammb]

What would I do? I would ignore your next post!

To.ny Biv.iano

[whiteymet]

Larry:

Sounds familiar..........

Seems to me it is the same thing as when someone contacts you with items you might want and you tell them that person to pick up the stuff for X dollars, then later when that person gets the items in question for you, you say you won't pay that much!

Agree?????

[drcy]

If this is a case of people making an agreement to lower the final price, the OP maybe should drop the issue. Some might call it collusion-- sort of a form of reverse shilling.

But, as earlier noted, with group lots it's not always clear cut because two bidders may want and not want different stuff from the lot and that may be an important part of the reason they make an agreement.

I'd never go in with multiple people on a lot, because it sounds too messy and confusing. Anything that requires a spreadsheet to document what goes where is something on which I'd pass.

[Jewish-collector]

Larry -

Why don't you just say what Joel Goodsen (Tom Cruise) said in the movie Risky Business. He said in one of the scenes, "Sometimes you gotta say WTF"

[ValKehl]

Larry, I like Daniel's suggestion (post #19) that you contact Leon, provide him with all the particulars, and ask him to contact this other Board member. I think this approach offers the best chance of getting this matter resolved amicably.
Val

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cammb

What would I do? I would ignore your next post!

What would I do? Tell this poster (CAMMB) to put his name in his post. You can say what you want to but if you want to poke or jab someone (on this board), put your name next to it.

and to add, I don't care to get in the middle of anything but if I can help I will always try to...but prefer for members to work it out themselves..

[Exhibitman]

Or what we all should behave as if we were...

The issue of whether a bidding partnership is collusive is a close one [my experience is that the partnerships generate higher bids overall by pooling resources on the lot] but entirely irrelevant. Gentlemen do and do not do certain things not because they are enforceable contractual obligations but because they are the right things to do when interacting with other gentlemen. A gentleman:

--honors his wagers.
--keeps his word.
--watches out for his friends
--never cheats his co-venturers.

I partner with others on auction lots all the time. Never had a problem so far. Is it enforceable? No. Nor would I try to enforce it if the bidding partner decided to renege. I figure once someone gives you a cheap lesson about who he really is, choose to believe it. If a member here chose to cheat another member and it is clear-cut I'd favor outing him and then suspending him for a time. Might not teach the offender anything about how to behave but it would prevent others from being harmed. That said, it is the OP's choice whether to do so.

I have heard of certain members here whose word is no good on deals such as the one referenced in the OP and have refused to partner with those people on auction lots. Whoever it is this time, don't think for a moment that word of your behavior won't get around off the front page, so to speak, and that there won't be consequences to it even if the OP refuses to out you here.

[vintagetoppsguy]

At this point, I think the OP is either a total nut job, or isn't telling the entire truth. He claims he don't want to give up the name, but he's never had a problem outing people by name before...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=171975

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=185189

[Peter_Spaeth]

Perhaps he doesn't want to out him because the guy would come back with another side of the story.

[ruth-gehrig]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

At this point, I think the OP is either a total nut job, or isn't telling the entire truth. He claims he don't want to give up the name, but he's never had a problem outing people by name before...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=171975

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=185189

Appears he's been temporarily banned before as well.

[drcy]

I think there can be situations of bidder collusion to suppress prices, but there also situations of two friends who pool together their funds to win a lot neither could afford on his own. There are also situations of "I have no interest in all 150 of the cards in the lot and wouldn't place a bid, but if you win it I'll buy from you the three cards I need to finish my set." I don't consider the latter two examples of collusion.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

I think there can be situations of bidder collusion to suppress prices, but there also situations of two friends who pool together their funds to win a lot neither could afford on his own. There are also situations of "I have no interest in all 150 of the cards in the lot and wouldn't place a bid, but if you win it I'll buy from you the three cards I need to finish my set." I don't consider the latter two examples of collusion.

Larry said he would have bid up to 20k, but reached an agreement with the other guy not to bid, so it doesn't sound to me like this is either of the latter two examples. At least that is how I interpreted the hypothetical. Fine line though.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by sflayank

no need to mention the other party...the deal was outlined in emails
however since the items that he collects are limited to less than a handful of collectors the odds of him having any dealings on this board are very small
the only items he needs are extremely rare and only show up once in a blue moon in major auctions
i have no intention of legal action whatsoever after all its just cardboard
as far as those concerned of collusion...thats ridiculous...it was a 19 card lot of which he only needed 12...so offering to sell the dupes is perfectly ethical
it happens in every auction by bidders all the time

Dennis, the link provided was for a 15 card lot (not 19 cards). Close with the $10K bid, but no cigar.

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by Fred

Dennis, the link provided was for a 15 card lot (not 19 cards). Close with the $10K bid, but no cigar.

Fred, I know, I went through the entire baseball card section and couldn't find a perfect match, maybe I just missed it.