Kevin Keating responds to shill bidding allegations

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by glchen

David, what does any of this have to do with whether Kevin shilled or not? If you believe Kevin's reason on why he appeared on the list is not legit, go ahead and poke holes in it, but I don't think whatever Hank said is relevant.

Because when somebody (Kevin) tells the truth, they usually don't need others with prepared statements to vouch for them. Or am I way off base here?

[trobba]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Because when somebody (Kevin) tells the truth, they usually don't need others with prepared statements to vouch for them. Or am I way off base here?

I have no idea if you are off base or if it means anything, but I too noticed the lengthy, thought out response that was posted almost simultaneously as the OP.

Means absolutely nothing to me other than I noticed it and thought it was odd.

Rob G$the!l

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Because when somebody (Kevin) tells the truth, they usually don't need others with prepared statements to vouch for them. Or am I way off base here?

David, I don't mean to speak for Hank, and I have no idea what actually happened. However, if I had to guess, it probably went something like this where after Kevin appeared on the list, Hank contacted him to ask him what was going on. Kevin then probably told Hank privately what happened, but said he wanted to wait until Doug Allen was sentenced to publish it. Then as Hank saw Kevin get completely hammered in the list thread, he probably wrote his long post wanting to defend him, but then in the end, decided to just wait until Kevin posted this thread before he gave his response. Again, this is just my guess, as I have no idea what exactly happened, but it seems harmless to me.

[autograf]

Well.....they set up together at the National, so they are intertwined to some extent. I think the explanation by Kevin is entirely plausible and think it's quite possible a similar situation exists for other people on that list. I know some people on that list have similar non-sports collections that I do/did and bid on some of those items. The problem exists where ANY employee of ANY auction house bids on ANY item in their own auction. It could always be thought of as somewhat fishy since it could truly be shilling or could be that employee just wanting to further their collection. Would need a deep-dive, forensic accounting of each lot and bidders to truly know what was shilling. And that won't likely happen for this narrow group of years.............

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by autograf

Well.....they set up together at the National, so they are intertwined to some extent.

I think Hank sincerely has the utmost respect for Kevin's integrity and skills.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think Hank sincerely has the utmost respect for Kevin's integrity and skills.

I've been around this hobby a long time, and I don't know anyone who doesn't. You can argue all you want about his business strategies (pricing, not selling autographs with TPA, etc.) and I can't tell you how many discussions he and I have had over the years about every aspect of the hobby. But there's two things nobody can argue with: he always has the best autographs in the room, and he never cuts corners with ethics and certainly not with legalities. If there's a shadow of a doubt about whether something is good or not, or about any aspect of a transaction, he will close the book on it, even if it costs him a lot of money. I've seen it happen more than once.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

I've been around this hobby a long time, and I don't know anyone who doesn't. You can argue all you want about his business strategies (pricing, not selling autographs with TPA, etc.) and I can't tell you how many discussions he and I have had over the years about every aspect of the hobby. But there's two things nobody can argue with: he always has the best autographs in the room, and he never cuts corners with ethics and certainly not with legalities. If there's a shadow of a doubt about whether something is good or not, or about any aspect of a transaction, he will close the book on it, even if it costs him a lot of money. I've seen it happen more than once.

Hank, I just didn't want anyone thinking that you defended Kevin purely because of business interests. If another questionable autograph pops up, the people with autograph skills can discuss it once again. As this thread shows, and as past threads have shown, no one gets a free pass in this forum, and I believe that's the way it should be.

[drmondobueno]

Deleted

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by glchen

David, I don't mean to speak for Hank, and I have no idea what actually happened. However, if I had to guess, it probably went something like this where after Kevin appeared on the list, Hank contacted him to ask him what was going on. Kevin then probably told Hank privately what happened, but said he wanted to wait until Doug Allen was sentenced to publish it. Then as Hank saw Kevin get completely hammered in the list thread, he probably wrote his long post wanting to defend him, but then in the end, decided to just wait until Kevin posted this thread before he gave his response. Again, this is just my guess, as I have no idea what exactly happened, but it seems harmless to me.

Bingo! In fact, I sent Kevin my prepared response to his post to look over, since he had talked to the DA at length and had as much inside information on the intricacies of the exhibit as anyone. He asked if perhaps I should wait a while after his post so it wouldn't look like some kind of team effort on his behalf--which it isn't--and my response was that I didn't care what anyone thought about it, I meant every word and had nothing to hide. Yes, I had read his statement before making my post. So what?