PWCC Part Deux

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by Brent Huigens

It is unfortunate that the previous thread was locked because, in our opinion, there is no reason to limit honest and thoughtful dialogue. We truly value the unbiased nature of the discussion boards, so intentionally try to only chime in when needed. This will be our only post on this thread. Betsy Huigens

"there is no reason to limit honest and thoughtful dialogue" and you "truly value the unbiased nature of discussion boards" yet you are not interested in participating in said dialogue and you pick and choose which questions to answer.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Exactly.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In the name of thoughtful dialogue you sell many very high end cards and obviously are aware of the huge issue with compromised or fake slabs in that market segment. How did cortney,s card get through your screening process and what went wrong? How do you know if it is an isolated incident?

[sreader3]

Auctions will always be susceptible to manipulation from collusion. In a fixed price scenario, the sale price is determined only by the seller and the buyer – a truly arms-length scenario. However, in an auction scenario, the sale price is determined by the seller, the buyer and the second highest bidder. The second highest bidder has no risk, allowing: (1) the seller and the second highest bidder to collude to raise the hammer price or (2) the buyer and the would-be second highest bidder to collude to lower the hammer price. Case 1 is the classic shill bidding scenario. In Case 2, consider a case where two “friends” who have the same collecting interests agree that one of them will bid in a particular auction and the other will refrain, thereby reducing the hammer price.

Even though I love winning auctions below my “max bid” as much as the next guy, I believe this collusion is why eBay has trended toward a fixed pricing model and why that is probably where things are likely trending long term.

Unless someone can come-up with a solution to the collusion problem, of course.

[jefferyepayne]

Sorry PWCC but between string bidding and bid retractions, bid retractions are way, way, way more important to stop than string bidding. Yet you continue to focus on the former.

Get serious about banning anyone with >1 bid retraction in the past 6 months and maybe we'll take your comments seriously. Compared to banning those who retract bids, worrying about string bidding is a waste of time.

jeff

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by slipk1068

"there is no reason to limit honest and thoughtful dialogue" and you "truly value the unbiased nature of discussion boards" yet you are not interested in participating in said dialogue and you pick and choose which questions to answer.

Bs meter go off? Lol.