Article about Collecting and Fraud in the Hobby

Snowman · #1 09-23-2022, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

They did not specifically accuse BRENT is probably what we'll hear back, so what he said was literally partially true. Of course harder to defend the lie that shill bidding had nothing to do with the press release since it mentions it specifically. Unless part two of the BS spin is that Travis somehow knows that was all a pretext.

Of course that's what you'll hear back because that's OBVIOUSLY what I said. We've been sitting here discussing Brent specifically and what he may or may not have done for two pages now. Then someone who lacks reading comprehension skills pipes in with "ebay said BRENT was shill bidding". I responded with, "no they didn't", and you clowns run with it like you always do. Then somehow you guys turns into me denying that ebay sent out a letter stating "individuals associated with PWCC engaged in shill bidding."

Peter_Spaeth · #2 09-23-2022, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

Of course that's what you'll hear back because that's OBVIOUSLY what I said. We've been sitting here discussing Brent specifically and what he may or may not have done for two pages now. Then someone who lacks reading comprehension skills pipes in with "ebay said BRENT was shill bidding". I responded with, "no they didn't", and you clowns run with it like you always do. Then somehow you guys turns into me denying that ebay sent out a letter stating "individuals associated with PWCC engaged in shill bidding."

Most of your post was denying the statement had anything to do with shill bidding. That was certainly what you implied, not the wordsmithing parsing spin you are putting on it now. You're a bullshit artist. It's like me proclaiming, the Declaration of Independence never said all men were created equal.

Snowman · #3 09-23-2022, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Most of your post was denying the statement had anything to do with shill bidding. That was certainly what you implied, not the wordsmithing parsing spin you are putting on it now. You're a bullshit artist. It's like me proclaiming, the Declaration of Independence never said all men were created equal.

At no point did I ever state or even suggest that ebays statement had nothing to do with shill bidding. I know exactly what they said, and so do you.

What I said is that the letter eBay sent out is bullshit because they CLEARLY do not care about shill bidding. If you'd like to challenge this claim, be my guest. But please stop attacking strawmen.

raulus · #4 09-23-2022, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

At no point did I ever state or even suggest that ebays statement had nothing to do with shill bidding. I know exactly what they said, and so do you.

What I said is that the letter eBay sent out is [codswallop] because they CLEARLY do not care about shill bidding. If you'd like to challenge this claim, be my guest. But please stop attacking strawmen.

Just for fun, could you unpack this for me a bit? Are you suggesting that they don't care about shill bidding because it happens all day every day on their site and they do nothing about it? Or something else?

Peter_Spaeth · #5 09-23-2022, 03:15 PM

the Declaration of Independence never said all men were created equal.

Would you think I was disputing the substance or just quibbling about were vs. are?

BobC · #6 09-23-2022, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

Just for fun, could you unpack this for me a bit? Are you suggesting that they don't care about shill bidding because it happens all day every day on their site and they do nothing about it? Or something else?

Hey Nicolo,

Not exactly 100% sure, but if you look back at some of those statements attributed to Ebay, like in the Oregonlive link you posted, it states that Ebay accused "individuals associated" with the seller of engaging in shill bidding. Your debating adversary may be using that specific wording to then be able to claim they never specifically named and accused the company's owner, Brent. Which, and I hate to admit this, is technically correct then. That may be the rack your adversary is trying to hang at least one of their hats on then.

Now as for Ebay not caring about shill bidding, ask your debating adversary to then come forward with what other logical and intelligent reasons Ebay had to remove one of their largest sellers from their site for then. Typically, you'll get some hemming and hawing, but never any actual or credible direct response, and without really any supporting facts or information whatsoever. It is usually the classic "I'm right, and you're wrong!" defense and attack mode they'll throw at you. I saw and realized there are some like that on here long ago, and quit wasting my time even responding to such people, and just threw them on my "Ignore" list. Unfortunately, when others quote them when posting, the "Ignore" list feature doesn't stop me from seeing their comments. Oh well. Good luck with your debate.

raulus · #7 09-23-2022, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobC

Good luck with your debate.

In all honesty, I'm not really invested in this enough to even rise to the level of a debate. Maybe a mild intellectual inquiry?

Just trying to understand the inference behind why eBay clearly doesn't care about shill bidding.

Lorewalker · #8 09-23-2022, 04:54 PM

Much as I hate agreeing with Travis, he is right that eBay does not care about shilling. But they clearly do when they are pushed or embarrassed. Sort of like PSA and SGC not caring a heck of a lot how many bad cards they have slabbed until they are called out in a way where they cannot spin it. Then they go after the exact people who they know who were participating in the shenanigans and they ban em.

And as Bob C points out the notice from eBay said people associated with PWCC. Could have been consignors but since we have not seen a formal complaint filed by PWCC against ebay, their banning from selling suggests they were involved in the shill bidding to some extent and the banning was justified.

BobC · #9 09-23-2022, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

In all honesty, I'm not really invested in this enough to even rise to the level of a debate. Maybe a mild intellectual inquiry?

Just trying to understand the inference behind why eBay clearly doesn't care about shill bidding.

Good for you. Not worth the waste of your time. LOL

Snowman · #10 09-23-2022, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobC

Hey Nicolo,
Now as for Ebay not caring about shill bidding, ask your debating adversary to then come forward with what other logical and intelligent reasons Ebay had to remove one of their largest sellers from their site for then. Typically, you'll get some hemming and hawing, but never any actual or credible direct response, and without really any supporting facts or information whatsoever. It is usually the classic "I'm right, and you're wrong!" defense and attack mode they'll throw at you. I saw and realized there are some like that on here long ago, and quit wasting my time even responding to such people, and just threw them on my "Ignore" list. Unfortunately, when others quote them when posting, the "Ignore" list feature doesn't stop me from seeing their comments. Oh well. Good luck with your debate.

This has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, but for the sake of continuity in this thread, I will attempt to restate the Cliff Notes, as there have been multiple reasons stated for why eBay might have sent out that letter, several of which have garnered significant support among those paying attention.

The most common arguments are, in no particular order:

A) "Yay! ebay is finally cracking down on shill bidding! And Probstein is next!"... any day now, any day now...
B) The FBI came knocking on their door, asking for any and all records pertaining to PWCC as a result of the card trimming scandal/investigation.
C) eBay execs were pissed off when they learned that after many years of building their brand off of eBay's back, PWCC, their largest seller of sports cards, would be launching their own platform and stealing business from them (a fairly reasonable viewpoint for eBay to have, if you ask me). Thus, they wrote this very public letter and sent it to all of PWCC's customers in an effort to tarnish their reputation a mere few weeks before the launch of PWCC's new platform. Or what some might refer to as the, "you can't quit, you're fired!" approach.

Personally, while I acknowledge that option A is plausible, I see it as highly unlikely given their history of allowing shill bidding to permeate their entire platform prior to cutting off PWCC, and their otherwise continued lack of interest on this front since then. I think that some combination of B) and C) is what led to their decision to cut ties with PWCC, and that they intentionally scripted a very vague letter about "individuals associated with PWCC" that they hoped would damage PWCC's reputation. The timing of when this letter was sent out with respect to the launch of PWCC's new platform should not be lost on anyone. This was not a coincidence.

We are all free to call it how we see it, but this is how I see it, and I'm very much not alone. In fact, I believe my opinion is, by far, the majority opinion in this hobby.

raulus · #11 09-23-2022, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

We are all free to call it how we see it, but this is how I see it, and I'm very much not alone. In fact, I believe my opinion is, by far, the majority opinion in this hobby.

I don't think there's any doubt that the two principal players in this saga deserve each other, and probably deserve the cloud of suspicion that comes with it.

It might be a wee aggressive to suggest that yours is the majority opinion, simply because none of us are doing public opinion polls, so it's anyone's guess exactly what the hobby thinks.

But if your assertion is that a large number of people are still buying from PWCC's auctions, so they must not be viewed as guilty by the hobby, then I suppose that's possible. It's also possible that a good slice of us aren't willing to let our morals get in the way of our collecting. And I suppose in that way, we deserve what we get just as much.

Lorewalker · #12 09-23-2022, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

This has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, but for the sake of continuity in this thread, I will attempt to restate the Cliff Notes, as there have been multiple reasons stated for why eBay might have sent out that letter, several of which have garnered significant support among those paying attention.

The most common arguments are, in no particular order:

A) "Yay! ebay is finally cracking down on shill bidding! And Probstein is next!"... any day now, any day now...
B) The FBI came knocking on their door, asking for any and all records pertaining to PWCC as a result of the card trimming scandal/investigation.
C) eBay execs were pissed off when they learned that after many years of building their brand off of eBay's back, PWCC, their largest seller of sports cards, would be launching their own platform and stealing business from them (a fairly reasonable viewpoint for eBay to have, if you ask me). Thus, they wrote this very public letter and sent it to all of PWCC's customers in an effort to tarnish their reputation a mere few weeks before the launch of PWCC's new platform. Or what some might refer to as the, "you can't quit, you're fired!" approach.

Personally, while I acknowledge that option A is plausible, I see it as highly unlikely given their history of allowing shill bidding to permeate their entire platform prior to cutting off PWCC, and their otherwise continued lack of interest on this front since then. I think that some combination of B) and C) is what led to their decision to cut ties with PWCC, and that they intentionally scripted a very vague letter about "individuals associated with PWCC" that they hoped would damage PWCC's reputation. The timing of when this letter was sent out with respect to the launch of PWCC's new platform should not be lost on anyone. This was not a coincidence.

We are all free to call it how we see it, but this is how I see it, and I'm very much not alone. In fact, I believe my opinion is, by far, the majority opinion in this hobby.

I should let the lawyers on the board speak to this but if eBay was at all attempting to damage PWCC's reputation because they were pissed off learning that PWCC would languish...I mean move...to their own platform, Brent should have and could have sued. eBay has already forgotten that PWCC was a leader in selling sports cards on their site. Does not impact their bottom line in any meaningful way.

BobC · #13 09-23-2022, 04:23 PM

Double post.

Peter_Spaeth · #14 09-23-2022, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobC

Double post.

If you post twice is it the Bob C. twins?

BobC · #15 09-23-2022, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you post twice is it the Bob C. twins?

LOL

Internet issues, I think.

Snowman · #16 09-23-2022, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raulus

Just for fun, could you unpack this for me a bit? Are you suggesting that they don't care about shill bidding because it happens all day every day on their site and they do nothing about it? Or something else?

Yes, I'm suggesting that eBay's actions speak louder than their words. The problem of shill bidding has plagued their entire platform for decades. It is probably at least an order of magnitude worse on ebay than it is on any other auction website. Furthermore, it is not a difficult problem to solve, if solving means to reduce shill bidding activity by something like 95% or more. I could code it myself in less than a week. I also know that it's not an issue of competency, but rather one of priorities and self interests, as I have many data geek friends who either work there currently or have in the recent past (I used to live a few blocks from eBay headquarters here in San Jose). I wouldn't even be surprised to learn that someone has in fact already solved this problem but that their CFO, Steve Priest, chose not to implement it because it is something that they benefit from greatly. Whatever actions they do take toward this effort are merely done to save face, or as I believe is the case with PWCC, to tarnish the reputation of a very soon to be competitor.

raulus · #17 09-23-2022, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

Yes, I'm suggesting that eBay's actions speak louder than their words. The problem of shill bidding has plagued their entire platform for decades. It is probably at least an order of magnitude worse on ebay than it is on any other auction website. Furthermore, it is not a difficult problem to solve, if solving means to reduce shill bidding activity by something like 95% or more. I could code it myself in less than a week. I also know that it's not an issue of competency, but rather one of priorities and self interests, as I have many data geek friends who either work there currently or have in the recent past (I used to live a few blocks from eBay headquarters here in San Jose). I wouldn't even be surprised to learn that someone has in fact already solved this problem but that their CFO, Steve Priest, chose not to implement it because it is something that they benefit from greatly. Whatever actions they do take toward this effort are merely done to save face, or as I believe is the case with PWCC, to tarnish the reputation of a very soon to be competitor.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing those details. Always helpful to better understand some of the insider baseball behind the curtain.

I just wish I could get more shill bidders to bid up my items when I sell my items using the auction format on eBay. But I suppose they would only be shill bidders if I was making it happen myself, which I suppose is my problem.

G1911 · #18 09-23-2022, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

What I said is that the letter eBay sent out is bullshit because they CLEARLY do not care about shill bidding. If you'd like to challenge this claim, be my guest. But please stop attacking strawmen.

I mean, the fact that they kicked off and publicly lambasted the biggest seller in a very profitable category, to their fiscal detriment, would suggest, obviously, that they in fact do care to at least some extent.

Again, one could simply say "I don't care about the ethics, I'm here for money and PWCC makes me money" and be fine. The complete baloney made up while accusing the facts as straw men and conspiracy theories is where this goes completely off the edge.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fraud in the hobby	Snapolit1	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	84	04-23-2021 05:14 PM
Hobby history: 1977 Chicago Tribune article on card collecting	trdcrdkid	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	10	08-16-2017 04:19 PM
Hobby history: 1945 Sporting News article on baseball card collecting	trdcrdkid	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	2	04-25-2017 10:28 AM
NY Post article on Halper Fraud	brooklynbaseball	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	07-24-2011 10:14 AM
Auction Fraud Article	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	33	08-06-2002 10:17 PM