It's Closing Night of a Great Vintage Auction

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Buyer collusion technically is unlawful.

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

[raulus]

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by raulus

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

Conversely, am I colluding with the seller to increase the price when I tell my buddy that a card he wants for his collection is available at XYZ auction house that he is not aware of?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Conversely, am I colluding with the seller to increase the price when I tell my buddy that a card he wants for his collection is available at XYZ auction house that he is not aware of?

Of course not. There's no agreement between potential competitors in that case.

[G1911]

If it is fine to run fake auctions for items the auction house doesn't even have control of anymore then I can decide not to run up the price on a card I know a friend wants more and will mean more to than it will to me.


I mean, I use this hobby-approved path

A) If item is being sold by a corporation people with a vested interest in prices escalating like, even if that corporation is run by convicted fraudsters or people with long histories of ethically dubious conduct, anything is fine.

If condition A is not met, then proceed with:

1) If it increases card values and is legal and ethical = it is fine
2) If it increases card values and is unethical = it is fine
3) If it increases card values and is unethical and also illegal = it is fine
4) If it decreases card values and is legal and ethical = it is debatable
5) If it decreases card values and is unethical = it is not okay
6) If it decreases card values and is unethical and also illegal = it is not okay

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

If it is fine to run fake auctions for items the auction house doesn't even have control of anymore then I can decide not to run up the price on a card I know a friend wants more and will mean more to than it will to me.


I mean, I use this hobby-approved path

A) If item is being sold by a corporation people with a vested interest in prices escalating like, even if that corporation is run by convicted fraudsters or people with long histories of ethically dubious conduct, anything is fine.

If condition A is not met, then proceed with:

1) If it increases card values and is legal and ethical = it is fine
2) If it increases card values and is unethical = it is fine
3) If it increases card values and is unethical and also illegal = it is fine
4) If it decreases card values and is legal and ethical = it is debatable
5) If it decreases card values and is unethical = it is not okay
6) If it decreases card values and is unethical and also illegal = it is not okay

Thanks Greg!

I've been waiting for just such a handy decision tree to help me to navigate these sticky situations.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by raulus

Thanks Greg!

I've been waiting for just such a handy decision tree to help me to navigate these sticky situations.

Straw man of all straw men

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Of course not. There's no agreement between potential competitors in that case.

I'm not sure I understand the ethical argument here, technically yes, talking to any other person about a listing would be considered collusion.

In reality, it happens more like this.

"Hey, did you see that E-card in XYZ auction?"

"I did, are you interested in it? I know we both collect cards like that."

"Yes, I'd probably be at 2K on it, I have my eye on that T-card in the same auction so that would be my priority".

"I'd probably go 2.5K since I need it for my collection."

"Okay, good luck, I hope you get it."

And the results are usually my buddy overpaying for the E-card and me overpaying for the T-card since there are always other bidders involved, and more often than not neither one of us wins.

Now I could see if all of the potential bidders got together and chose one guy to win like Scott's example link, that would definitely qualify has collusion.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If you think there's no chance of influencing the outcome why are you even having the conversation?

[BioCRN]

Closing night? If they're not already in at that point, nah.

Early on, shared many times. "Hey, ____ have some ____ if you haven't checked it out."

I'm not afraid of missing out. The longer I have to search for things, the longer the hobby keeps me from creating a new (and therefore expensive) hobby focus.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you think there's no chance of influencing the outcome why are you even having the conversation?

We've already established the outcome regarding the two of us, either he is willing to pay more than me or he isn't. That would have no material effect on the ultimate sales price the seller receives.

Am I the only one who has hobby conversations with friends like this?

Because I certainly don't feel like some criminal mastermind who is having any effect on the outcome of prices except when I do win I usually have to overpay for the honor of adding a card to my meager collection on a limited budget.

[Kco]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I'm not sure I understand the ethical argument here, technically yes, talking to any other person about a listing would be considered collusion.

In reality, it happens more like this.

"Hey, did you see that E-card in XYZ auction?"

"I did, are you interested in it? I know we both collect cards like that."

"Yes, I'd probably be at 2K on it, I have my eye on that T-card in the same auction so that would be my priority".

"I'd probably go 2.5K since I need it for my collection."

"Okay, good luck, I hope you get it."

And the results are usually my buddy overpaying for the E-card and me overpaying for the T-card since there are always other bidders involved, and more often than not neither one of us wins.

Now I could see if all of the potential bidders got together and chose one guy to win like Scott's example link, that would definitely qualify has collusion.

Exactly my point, acting like 2 buddies deciding to prioritize which item they are going for the hardest has ANY material change on the auction final price is funny, as if there aren't 20 others bidding on most desirable items.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by raulus

Is it really collusion though?

For example, if I know that my buddy absolutely has to have something to complete his collection. It's an obscure item, and there aren't many other bidders. For the sake of argument, it's something that I am mildly interested in acquiring, but not really willing to spend very much. I know that my buddy is going to be willing to go nuts to get it, far more than I ever will.

Would it really rise to collusion if I decide to sit that item out?

Let's assume for a moment that all of this goes on without us actually discussing this item specifically, simply because I know my buddy and his collection, and because we're such good friends that I'm not going to be that guy.

There would have to be a conversation. Collusion has to be a concerted effort between multiple parties. Deciding on your own not to bid is not that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

Structurally it's the same thing as bid rigging. Of course it's de minimus in this case, but still not the best look ethically either IMO. And people who think it's cool might feel differently if it was on a pricey card THEY had consigned.

[Kco]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Glad you said it, I was biting my tongue.

Of course it's not the intent of the law to penalize a couple of buddies, but it has been prosecuted and recently when it is a true matter of collusion intended to depress the bidding artificially.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-...osure-auctions

and there are others.

Respectfully disagree on it being collusion between a couple of friends and fellow collectors to choose not to bid on an item the other is truly after.

The reality is one person not bidding probably doesn't change the price much if at all, considering the hundreds of thousands to millions of additional consumers in the marketplace that you aren't in contact with that may also have interest in that item.

With how front and center auctions are now, my buddy Bob electing not go go after an item to not bid against a friend is unlikely to have any material change on the market value of that piece. If only you and Bob were willing to fight for the item in the first place, and it goes for a very low price, then the market wasn't really much of a market to begin with and you'd have been overpaying.

If something is too good of a deal, a dealer or flipper will bid in principal to grab a deal and flip it.