*** Official REA Partnering Thread ***

Matt · #1 04-18-2011, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I'm no lawyer, but isn't this collusion? I know it's been going on with this forum forever, but I've always been a bit curious about that...I know that if you go to an auction you can not sit there and make deals with people to not bid on this and they won't bid on that.

What you described is collusion (whether it is in person or virtual). What happens here is not. Many cases where people team up it is because they can't afford to pursue the lot on their own and so by having them as part of the bidding pool through this kind of thread it's actually accomplishing the exact opposite of what collusion does for the consignor.

slidekellyslide · #2 04-18-2011, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

What you described is collusion (whether it is in person or virtual). What happens here is not. Many cases where people team up it is because they can't afford to pursue the lot on their own and so by having them as part of the bidding pool through this kind of thread it's actually accomplishing the exact opposite of what collusion does for the consignor.

If I'm at an auction and there is a box of cards is it legal for me to tell my bidding nemisis that I won't bid if he'll split the cards with me after the auction?

Matt · #3 04-18-2011, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

If I'm at an auction and there is a box of cards is it legal for me to tell my bidding nemisis that I won't bid if he'll split the cards with me after the auction?

I'm pretty sure that's collusion, but again, that's not analogous. What if we met at auction and started talking about a lot and we each observe that it's too bad because it has some really cool cards and there's no way we could win it individually, at which point, you propose the brilliant idea of pooling our money to go after the lot. Not only is that not collusion, it's desirable to the consignor.

To put a finer point on it, I believe it is only collusion if all participating parties initially had intent to go after the full lot.

slidekellyslide · #4 04-18-2011, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

I'm pretty sure that's collusion, but again, that's not analogous. What if we met at auction and started talking about a lot and we each observe that it's too bad because it has some really cool cards and there's no way we could win it individually, at which point, you propose the brilliant idea of pooling our money to go after the lot. Not only is that not collusion, it's desirable to the consignor.

To put a finer point on it, I believe it is only collusion if all participating parties initially had intent to go after the full lot.

How can you prove intent?

Anthony S. · #5 04-18-2011, 04:41 PM

I need someone to buy the 1909 Obak set and then sell me the Speas.

I know that will happen. Thanks in advance.

barrysloate · #6 04-18-2011, 04:58 PM

Dan- we've had this discussion many times, and I was always the one who suggested these groups were colluding to keep the bids down. But now I realize there can be extenuating circumstances.

Say there is a large lot of cards that appears likely to sell for around 10K. And let's suppose that five collectors can each use quite a few cards in the lot, but none of them can afford to spend that much. As a result, they form a group and bid on it that way. In that example, you've actually created an extra bidder, because individually none of them would have bid.

I imagine intent has something to do with whether or not it is collusion, but I don't know legally know how it can be determined.

rdixon1208 · #7 04-20-2011, 08:18 PM

If you're interested in going in on the T210-3 lot, please PM me your email address. I'll send out a group email and we can go from there.

wolf2039 · #8 04-21-2011, 12:03 PM

I am pursuing this lot and there will be 14 cards I do not need. If anyone is interested in these 14 cards as a lot, let me know what you'd be willing to pay. If we agree on the price, I will sell you the cards should I be fortunate enough to win the lot.

The 14 cards are:

Davidson
Demmitt (NY)
Devlin
Dougherty (portrait)
Fiene (throwing)
Gray
Hoffman
McBride
Merkle (portrait)
Mowrey
Payne
Seymour (portrait)
Heinie Smith
Snodgrass (catching)

Thanks!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
vBulletin How To: Understanding the Thread List	Matt	Soccer / Golf / Testing Forum	0	04-26-2009 09:12 AM
vBulletin How To: Understanding the Thread List	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	12	04-22-2009 12:55 PM
Official 1961 Fleer Basketball Thread	Archive	Basketball / Cricket / Tennis Cards Forum	6	10-14-2007 09:32 PM
REA vs. ebay	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	13	04-13-2007 07:52 PM
Official vintage card gripe thread	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	32	12-17-2005 12:39 AM