posted 08-18-2001 10:02 PM               

quote:

---

You come across an item on eBay you desire to own, but notice that someone you know is the current high bidder. Do you:

a. bid anyway

b. wait until someone else is the high bidder and then bid

c. write the person first and ask for permission to bid

d. not bid

---

posted 08-19-2001 03:43 AM               

Robert;

I'm not sure of the law elsewhere, but here in New York if you engaged in "C" you and the other party would be guilty of a serious crime: conspiring to fix the outcome of an auction. If you and any other party engage in such collusion as agreeing not to bid on lots which the other is interested in, agreeing not to raise anothers bid unless a third party is involved, or both laying off on a lot in the hope it will be passed, and you might strike a sharper deal after the auction is closed you are not just exchanging courtesies with a fellow collector; in effect you are colluding to lower the price which a consignor might otherwise realize, and you are depriving the auctioneer of his commission which he might otherwise be entitled to. As I say, I'm not sure how the laws are in each jurisdiction, but the above is a rough synopsis of that part of the UCC referring to collusion by bidders, and most states are a party to the UCC (Universal Commercial Code)in full or in part .

Ethically, if you are interested in the item, and there is still a raise available within your price range, you should bid. It should make no difference whatsoever who else is bidding. To do otherwise deprives the consignor and auctioneer of the opportunity to achieve true value for the lot.

The only possible reason I can see why anyone would care who else is bidding, is to see if a more knowledgible person also has faith in the authenticity and value of a lot. Years ago I used to bid against the late Mary Benjamin for autograph lots, I'd go one raise above where she stopped, no matter how many others continued to raise. I knew as a dealer she had to limit how much she'd pay, based on reselling the item(s); if I was successful at one raise higher I was receiving good value as a collector. I also respected her knowledge as to authenticity, and knew if she was "on" a lot, it was kosher.

Wayne;

If you were going to engage in conduct such as you indicate in your message, you should be aware you are in violation of the law in most states in the Union, and could be charged in your state, the state of the person you exchanged messages with and/or the state where the auction is taking place, and so could you "friend", if he didn't tell you to go ahead and bid, but accepted your "favor". So if any of those three states has enacted the basic form of the UCC regarding auctions, and the chances are very good at least one has, you would be engaging in a serious crime. For the protection of buyers, sellers and auctioneers from unscruplious action by others, auction laws are very strict...after all, auctions largely rely on trust between all parties.

Doc

Dr. William R. Hanson
Lunar Artist-Apollo 16

posted 08-19-2001 05:20 AM               

eBay has gone to great pains -- in and out of court -- to insure they are not identified as an auction house but instead as a classified advertisements service. They did so to avoid the pesky responsibilities of real auction houses, such as vouching for the authenticity of the items they present.

As far as I am aware, there is no law which prevents "fixing" the outcome of a classified ad, where the seller lists "best offer".

posted 08-19-2001 08:31 AM               

"Ethically, if you are interested in the item, and there is still a raise available within your price range, you should bid. It should make no difference whatsoever who else is bidding. To do otherwise deprives the consignor and auctioneer of the opportunity to achieve true value for the lot."

I agree with the good Doctor here. I would bid anyway. In fact, if you have a cable modem or other fast hook up, do what I do and "snipe". I bid with about 30-40 seconds to go in the auction and I put in my highest bid. It doesn't give the other guy time to respond. If I get the item, fine, if I don't, disappointment but life goes on. It's a sneaky way to do it but, damn, it works! :-)

posted 08-19-2001 10:12 AM               

BIG difference!!

posted 08-19-2001 10:18 AM               

Cable modem sniping is for whimps :-)
.....get yerself a good old slow and cranky dial-up, preferably from about 8,000 miles away using the world's most useless telecomms network and bid in the last 3 seconds of the auction - that gets the blood racing!!
You also feel a complete arse when the link hangs and the auction ends before your bid has got through, but what the heck, collecting isn't life or death... its supposed to be fun.

posted 08-19-2001 11:06 AM               

"Cable modem sniping is for whimps :-)
.....get yerself a good old slow and cranky dial-up, preferably from about 8,000 miles away using the world's most useless telecomms network and bid in the last 3 seconds of the auction - that gets the blood racing!!
You also feel a complete arse when the link hangs and the auction ends before your bid has got through, but what the heck, collecting isn't life or death... its supposed to be fun."

Better yet, cable modems are of no use, no matter how fast, if a thunderstorm knocks out the power just as you are about to bid. Talk about useless! :-)

Gene

posted 08-19-2001 12:32 PM               

What the h*ll and email the person of a joust of humour and tell them you are interested with the same item and will give them competition. Let the betting raise!

posted 08-19-2001 01:08 PM               

Unless its a true friend I know, theres no problem bidding agaist him/her. Besides, most bidders I know are all from collectspace or Yahoogroups, and are "just" online buddies.

------------------
______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Ben

http://www.geocities.com/ovcolumbia/totaleclipse.html

posted 08-20-2001 03:09 PM               

I think sometimes we take this stuff a tad seriously sometimes. Rob, if its a friend, and I will publically say this and wait on the FBI to come to my house with a search warrant now....<G> I do not bid against friends. Common courtesy. Should they decide or feel differently, refer back to my previous mentioning of it being taken too seriously.

Go with your gut, and you know how good of a friend they are. If theyre a true friend, tell em how badly you want it.

Cheers!

posted 08-20-2001 05:55 PM               

With some friends it's "may the best man win", with no feelings hurt, with others I at least ask.

posted 08-21-2001 03:23 AM               

There is most certainly "direct law" regulating all parties to auctions, and seller and auctioneers do take it very seriously when bidders conspire to cheat them. That the heads of a couple big auction houses are under indictment should show you just how serious the authorities are about trying to uphold the law. As to this being small potatoes, and just fun, maybe to us hobbiests, but probably not so to the guy consigning the stuff, and the guy feeding his family from the commissions from the auction. Frankly, I don't bid on the ebay autographs or space memorabilia auction sites (or consign there either) so it's no skin off my nose, Robert brought up the question and I just ventured my opinion and bit of knowledge about auction law and ethics. You can pooh-pooh it if you want, but ignore the law at your peril. Isn't one of you in law enforcement in New York? Well, you'd better bone-up on conspiricy to defraud as to auctions before you venture advice. I'm neither an auctioneer nor a lawyer, but I've taken more than a few law courses in college, been partner in a major business in the medical field (where you deal with legal questions daily) and more importasntly have made major purchases at many auctions (mainly philatelic)including Christies and have had to conform to the laws governing that industry. Talking about lots with a fellow bidder is perfectly okay, until you cross the line where I agree not to raise you, I agree to lay off lots you are bidding on, or in other way conspire to see that the lot(s) don't realize their full potential.

Robert, as to Ebay not being an auction in the strictest interpretation of the law, I have no knowledge. But Classified ads? When you put something up for bids, and people place bids in competition with one another for the item, and it sells to the highest bidder at a pre-announced cut-off time, what it is except an auction? If it walks like a duck, etc. Regardless, the laws of conspiracy to defraud can and do apply. Granted, with the nickles and dimes most of these lots sell for, most DAs haven't got the time to be bothered, but they COULD get involved, and you're still cheating the auctioneer and consignor, and that's the point. All over America traffic moves constantly at 10-15 miles above the posted limit, and the cops just watch it flow by, but let there be an accident, especially with serious injuries, and you'd best believe the words "excessive speed" and "contributed" are going to be in the report, and likely tickets will be issued; probably by the same cop who didn't bat an eye as you and everyone else went by him doing 69 in a 55 zone.

posted 08-21-2001 08:20 AM               

I can return the same advice you venture....a "few law courses" in NO way entitles you to give advice in any way, shape or form. Yes I was in law enforcement for 26 years and if you want to debate, off list of course, conspiracies, conspiracies to defraud et al, Id be glad to do so as I have handled similar cases many MANY times. And I DO know whereof I speak. Remember in your first paragraph, you said "conspire" to defraud. You seem to have trouble differentiating between having the INTENT to CRIMINALLY conspire (ergo cheat somebody out of something for personal gain as part of a criminal enterprise) and 2 friends dealing with a friendship.

This makes it obvious where you are lacking in the criminal justice/legal field.

What the heads of auction houses did was FAR different than 2 friends deciding on whether to bid against each other or not. No Prosecutor in the WORLD would take a case like this because he could not win it (and has the integrity to know this), but more importantly, knows the difference (which is where he GETS the integrity).

No Doc, this is NOT any direct law case, I'm sorry. You are 100% incorrect in this case. And thank you but I do not need to go "brush up" on anything. This is my area of expertise, but thanks for THAT advice.

Now if we can PLEASE get back to Roberts question of ethics and friendship that would be wonderful as it wasn't a law issue he was inquiring about anyway. My point is made and no need to belabor it anymore and attempt to defend positions that are tenuous, at best.

Cheers!

posted 08-21-2001 08:48 AM               

Personally -- and I mean just that, this is my personal choice and I do not mean to comment on others' decisions -- I almost always chose 'a' -- not to bid.

If the situation presents itself, than I sometimes choose 'b' -- but it must be obvious that the original bidder -- my acquaintenance or friend -- is no longer interested.

I believe this hobby should be (and is) much more than the acquisition of new artifacts for our personal collections. Its the exchange of information and the support of our fellow collector.

If someone other than myself is lucky enough to stumble upon a good deal on eBay than I say more power to him/her and its not my place to steal that opportunity... whether there are five days or five second remaining to the sale.

Otherwise, this becomes a battle of who has the most money and I, for one, would regret if our hobby degraded to an activity for the very rich (and to some degrees, it already has).

Its important I note that I only apply this approach to eBay and other online auctions. Live auctions are true competitions -- eBay is a cross between classified ads and flee markets and therefore does not deserve (again my personal opinion) the same treatment.

So, why did I raise this question now? I was recently outbid by someone I know on an item I very much wanted. I couldn't go any higher than what I bid and even that much was a stretch. But for a short while (several days) I felt I had a good chance of winning. As it resulted, it was only this person's bid which stood between me and the item.

posted 08-21-2001 08:54 AM               

Were you high bidder at the time you were outbid? In fairness to your friend if you were not, he may not have realized it at the time. I have been outbid by friends in a small circle that do not bid against each other, simply because someone outbid me by a dollar and they (and Im guilty of it too) didnt check previous bidders first.

But you are right, this is a "friendship" question and I as a rule do not, but would not allow a friendship to go by the wayside if a friend did it to me. Of course true friendships are based on so much more.

Best,

posted 08-21-2001 10:31 PM               

Had a chat with my friend, the DA of a near-by county the other day, he tells me there are just so many hours in the day and he and his assistants have to make decisions all day long on what cases to persue. If violence is not involved, in many cases they have to pass on prosecuting, because of man power and court docket considerations. In hasn't a thing to do with "integrity", they'd love to prosecute every crime the police turn over to them or which comes to their attention through a citizen complaint, media investigation, or whatever, but we taxpayers aren't willing to pay for enough Assistant DAs, secretaries, court clerks, judges, and jail cells. As a former policeman you shgould be painfully aware of that fact. So, unless someone has been injured physically, darn few "white-collar" crimes manage to get before a Grand Jury; doesn't make them less of a crime, just means they don't always get prosecuted.

As to the question of "intent", when two or more people have a conversation, the purpose of which is to control the bidding at an auction, the result of which will be a lower price realized by the seller, that is on its face proof of intent to defraud, and when engaged in by two or more people it is called criminal conspiracy. And it doesn't require a degree in Law to understand that, but I ran it by my DA friend just to see if my recollections of many long conversations with Pat Hurst (a licensed New York City auctioneer for decades) were correct. He concurred, but cautioned that few jurisdictions had as strong an auctioneer licensing commission as New York City, nor the financial resources to go after these crimes unless really big money was involved.

posted 08-22-2001 06:39 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr. William R. Hanson:
when two or more people have a conversation, the purpose of which is to control the bidding at an auction, the result of which will be a lower price realized by the seller, that is on its face proof of intent to defraud, and when engaged in by two or more people it is called criminal conspiracy. Doc

---

Friend #1 - Hey, did you see that Joe Dingleberry SP, lot #68?

Friend #2 - Yeah, I'm bidding on it... I've been dying to get one.

Friend #1 - Really? I was thinking of bidding on it too. Well, I don't really want it THAT much. Go for it pal, I won't bid against you.

Criminal conspiracy? GIMME A BREAK!! This shows how some folks take all of this (and themselves) way too seriously.

Take all the classes you want, talk to all the DAs in the world... and then report the above scenario to your local police precinct as a "crime." They will laugh you out of the station. PUHHHHLEEEZE... this is so absurb.

Given William Hansen's interpretation, ANY lot you wanted you'd have to bid on otherwise you are depriving the seller "full value" and committing a CRIME!!!

posted 08-22-2001 06:52 AM               

I too ran it by THE State Attorney for this Judicial District, not one of his assistants. Outlining the entire scenario (he's a space collectibles geek as well who uses eBay), he harumphed, hemmed and hawed, and said:

(1) eBay does fall under different rules

(2) Two words here, and this test is the one that fails and the most essential to ANY type fraud: Criminal Intent. 2 friends discussing something and not following through for whatever reason is NOT criminal intent.

Which thank God is true. Otherwise it would be Big Brother all over again, where simply saying hello and thinking something different would make you a violater. And it does not matter what State or jurisdiction you are in, this is based on common law as well as statutory law.

Best,

posted 08-24-2001 03:41 PM               

My approach to ebay is (whether I see the item on its first, last or anyday that the item is viewed - I usually only visit ebay 1 or 2 times a week) that if I see something I like I bid on it and when it asks for a "maximum bid" I will put in a bid that will be my maximum bid. By reading some of the posts on collect space and looking at the times in bid history after an auction has closed my approach must be a little different.

posted 08-24-2001 05:47 PM               

The technique of Ebay bidding is almost an art form in itself and there are many legitimate and fair techniques one can employ to match a given circumstance. But dont forgot one reason for late bidding is it re-injects some of the risk and emotion of an actual auction!

posted 08-24-2001 05:48 PM               

<<<I guess my question is why wait to the last 30 seconds or why not have a true maximum bid?>>>

I wasn't belittling sniping as I've done it more than once myself and still do.

And yes, as you hinted, I once did make "behind the scenes" negotiations with a seller to circumvent an auction. A practice I was not alone in. As it caused much dissension among strangers and friends alike, I no longer do this & haven't in quite awhile.

If you were in contact with me as you once were you'd know this. Or join The Astro Nuts, 240+ strong now. I invited EVERY person I knew including folks I've had very public disagreements with in the past. Folks like you, Al H., James Brown, Mint, Kim Poor, etc. To date of those I just listed only Mint has decided to let bygones be bygones.

Being the moderator of one of the fastest growing egroups on the planet has caused me to control my once infamous temper. Ask a Nut and and I think they'll confirm that statement.

As to experience you have an order of magnitude more experience in collecting than I, and I have always said so.

Let's bury the hatchet old friend.

posted 08-25-2001 07:57 AM               

Really, your comments to Don including mine and some other names was very innappropriate. First off, this was another chance for you to shamelessly advertise your list and I suspect you've become so obsessed with recruitment it shows up in very nearly every post here you make. It's getting old.

Especially when you make inferences about how you wonderfully turned over a new leaf, and offered to bury the hatchet yet some of us refuse to do so. What a guy and what jerks we must be.

This is wrong wayne, as my desire to not join your group has nothing to do with burying the hatchet, whether it be in the ground OR in someones skull. In fact, I have done nothing but support your group and have offered well wishes in every aspect. In SPITE of your allowing people to say negative things about me and not doing anything about it, so sadly the favour is not returned. Certainly this contributes to my reasoning for not joining.

And in all fairness, this is not confined to your group and is in a lesser number than another new group.

So I'd certainly appreciate you not making allegations like this, and I believe a great many people would like to see less advertising as well. Let's stick to the subject matters at hand, as you do have a lot to contribute, as does your list.

Best,

posted 08-25-2001 09:36 AM               

I haven't said or implied you were a "jerk" for not joining. I am surprised that only Jimmy took time to at least respond with a no thank you. I've been ignored by the others I mentioned (except for Mint of course).

And while the above post may have come across as a "shameless advertise" it was not intended. This forum was my only means to respond to Don. When he broke off our friendship a few months back he told me point blank that I "had no need to respond to his email as he would delete any communication sent by me unread". The above is the first time he's even talked to me 3rd party, so I took my chance at healing old wounds.

Sorry it had to be public as I had no other means left to me. The above would have been sent in private if I had thought he'd read it. In this case there were no ulterior motives of trying to plug my group as I've done in the past. Robert and I have an understanding on that issue.

Thanks for your support and concern Al.

posted 08-25-2001 04:44 PM               

Information is a ressource. When gathered and exchanged, it may help the collector to do as well as another collector with more financial ressource. Why not?

-=+=-

Yes, I may contact antother bidder. I could also just as well make decision A or D on my own, without contacting the other collector.