I have another situation to raise and it will probably "raise some hell"!

I'll respond simply to Jim questions first, then pose my question.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Put another way, what is the rationale behind a rule prohibiting shill bidding?

>>>>>>>>For the protection of the auction integrity itself and possibly the uninformed buyer.>>>>>>>>

What interest of the free will buyer, if any, is being protected by a rule against shill bidding?

>>>>>>>>More likely their being protected against their own anxieties and getting caught up in their own bidding frenzy on an item when the bidding starts getting to the point of a normal purchase price or even above that, if the shill is only protecting the seller's investment and not helping the seller get greedy.>>>>>>>>

Is there a factual situation in which a buyer can ACTUALLY be HARMED by the use of a shill bidder, as opposed to the use of a higher minimum bid or reserve price? [Please NOTE that having to pay a higher price than might otherwise be the case is NOT true harm to the bidder as long as he is still getting the item for a price equal to or less than the maximum he is prepared to pay for the item.]

<<<<<>>>Yes, if the shill doesn't stop bidding. If the seller sets a minimum bid you know right away where it's at. But that still doesn't preclude the use of a shill to keep bidding it up. "MAXIMUM he is prepared to pay" can mean anything with regard to someone with $ pockets and isn't informed as to what the current market prices are, and just has to have the item at auction.>>>>>>>>

If you think shill bidding is "unfair" to the buyer, WHY?

>>>>>>>>Only unfair to the bidder's as they are bidding against someone who has NO INTENTION of purchasing the item especially if they(the shill) are the high bidder, then there wasn't ever an auction in this case. If a minimum or reserve was first set and there was no use of a shill then this point is moot.

If the item is seen by price guide authors, it might cause a raise their prices in their guides.

BUT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BUYER IF IT WAS THE SHILL THAT WON. HOWEVER, IT DOES HAVE EVERYTHING TO DO WITH YOU THE CONSUMER WHO MIGHT RELY ON THE PRICE GUIDE WHICH NOW SHOWS AN INFLATED PRICE FOR THIS ITEM WHEN YOU GO TO PURCHASE ONE "NOT" ON AUCTION.>>>>>>>>

If you think shill bidding destroys the "integrity" of the auction, WHY?

>>>>>>>>When a shill bids and win's there wasn't ever an auction.>>>>>>>>

If you think shill bidding either is or ought to be "illegal" (that is, criminal in the real world), WHY? Factual reasons, please; what is the harm being protected against?

>>>>>>>>With reserves and minimums allowed, shills should be non existent. As those options are in place to protect the seller already.>>>>>>>>

As long as the buyer has the final word on how much he is willing to spend, what difference does it make how he gets there?

>>>>>>>>NONE! If the buyer is an INFORMED buyer. Lots, if the bidder is a NOVICE or UNINFORMED buyer with respect to the item they are bidding on. Again we're back to that old adage... "BUYER BEWARE">>>>>>>>

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now let me pose my questions.

How many times do we see this or that auction item sold for 2 to 10+ times the value that you could find it in the local store or dealer's shop?

Do you think that the INFORMED Seller is likely to let Joe NOVICE off the hook with his high bid?

Let us say, the item we know is available at any dealer or store for $20 and the item sold at auction for $75. Do you think any Seller would let Joe NOVICE off the hook with his bid? Or even inform him that he was paying too much?

Do you think the INFORMED Seller would say "Hey Joe, you've overbid on this item and I'll let you have it for $30?

Do you think the INFORMED Seller would have Joe NOVICE pay his bid price and even require him to pay the postage? And then go to the bidder's below Joe NOVICE and offer them the same item at their last bid prices?

-------------------------------------------------------------

In my opinion, auctions are there to put two people together, a buyer and a seller. Both should be informed and knowledgeable with regard to the item that is being offered.

What about the uninformed Seller.... Novice SELLER offers an item which we know has a market value of $500.00 but offers it at a starting bid of $10.00. Do we the informed bidder inform the SELLER? Or do we bid on the item and get it for $10.00 because no one else see's it and bids. Do we then inform the Seller of what they had?

From looking at what I've seen there are too many people who don't know what they are selling and what they are buying.

I just bought a Silver Strike token at auction which I didn't know what it was by the description the Seller had posted. Even asking the seller questions prior to the auction didn't resolve my questions?

I was either getting an newly discovered ERROR token from Boomtown, Reno or an OBSOLETE token from Boomtown, Las Vegas. Turns out, the seller finally took the time to look at the token just after the auction ended. I get the Las Vegas token.

As for the NOVICE Seller, that's how I got a "Rockette's Silver Strike token" now worth about $450.00 for $30.00(I did place a hidden maximum bid on the item at $250.00 at the time). I did inform the seller after the auction was over as to what they had offered and sent them a copy of my current guide. However, they were still happy with the sell as they originally won the token for around $2.00. And were also very happy to get more information regarding the tokens although that was the only Silver Strike token or chip they had.

Auctions aren't a perfect venue but they DO have their plus's and minuses.

Time for me to SHUT UP! :>()