MLB/team shilling?

[BVC]

I won quite a few items from MLB Auctions this year, but my last experience led me to believe there might be some shilling going on, either by MLB or by one or more of MLB teams. Specifically, I was offered an item at my high bid, that I was supposedly the underbidder on. Checking the bidder history, I recognized the winner as someone who bids a lot and never wins. Now he wins and I end up getting offered his item. I argued that he looked to be a shiller and his bids should be removed - the Washington Nationals agreed to my price.

Still, it smells bad. I haven't bid with MLB Auctions since.

[sportsnbikes]

I wouldn't be surprised if this practice exists. Maybe not by all teams but by some.

[dnrapp]

I won quite a few items from MLB Auctions this year, but my last experience led me to believe there might be some shilling going on, either by MLB or by one or more of MLB teams. Specifically, I was offered an item at my high bid, that I was supposedly the underbidder on. Checking the bidder history, I recognized the winner as someone who bids a lot and never wins. Now he wins and I end up getting offered his item. I argued that he looked to be a shiller and his bids should be removed - the Washington Nationals agreed to my price.

Still, it smells bad. I haven't bid with MLB Auctions since.

To me it looks like the high bidder didn't pay so the MLB team could live with your bid and just made you the winning bidder.

[BVC]

That is certainly factually true. But the question was whether or not the winning bidder was a shill for MLB or a team.

[commando]

When a high bidder does not pay, I believe the second-highest bidder should have the option of winning the item, but at the price he would have paid BEFORE all of the bids placed by the non-paying winner (or shill in some cases). If you would have won an item for $500 before the non-payer bid it up to $800, why do you now have to pay $750? I'll take it for the $500, which is probably closer to the true auction value.

[rufusandherschel]

I won quite a few items from MLB Auctions this year, but my last experience led me to believe there might be some shilling going on, either by MLB or by one or more of MLB teams. Specifically, I was offered an item at my high bid, that I was supposedly the underbidder on. Checking the bidder history, I recognized the winner as someone who bids a lot and never wins. Now he wins and I end up getting offered his item. I argued that he looked to be a shiller and his bids should be removed - the Washington Nationals agreed to my price.

Still, it smells bad. I haven't bid with MLB Auctions since.

As I understand, MLB Auctions is/are essentially a 'collection' of individual MLB team auctions. So, in essence, when bidding on an item, the bidder is dealing with the MLB team of which the item represents.

If my understanding of the workings of MLB and/or Team Auctions is correct, shill bidding calls into question the integrity of the specific team in question, and would seriously doubt that that/any team would (want to) risk the possibility of being accused of such a practice.

Just my opinion.

[ndevlin]

As I understand, MLB Auctions is/are essentially a 'collection' of individual MLB team auctions. So, in essence, when bidding on an item, the bidder is dealing with the MLB team of which the item represents.

If my understanding of the workings of MLB and/or Team Auctions is correct, shill bidding calls into question the integrity of the specific team in question, and would seriously doubt that that/any team would (want to) risk the possibility of being accused of such a practice.

Just my opinion.

I agree that they wouldn't want to risk doing that. But, let's say they did bid up their own items-- what's the difference between that and the other auction houses we bid on that are able to bid up their own auctions?

You are correct, teams work directly with MLB auctions, so when you see an item that is from the Royals for example, they are the ones that took the photo of the item and are the ones auctioning it off. But you have to be careful-- some items on their have nothing to do with the actual team. For example- when you see a Rangers item on there, it's actually Fanatics. If you were to call the Rangers about an item they have up for auction, they will have no idea what you are talking about, because it's Fanactics. So it can be a bit tricky. Not all MLB auction items are directly linked to the teams themselves, but a lot are. Hopefully that makes sense.

[BVC]

As I understand, MLB Auctions is/are essentially a 'collection' of individual MLB team auctions. So, in essence, when bidding on an item, the bidder is dealing with the MLB team of which the item represents.

If my understanding of the workings of MLB and/or Team Auctions is correct, shill bidding calls into question the integrity of the specific team in question, and would seriously doubt that that/any team would (want to) risk the possibility of being accused of such a practice.

Just my opinion.

That's the way I understand it as well - MLB made the offer to me, but when I countered that the possible sheller's bids should be removed, they had to go back to the Nationals to get agreement.

There could be many reasons for a specific team to shill - the person in charge might have questionable ethics or might feel that shilling is 'normal' for auctions. If he gets higher bids than other teams for similar items, it might mean a pay raise for him. Or it might not be a shiller - could just be someone who loves to play the game, but doesn't want to pay.

[BVC]

-- what's the difference between that and the other auction houses we bid on that are able to bid up their own auctions?

Transparency. Both are wrong, but AH's can get away with it because you can't track shillers (MLB provides bidder i.d.'s). Whether a team is shilling or not, it's in their best interest to ban the bidders who appear to be shills, and to let their customers know what they've done.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

When a high bidder does not pay, I believe the second-highest bidder should have the option of winning the item, but at the price he would have paid BEFORE all of the bids placed by the non-paying winner (or shill in some cases). If you would have won an item for $500 before the non-payer bid it up to $800, why do you now have to pay $750? I'll take it for the $500, which is probably closer to the true auction value.

I disagree. What if a third party were interested in purchasing the item at $600 but didn't get a chance to bid due to the winner and under-bidder having bids placed at $750 and $800.

I think the under-bidder should be given the option to purchase at their top losing bid or the item should be relisted.

[BVC]

I disagree. What if a third party were interested in purchasing the item at $600 but didn't get a chance to bid due to the winner and under-bidder having bids placed at $750 and $800.

I think the under-bidder should be given the option to purchase at their top losing bid or the item should be relisted.

You have a good point, but at this point the deal is with the underbidder, and while we know the shiller cost him money, any potential activity by other bidders is just guessing.

Also, the MLB team isn't interested in fairness - they want money. A good argument and a good $ figure is probably enough to get the deal done.

[JDF5244]

How could someone not pay for their item? I bi on MLB Auctions too and they already have my credit card info. As soon as I win something they charge my card….
Unless people are entering fake credit card info, I don't understand how something doesn't get paid for…...

[jojac]

I had a few issues last year that made me suspect some shill bidding was going on with MLB items. It all started when someone bid me up and once they matched my bid they quit. Shortly after I noticed the same thing happening on a separate item that I was watching to another bidder. Once the suspected schill matched the original bid he quit.
When I went back and looked at the bid history on the item I had won then I could see that the bidder who bid me up had changed his name and was the same bidder who ran up the second item I was watching a week later.You could think it was coincidence but I could track the shills name changes thru my bid history and you have to ask yourself who & why would someone change their name 6 times in just a few months. It didn't seem right to me at the time.
I lost track of the suspected shill when MLB changed their format last year but it also seemed to me that the suspected shill bidding has dropped off some since that point.

[MTC]

Also agree with the consensus that MLB.com auction items are definitely being shilled at times.

From my understanding, any bids placed by the following bidders are shill bids:

Sullyrackem
sparkles1

[5toolplayer]

I won quite a few items from MLB Auctions this year, but my last experience led me to believe there might be some shilling going on, either by MLB or by one or more of MLB teams. Specifically, I was offered an item at my high bid, that I was supposedly the underbidder on. Checking the bidder history, I recognized the winner as someone who bids a lot and never wins. Now he wins and I end up getting offered his item. I argued that he looked to be a shiller and his bids should be removed - the Washington Nationals agreed to my price.

Still, it smells bad. I haven't bid with MLB Auctions since.

Email me

[gorilla777]

I was going to add I quit looking at items due to bidding by NEWYORK25 and MTC and others, so sorry maybe I'm wrong.
Then I gave up long ago on NFL Auctions, think the name was like Steadynitenson? I was run up by 45 plus bids on a Niners jersey and saw it happening on all the other team players, but that was a year plus ago.

[sherbal15]

Thought this thread could use a renewal -


Cardinals auctions on mlb

I don't know if anyone else has noticed but Cardsgurl16 bids only on items that have a reserve on them. The bidder is always ending their bidding just under the reserve. They have done this multiple times. Don't believe me? Watch the stephen piscotty jersey currently up for auction. You can also be sure to see the wacha coming up go the same way. This bidder NEVER wins and NEVER bids on anything without a reserve.

If I were anyone bidding on cardinals stuff I would stay away from anything attached to a reserve.

[sherbal15]

Thought this thread could use a renewal -


Cardinals auctions on mlb

I don't know if anyone else has noticed but Cardsgurl16 bids only on items that have a reserve on them. The bidder is always ending their bidding just under the reserve. They have done this multiple times. Don't believe me? Watch the stephen piscotty jersey currently up for auction. You can also be sure to see the wacha coming up go the same way. This bidder NEVER wins and NEVER bids on anything without a reserve.

If I were anyone bidding on cardinals stuff I would stay away from anything attached to a reserve.

You can also watch the kolten wong helmet currently up for auction. Cardsgurl16 currently is in the "lead". The reserve must be close...

[yanks12025]

You can also watch the kolten wong helmet currently up for auction. Cardsgurl16 currently is in the "lead". The reserve must be close...



I don't see the big deal because there's a reserve already on the item. It's not like they're running the price up on people because technically no one is winning the item.

[sherbal15]

I don't see the big deal because there's a reserve already on the item. It's not like they're running the price up on people because technically no one is winning the item.

I disagree. Without the bids by cardsgurl16 most, if not all, all of these items wouldn't even come close to the price they end up at. All the reserve is doing is ensuring that cardsgurl16 will never win. Creating a false interest in an item through fake bidders is shilling, reserve or not. Taking it one step further - normally you point to a recent auction sale price to benchmark the value of an item right? What better way to justify CRAZY prices to customers than point to your own shilled auction?

[seanbaseball]

Shill bidding at any auction is wrong, period. It creates a falsely inflated market

[sherbal15]

Shill bidding at any auction is wrong, period. It creates a falsely inflated market

Totally agree. And for the record these prices are not getting this high because it's charity. The cardinals auctions on mlb auction are absolutely for profit. Let's not confuse Cards Authentics with Cardinals Care (the not for profit). These are two completely separate beasts

[danesei@yahoo.com]

I disagree. Without the bids by cardsgurl16 most, if not all, all of these items wouldn't even come close to the price they end up at. All the reserve is doing is ensuring that cardsgurl16 will never win.

But what difference does it make what price the item "ends at" if it never gets sold? The reserve ensures that the items don't go for less than the organization wishes to sell for.

As for the charitable aspect of bidding, there are two things which may drive prices in league sponsored auctions:

1) The assumption that the proceeds, at least in part, go to charitable purposes.
2) The items have more legitimacy coming from a primary source.

Personally, I can see both sides of the "shill" argument. It does drive up the market price, but it also shows what an individual is willing to pay for an item. If you don't want to pay a high price, stop bidding.

On the flip side, people inherently feel betrayed or defrauded when shill bidding occurs. This is thanks to eBay. I know larger auction houses have been accused of doing it, but eBay's form of it is idiotic and blatant.

My view is that shill bids will remain a problem, so long as the individual selling the item has a vested interest in the outcome. Auction houses have a vested interest in garnering the highest possible sale price for their clients, since that maximizes their profits, as well. However, that's still a better venue (to prevent shill bids) than having a "marketplace" where all bidders are anonymous.

[sherbal15]

But what difference does it make what price the item "ends at" if it never gets sold? The reserve ensures that the items don't go for less than the organization wishes to sell for.

The items are shilled to the point where the next bid triggers the reserve price. The items are getting sold at an artificial price


Personally, I can see both sides of the "shill" argument. It does drive up the market price, but it also shows what an individual is willing to pay for an item. If you don't want to pay a high price, stop bidding.

I hope this was meant to construe that you are understanding the reasoning behind shilling and the way it comes across. It comes across as if you believe shilling is "ok" sometimes.

[GoCrazyFolks76]

Has anybody bothered to notify MLB about this practice? I think they would be interested to know about illegal activities that are taking place on their websites.

[yanks12025]

Has anybody bothered to notify MLB about this practice? I think they would be interested to know about illegal activities that are taking place on their websites.

No one has given 100% proof that the teams are shilling bidding their own auctions.

I still think there's nothing big about someone bidding up a reserve(no reserve is different story). And no one should use mlb auctions as a go to for prices because most items go over market price anyway.

[sherbal15]

No one has given 100% proof that the teams are shilling bidding their own auctions.

I still think there's nothing big about someone bidding up a reserve(no reserve is different story). And no one should use mlb auctions as a go to for prices because most items go over market price anyway.

The only people using mlb auctions as the "go to" for market value is the teams store. So when you call about buying something they can point to the their latest auction prices as justification. So when you say "that pete Kozma jersey is not even worth $175" the response you'll get is "check our latest auction". The great koz just brought $585!

Reserve or not, the practice of shilling is dishonest. Not sure if it technically is illegal or not. Again, if I were a cardinal fan bidding on anything I would stay away from anything with a reserve. The reason it even made it to auction is because no one in the "regular customer" list wants to pay the quoted price, which is most likely the reserve price on the auction. Since nobody wants to pay the price it goes to auction and is shilled to point of "just prior to" going over the reserve price. This justifies the price to the "regular customer" and creates a false market for the item entirely.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

I hope this was meant to construe that you are understanding the reasoning behind shilling and the way it comes across. It comes across as if you believe shilling is "ok" sometimes.

Take what I say however you want. I can't control how you interpret my comments any more than the board can convince you that there's no proof anything is being shill bid.

[seanbaseball]

Take what I say however you want. I can't control how you interpret my comments any more than the board can convince you that there's no proof anything is being shill bid.


So your comment is open to any interpretation anyone wants to make. Wouldn't it be easier to just clarify your position on shill bidding of any kind at any location?

[sherbal15]

Take what I say however you want. I can't control how you interpret my comments any more than the board can convince you that there's no proof anything is being shill bid.

Just to clarify - I'm not asking the board to convince me of anything. I'm trying to alert people and make them think twice before plunking down hard earned money on items with prices that are artificially inflated. If Cardsgurl16 or Terms actually exist as real bidders than I would gladly apologize to them and own my mistake. I honestly believe they exist to run prices up on unsuspecting real bidders who probably don't know better. They also exist to create a benchmark for items to be sold later.

[GoCrazyFolks76]

Shill bidding is Fraud and is absolutely illegal:

www.addleshawgoddard.com/www/view.asp?content_id=2448&parent_id=2439

It behooves everybody here to send an email or two to MLB to let them know about these criminal activities occurring on their own websites.

auctions.mlb.com/iSynApp/manageUserEmail!showEmailContactUsForm.action?sid= 1101001

Include specific examples in your email so they have something to investigate.

[yanks12025]

Shill bidding is Fraud and is absolutely illegal:

www.addleshawgoddard.com/www/view.asp?content_id=2448&parent_id=2439

It behooves everybody here to send an email or two to MLB to let them know about these criminal activities occurring on their own websites.

auctions.mlb.com/iSynApp/manageUserEmail!showEmailContactUsForm.action?sid= 1101001

Include specific examples in your email so they have something to investigate.


Ill ask you again. Please show examples of them shilling the auctions. Oh that's right, you don't have proof or anything that the teams themselves are shilling auctions.

[BirdsOnBat]

The Cardinals have all the money in the world, I highly doubt they'd risk their credibility over a few hundred dollars.

[sherbal15]

The Cardinals have all the money in the world, I highly doubt they'd risk their credibility over a few hundred dollars.

I am not by any means suggesting ownership would condone the activity whatsoever

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

The Cardinals have all the money in the world, I highly doubt they'd risk their credibility over a few hundred dollars.

These auctions are run by people making a very modest middle class wage. If their contract renewal is based off how much they sell things for or what their auctions look like I'd think one would be VERY motivated to schill.

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

Sometimes I bid on reserves with no intention of buying them. Some teams put the reserve at the price their inventory list has so I will bid it up a little to "help" them out.

(I do not bid on Cardinal Auctions)

[danesei@yahoo.com]

My understanding and reading of the law is that shilling is generally viewed as illegal under the UCC unless one of the following two conditions are met:

1) Disclosure. If the auction house indicates prior to the start of the auction (possibly in the Terms and Conditions of being a bidder) that they may bid on the seller's or auction house's behalf, then it has been disclosed. This is legal.

2) Reserve Auctions. This isn't as clear, but reserve auctions are auctions where the seller can withdraw the item for any reason. In the case of a reserve price auction, the reason is bidding doesn't reach the reserve price. If a transaction never occurs due to reserve conditions not being met, then no fraud has occurred.


Shill bidding is Fraud and is absolutely illegal:

www.addleshawgoddard.com/www/view.asp?content_id=2448&parent_id=2439

It is illegal in most, not all, cases. In the situation described by sherbal, it doesn't seem any fraud has occurred, since no transaction occurred, and therefore no loss was realized. Also, that site is a private attorney's website. Even the wording in the text related to shilling is that it's probably illegal. It's not definitive, since that's an interpretation of the UCC and recent changes. Only a judge can really define what's illegal or not.


The only people using mlb auctions as the "go to" for market value is the teams store. So when you call about buying something they can point to the their latest auction prices as justification. So when you say "that pete Kozma jersey is not even worth $175" the response you'll get is "check our latest auction". The great koz just brought $585!

Reserve or not, the practice of shilling is dishonest. Not sure if it technically is illegal or not. Again, if I were a cardinal fan bidding on anything I would stay away from anything with a reserve. The reason it even made it to auction is because no one in the "regular customer" list wants to pay the quoted price, which is most likely the reserve price on the auction. Since nobody wants to pay the price it goes to auction and is shilled to point of "just prior to" going over the reserve price. This justifies the price to the "regular customer" and creates a false market for the item entirely.

Again, the reserve is of substantial relevancy when determining whether shilling has occurred. If the reserve isn't met, no transaction has occurred.


These auctions are run by people making a very modest middle class wage. If their contract renewal is based off how much they sell things for or what their auctions look like I'd think one would be VERY motivated to schill.

I disagree with the above comment. If my contract were based upon sales in MLB auctions, I'd do everything in my power to ensure items sold. The scenario described by sherbal15 attempts to implicate individuals in shill bidding items BELOW the reserve price. The other implication is that the reserves are above the actual market value for the items. Those actions (setting an absurdly high reserve; shill bidding below the reserve price) don't seem congruent with generating sales.

As I said, I'd do everything in my power to ensure items sold. I wouldn't shill bid without prior disclosure.

Now, this brings up a different question...

eBay's rules prohibit shill bidding. Since eBay claims to be a marketplace, as opposed to an auction house, what would happen if a seller explicitly stated in their auction that they reserve the right to bid on their own behalf to increase an item's selling price? I'm sure that they'd be banned from eBay, but legally speaking, would buyers be surrendering the right to recourse by bidding in the auction and assuming the terms are accepted and binding?

[seanbaseball]

Im surprised so many on here think that any shill bidding anywhere is ok because there is a reserve. That makes zero sense. Also just because an auction may say in small print that they may do it does that make it ok. Its like cheating on your taxes and writing on the 1040 in small print "I cheated" :confused:

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Im surprised so many on here think that any shill bidding anywhere is ok because there is a reserve. That makes zero sense. Also just because an auction may say in small print that they may do it does that make it ok. Its like cheating on your taxes and writing on the 1040 in small print "I cheated" :confused:

Not exactly. According to the UCC, it's explicitly stated that auction houses can bid on their own items, so long as they disclose it in advance. As for the reserve concern, I don't understand why anyone cares what price an auction ends at when the reserve isn't met. I think that's why I personally don't care. It's like those people who put items for sale on eBay with $100k reserves, simply because they never intend to sell and want to advertise their own stores. Since a transaction never occurred, whatever price the item didn't go for is somewhat irrelevant, if not entirely irrelevant.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

To remove any further confusion, here is the actual language of the current version of the UCC, as it applies to auctions:

Uniform Commercial Code › U.C.C. - ARTICLE 2 - SALES (2002) › PART 3. GENERAL OBLIGATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT
§ 2-328. Sale by Auction.
(1) In a sale by auction if goods are put up in lots each lot is the subject of a separate sale.

(2) A sale by auction is complete when the auctioneer so announces by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner. Where a bid is made while the hammer is falling in acceptance of a prior bid the auctioneer may in his discretion reopen the bidding or declare the goods sold under the bid on which the hammer was falling.

(3) Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale. In an auction without reserve, after the auctioneer calls for bids on an article or lot, that article or lot cannot be withdrawn unless no bid is made within a reasonable time. In either case a bidder may retract his bid until the auctioneer's announcement of completion of the sale, but a bidder's retraction does not revive any previous bid.

(4) If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller's behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has not been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at his option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last good faith bid prior to the completion of the sale. This subsection shall not apply to any bid at a forced sale.

So, even in the event where the auction didn't disclose the right to bid, thereby enacting (4), recourse only exists to the buyer. If the reserve is never met, there's no buyer to seek recourse. This is why I keep saying it's pointless to talk about "shill" bidding in reserve price auctions where the reserve price is unmet.

[sherbal15]

...This is why I keep saying it's pointless to talk about "shill" bidding in reserve price auctions where the reserve price is unmet.

The reserves are consistently getting met. Check the history of "recently closed items" on the team page. Go to the recently closed/ended auctions where reserves are met. See whose name appears throughout (cardsgurl16) so there is no confusion).

What idiot would bid on any item where the seller is allowed to bid on their own item? If you have a list of auction houses that disclose this info please forward it on. That might actually be useful information.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

What idiot would bid on any item where the seller is allowed to bid on their own item? If you have a list of auction houses that disclose this info please forward it on. That might actually be useful information.

I used to feel the same way, but I found when dealing with rare coins, sometimes you have to deal with auctions that allow that, or you just never get the coins you want.

[BirdsOnBat]

These auctions are run by people making a very modest middle class wage. If their contract renewal is based off how much they sell things for or what their auctions look like I'd think one would be VERY motivated to schill.

The info would get back to management in an organization as big as that one. There are assistants to the assistant's assistant. Someone will notice.

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

The info would get back to management in an organization as big as that one. There are assistants to the assistant's assistant. Someone will notice.

Really? Who is going to know if I go home(or to a friend's), make an mlb auction account, and then start bidding.

No one is going to know unless I tell someone.

[BirdsOnBat]

Really? Who is going to know if I go home(or to a friend's), make an mlb auction account, and then start bidding.

No one is going to know unless I tell someone.

Hundreds of independent auditors review every detail of every piece of business the club conducts. It just takes one metric being reviewed to throw a red flag. I'm sure they review the bid histories of their auctions and the personal information associated with those accounts in order to leverage the specific interests of those customers.

It's possible no one notices, sure, but again, it's not like it's a guy in a basement calling himself an auction house with no accountability.

[BirdsOnBat]

That being said, I just looked through the CardsGurl bids for the last few months and I agree they lean towards the beliefs of the original poster and would be worth a message to the team if someone was so inclined.

[sherbal15]

I was going to add I quit looking at items due to bidding by NEWYORK25 and MTC and others, so sorry maybe I'm wrong.
Then I gave up long ago on NFL Auctions, think the name was like Steadynitenson? I was run up by 45 plus bids on a Niners jersey and saw it happening on all the other team players, but that was a year plus ago.


Looks like NEWYORK25 is reading the posts........currently bidding on the Wacha jersey listed for auction. Funny, I don't see cardsgurl16 "interested" in the newest stuff on auction.....

[danesei@yahoo.com]

The items are shilled to the point where the next bid triggers the reserve price. The items are getting sold at an artificial price



The reserves are consistently getting met. Check the history of "recently closed items" on the team page. Go to the recently closed/ended auctions where reserves are met. See whose name appears throughout (cardsgurl16) so there is no confusion).

You're the one who introduced the question of supposed shills bidding up to the reserve, but not triggering it. In the scenario you originally were complaining about, since no sale was affected, there would be no recourse against the seller. (4) indicates that the winning bidder, if they can prove the seller shill bid, would be given the option of purchasing at the price created by the last legitimate bid or giving up the item. If your supposed shills only bid up to below the reserve, then it's irrelevant. The buyer would need to prove that the highest losing bid was a shill bid in order for the UCC to be considered.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Looks like NEWYORK25 is reading the posts........currently bidding on the Wacha jersey listed for auction. Funny, I don't see cardsgurl16 "interested" in the newest stuff on auction.....

Maybe enough people complained about that account, and it was suspended. Maybe cardsgurl16 is on vacation or at work today. We aren't privy to this information, so we can't really assume anything.

[jbean023]

I have spoke with MLB and they want to look into this issue. Please provide me all user names you suspect of schill bidding, I will report to them and let you know the outcome.

Thanks

[sherbal15]

I have spoke with MLB and they want to look into this issue. Please provide me all user names you suspect of schill bidding, I will report to them and let you know the outcome.

Thanks

Cardsgurl16 - this is the only one I can confidently question at this point.

[jbean023]

Anyone else want to add to the list. I got an email about the bidder Terms? Anyone is welcome to email me to add to the list.

Thanks

[BVC]

I have spoke with MLB and they want to look into this issue. Please provide me all user names you suspect of schill bidding, I will report to them and let you know the outcome.

Thanks

Based on my experiences bidding on Nationals items in MLB auctions, I didn't think the MLB people really cared, so this is at least encouraging news.

The impression I get, based on both NFL and MLB auctions, and individual team auctions, is that most of those involved think we are a bunch of idiots who are going to spend our money on things we want, regardless of shilling and regardless of whether or not the items are even legit. What evidence have we provided to make them think otherwise?

[MLB~NUT]

Cardsgurl16 - this is the only one I can confidently question at this point.

I agree here!:cool:

[TBM]

I see terms and 509th bidding a lot. However I have seen items that terms has won showing up on eBay. The auction for Johnny Cueto First Game-Used Royals Jersey - Size 52 was won by terms for $918 and showed up for $5000 on eBay a few days after they won it.

[onlyalbert]

How ironic that since the question has been raised about this bidder ID on here that not one bid has been placed using it and several auctions have ran..........interesting. And I am seeing several new IDs that are completely new to the bidding on Cardinals auctions.

[sherbal15]

How ironic that since the question has been raised about this bidder ID on here that not one bid has been placed using it and several auctions have ran..........interesting. And I am seeing several new IDs that are completely new to the bidding on Cardinals auctions.

I am thinking Cardsgurl16 is just on vacation or busy at work :rolleyes:

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

Should be noted you can change your Bidder ID so the person could have just changed it. I try to change my after every item I win just so my identity won't effect how others bid against me.

[sherbal15]

Should be noted you can change your Bidder ID so the person could have just changed it. I try to change my after every item I win just so my identity won't effect how others bid against me.

Interesting. I am changing my user name to be Curt Shilling this afternoon.:D

[gorilla777]

Is this problem with suspected shill bidding still going on in MLB Auctions?...I have not bid for a few years, as every time it seemed like Terms or Mustafa Cat would run me up incessantly. So, I popped over there recently and tracked some items the last few weeks and most of the gear I looked at had Joe Soss and some other names putting bid after bid on them, and it wasn't for just one player. If legit, I can't understand the bidding strategy, other than to just to run guys up. Maybe this is coincidental, I know the card companies bid heavy...Is the same issue happening on Cardinals gear that was discussed above?

[sherbal15]

Is this problem with suspected shill bidding still going on in MLB Auctions?...I have not bid for a few years, as every time it seemed like Terms or Mustafa Cat would run me up incessantly. So, I popped over there recently and tracked some items the last few weeks and most of the gear I looked at had Joe Soss and some other names putting bid after bid on them, and it wasn't for just one player. If legit, I can't understand the bidding strategy, other than to just to run guys up. Maybe this is coincidental, I know the card companies bid heavy...Is the same issue happening on Cardinals gear that was discussed above?

I can't say anything for other teams as I only really look at cardinals auctions. Rarely do I bid on anything anymore due to lack of interest in what they list these days. I can say after this thread was created cardsgurl16 never bid again. Don't know if that's a coincidence or not. I did alert MLB auctions that the possibility of shill bidding was going on under that username and another. The response I got was "the other username actually bids on a lot of items and wins regularly, cardsgurl16 was one that they would look into". So draw your own conclusion I guess.

[tbone90]

Ben, unfortunately I'd say this is still occurring with regularity with situations similar to what others had described previously. The same bidder names pop up time and time again with the purpose of what appears to be just driving up the prices, not to actually win or buy anything. The Orioles often place reserves on many of their items and they're not hard to figure out what the reserve amount is. A bidder. "Kaszycki", will bid on many items with a bid of one penny under the reserve amount and never actually wins an item. This especially true for Manny Machado bats. The reserve is always $1k and Kaszycki will usually be one of the first bidders with a $999.99 bid. It's very frustrating and immature but just something we have to deal with in our hobby. There are other bidder names as well doing similar but this one just sticks out. And people do change there bidder names regularly. But just watching the types of items and pricing they're very quickly figured out.

[gorilla777]

Ben, unfortunately I'd say this is still occurring with regularity with situations similar to what others had described previously. The same bidder names pop up time and time again with the purpose of what appears to be just driving up the prices, not to actually win or buy anything. The Orioles often place reserves on many of their items and they're not hard to figure out what the reserve amount is. A bidder. "Kaszycki", will bid on many items with a bid of one penny under the reserve amount and never actually wins an item. This especially true for Manny Machado bats. The reserve is always $1k and Kaszycki will usually be one of the first bidders with a $999.99 bid. It's very frustrating and immature but just something we have to deal with in our hobby. There are other bidder names as well doing similar but this one just sticks out. And people do change there bidder names regularly. But just watching the types of items and pricing they're very quickly figured out.

Tony, you are right, Kaszycki was a name I saw on a ton of items, especially Machado like you mention...

[TBM]

Terms does win items and they show up on EBay using the pictures from MLB auctions nearly instantly.

These bidding tactics are what has made me stop bidding on MLB auctions until the last 6 minutes or so. Was to a point where I would place a bid then they would come along indeed put 20 bids of the minimum bid stopping just before my max bid. So I no longer bid before the last 6 minutes.

Saw this happen with a couple George Brett GU jerseys from his days as Royals hitting coach. One jersey sold for $400. Next one over $1000 because someone Schilled up the poor guy's bid to his max.

[BLANCO84]

you mean shit like this
http://auctions.mlb.com/iSynApp/auctionDisplay.action?sid=1101001&auctionId=1806231

why would anyone pay that much for a jersey in a game that he didn't play in

[gorilla777]

Ben, unfortunately I'd say this is still occurring with regularity with situations similar to what others had described previously. The same bidder names pop up time and time again with the purpose of what appears to be just driving up the prices, not to actually win or buy anything. The Orioles often place reserves on many of their items and they're not hard to figure out what the reserve amount is. A bidder. "Kaszycki", will bid on many items with a bid of one penny under the reserve amount and never actually wins an item. This especially true for Manny Machado bats. The reserve is always $1k and Kaszycki will usually be one of the first bidders with a $999.99 bid. It's very frustrating and immature but just something we have to deal with in our hobby. There are other bidder names as well doing similar but this one just sticks out. And people do change there bidder names regularly. But just watching the types of items and pricing they're very quickly figured out.

"Kaszycki" is at it again, changed his username to "GameUsed", probably after this thread was revived. I remembered seeing him bid the old $1,999.99 tactic time after time before, Tony, like this...
http://auctions.mlb.com/iSynApp/auctionDisplay.action?sid=1101001&auctionId=1879620#bid-history