• PCF is an Amazon Associate and an eBay Partner. If you make a purchase through one of our links, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support!

No more auctions (1 Viewer)

AB7153AC-141A-4BAA-BAF9-6852CE44B278.gif
 
It’s really cool to have mature discussions like this. Right on point as to the topic of the thread.

What I don’t like about auctions is the price fixing and manipulation - “if you quit bidding against me I’ll sell you the fracs for cheap” type of comments are manipulative and not appropriate for discussion in the auction thread. Do what you want via PM, manipulate and fix all you want, just don’t diss the seller by doing it in his thread.

I’m sure you can go back in some auctions somewhere and see where I’ve probably done the same thing, but discussions like these (minus the hostile derails) help people understand where they may make things better by thinking through things and maybe seeing a better way.

And EVERY auction is a test of the market, and if you don’t think so then you need some education about what your really doing before you post one.
 
justsomedude said:
Your bias is evident in your post, and that's fine. You are already trying to dismiss the threat as "stupid." I guess we're all just supposed to take it as some comedy between "friends." And yet the only alternative you'll accept is a "cease and desist" order, which no one ever mentioned - anywhere (not really sure where that came from actually). It's ironic that you're so sick of people in this country selling any story as fact, when you're guilty of twisting your own story to satisfy your ends.

But it seems there are some facts we do not dispute:

Fact: some one sent a PM discussing outside contact to GPI about the boat buys, while the transaction was in progress.
Fact: same said person suggested (in the same PM) "canceling" the order so friends and acquaintances of theirs involved would not "lose money."
Fact: screengrabs of this PM exist, but it's not my place to post it. And it sounds like you've already seen it yourself.

When any such threat or email is received, it can only be taken at face value, which means it has to be taken as fact. The repercussions of that PM cannot be ignored, and I refuse to pass it off as "stupid," "silly," or just some "chip-bro" humor. It had malicious intent, with only a single malicious goal in mind.

Sure, anyone can come back 18 months later and say, "oh, about that PM, it was just a joke bro! lol-lery!"

I don't know about you, but I don't go around pretending to mess around with my friends' quarter-million dollar deals. Maybe you do. Maybe that's just "chipper-bro" lulz for you. If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree, because that's not how I treat friends, or anyone in this community.

Carry on with your "fact" peddling.
Click to expand...

Your saying and accusing me of saying many things that I never said.

Sending a PM to someone on Pcf making a threat is very different than your version of contacting GPI and Caesar’s.

I’m open to agreeing with you, just show me where those facts happened.
 
ssanel54 said:
Your saying and accusing me of saying many things that I never said.

Sending a PM to someone on Pcf making a threat is very different than your version of contacting GPI and Caesar’s.

I’m open to agreeing with you, just show me where those facts happened.
Click to expand...
Which is more likely...
  1. Boat chip orders 1 and 2 went great, so they shut down the 3rd order because there was no believable threat.
  2. Boat chip orders 1 and 2 went great, so they shut down the 3rd order because there was a believable threat.
 
justsomedude said:
Yes.

GPI is well aware.

The "boat chips" were "outed" to GPI
Click to expand...

You know, you could have just linked to the threads where this has been discussed (loose interpretation of the word) endlessly. By posting this you are encouraging this sore spot. You may be intending to do that, in which case reactivate one of those other threads and have all the mean fun you want.

Meantime, this thread is about auctions and what you may think of them.
 
Poker Zombie said:
Which is more likely...
  1. Boat chip orders 1 and 2 went great, so they shut down the 3rd order because there was no believable threat.
  2. Boat chip orders 1 and 2 went great, so they shut down the 3rd order because there was a believable threat.
Click to expand...

If you are asking me for an answer, I’m happy to concede that a threat was made which stopped the third Paulson group buy.

I am not aware that anyone actually followed through on that threat. And since another group buy still occurred for bud jones chips, whatever threat there was proved minimal in the grand scheme of GPI continuing to produce chips.
 
ssanel54 said:
If you are asking me for an answer, I’m happy to concede that a threat was made which stopped the third Paulson group buy.

I am not aware that anyone actually followed through on that threat. And since another group buy still occurred for bud jones chips, whatever threat there was proved minimal in the grand scheme of GPI continuing to produce chips.
Click to expand...
Not a group buy.
 
ekricket said:
It’s really cool to have mature discussions like this. Right on point as to the topic of the thread.

What I don’t like about auctions is the price fixing and manipulation - “if you quit bidding against me I’ll sell you the fracs for cheap” type of comments are manipulative and not appropriate for discussion in the auction thread. Do what you want via PM, manipulate and fix all you want, just don’t diss the seller by doing it in his thread.

I’m sure you can go back in some auctions somewhere and see where I’ve probably done the same thing, but discussions like these (minus the hostile derails) help people understand where they may make things better by thinking through things and maybe seeing a better way.

And EVERY auction is a test of the market, and if you don’t think so then you need some education about what your really doing before you post one.
Click to expand...

THIS PLEASE! Are there generic rules in place to follow concerning auctions? While I understand there being some need for communication as well as obvious and common sense items to follow, as a new chipper here it does seem very grey.

I recently had someone PM me during an auction to say hey let’s not bid against each other and just split, and while it didn’t seem overly malificent, it still felt shady. While I by know means thought their intent was to hurt the seller, I than purposefully bet much higher than initially planned just to make sure 1) I was now getting the chips and more importantly 2) the seller made more money.

Just hard to tell what’s generally looked down upon vs what’s not allowed.
 
And thanks for bringing it back @ekricket! Also as a newish chipper, the pointless infighting with no resolution looks rather superficial but still bleak.

I was curious as to the various mentions of boat chips that I’ve found, but as a new chipper I found the first answer to be plenty helpful and informative. Everything after that doesn’t seem to help the well established PCFers or the new chippers like me.
 
BarrieJ3 said:
And thanks for bringing it back @ekricket! Also as a newish chipper, the pointless infighting with no resolution looks rather superficial but still bleak.

I was curious as to the various mentions of boat chips that I’ve found, but as a new chipper I found the first answer to be plenty helpful and informative. Everything after that doesn’t seem to help the well established PCFers or the new chippers like me.
Click to expand...

It may be that they are intentional derails to make this thread cluttered with crap so no one participates in a discussion about auctions. It sure seems wanton and deliberate despite being asked several times to stop.
 
BarrieJ3 said:
THIS PLEASE! Are there generic rules in place to follow concerning auctions? While I understand there being some need for communication as well as obvious and common sense items to follow, as a new chipper here it does seem very grey.

I recently had someone PM me during an auction to say hey let’s not bid against each other and just split, and while it didn’t seem overly malificent, it still felt shady. While I by know means thought their intent was to hurt the seller, I than purposefully bet much higher than initially planned just to make sure 1) I was now getting the chips and more importantly 2) the seller made more money.

Just hard to tell what’s generally looked down upon vs what’s not allowed.
Click to expand...

I saw that happen in an auction thread, and was a little shocked - but the truth is, there will always be opportunities in a regular auction to negotiate with the person you are bidding against. It may happen via the thread, or more likely via PM. It could also happen via text messages, phone calls, or a trip up the street.

In the end, the auctioneer can set his minimum price. After that, it's all gravy. While initially, I don't like the practice, I can't argue against it either. Seller starts out with a minimum bid so they're happy, both buyers get chips, so they're happy, and a little money is saved. It's a win-win-win situation.
 
Poker Zombie said:
I saw that happen in an auction thread, and was a little shocked - but the truth is, there will always be opportunities in a regular auction to negotiate with the person you are bidding against. It may happen via the thread, or more likely via PM. It could also happen via text messages, phone calls, or a trip up the street.

In the end, the auctioneer can set his minimum price. After that, it's all gravy. While initially, I don't like the practice, I can't argue against it either. Seller starts out with a minimum bid so they're happy, both buyers get chips, so they're happy, and a little money is saved. It's a win-win-win situation.
Click to expand...
So a statement such as this is ok in an auction?

Starting bid on a set of 1000 chips is $250. There’s a rack of hundreds in it.

“I bid $250. I only want the hundreds, so if nobody bids against me I will sell the rest of the denominations at $25 a rack after the auction”

So the bidder wins, pays his $250, keeps his rack of hundreds, sells the rest for $225, and is happy with his rack for $25.
Seller is upset and reports this, and is told “it’s just guys making deals and cutting up”.

Your saying your ok with this situation?
 
ekricket said:
So a statement such as this is ok in an auction?

Starting bid on a set of 1000 chips is $250. There’s a rack of hundreds in it.

“I bid $250. I only want the hundreds, so if nobody bids against me I will sell the rest of the denominations at $25 a rack after the auction”

So the bidder wins, pays his $250, keeps his rack of hundreds, sells the rest for $225, and is happy with his rack for $25.
Seller is upset and reports this, and is told “it’s just guys making deals and cutting up”.

Your saying your ok with this situation?
Click to expand...
I think he’s referring more to if people want different parts or say half the chip set. I think an example like that would be a better one to have a debate on rather than your extreme example because its an incredibly unlikely event (that someone would say it to begin with, that no one else wants the entire set or chips the poster wants, that there’s that level of trust/collusion with the poster that wouldn’t make others still bid on it anyway, plus here’s an actual area where flippers would be a positive thing as they’d bid up the undervalue set to flip until it was no longer worth there time to flip, and if the set is worth say $1,000 the sellers taking the risk of putting the starting bid at $250, not that it makes the collusion you’re posing ok but the seller knowingly took on a risk with a low starting bid).
 
ReallyGoodUsername said:
I think he’s referring more to if people want different parts or say half the chip set. I think an example like that would be a better one to have a debate on rather than your extreme example because its an incredibly unlikely event (that someone would say it to begin with, that no one else wants the entire set or chips the poster wants, that there’s that level of trust/collusion with the poster that wouldn’t make others still bid on it anyway, plus here’s an actual area where flippers would be a positive thing as they’d bid up the undervalue set to flip until it was no longer worth there time to flip, and if the set is worth say $1,000 the sellers taking the risk of putting the starting bid at $250, not that it makes the collusion you’re posing ok but the seller knowingly took on a risk with a low starting bid).
Click to expand...

So sellers should start their auctions at "the perceived market price" to make sure they don't get ripped off and to also insure that their chips sell for more than "perceived market price" thus further inflating the "perceived market price" for the next sale of these chips?
 
ekricket said:
So sellers should start their auctions at "the perceived market price" to make sure they don't get ripped off and to also insure that their chips sell for more than "perceived market price" thus further inflating the "perceived market price" for the next sale of these chips?
Click to expand...
If you want to put words in my mouth than this isn’t a discussion worth having. I’m saying your example was a poor one for the reasons I noted above. Any point based on extremes isn’t a strong one.
 
ReallyGoodUsername said:
If you want to put words in my mouth than this isn’t a discussion worth having. I’m saying your example was a poor one for the reasons I noted above. Any point based on extremes isn’t a strong one.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree. If you give people angles they will take them, a little at first, then blatantly. Its showing up a little at a time now.
So I must have misunderstood your other post, I read it as "sellers fault for not putting their starting bid where they wanted to sell them."

There are auctions out there that have the language I quoted above in them, not to that extreme, but if its allowable it will be that extreme soon.

And if you are offended every time someone answers one of your posts because its not the answer you want then you are correct, you will not have discussions worth having about anything.
 
ekricket said:
I don't really agree. If you give people angles they will take them, a little at first, then blatantly. Its showing up a little at a time now.
So I must have misunderstood your other post, I read it as "sellers fault for not putting their starting bid where they wanted to sell them."

There are auctions out there that have the language I quoted above in them, not to that extreme, but if its allowable it will be that extreme soon.

And if you are offended every time someone answers one of your posts because its not the answer you want then you are correct, you will not have discussions worth having about anything.
Click to expand...
Just seemed like you missed the point of my post and the 4 other reasons your scenario was implausible, purposely, to focus on something you could nitpick while avoiding the rest.

I’d disagree on the slippery slope argument. Again even if someone did there’s little to no chance the set would be sold for a large discount (see reasons I noted before).

Not sure why you think I’m offended :) simply pointed out that if you’re going to nitpick one of 5 points I made to then put words in my mouth or make assumptions about what I’m thinking (like you’re doing again) then it’s not a discussion worth having.
 
ReallyGoodUsername said:
Just seemed like you missed the point of my post and the 4 other reasons your scenario was implausible, purposely, to focus on something you could nitpick while avoiding the rest.

I’d disagree on the slippery slope argument. Again even if someone did there’s little to no chance the set would be sold for a large discount (see reasons I noted before).

Not sure why you think I’m offended :) simply pointed out that if you’re going to nitpick one of 5 points I made to then put words in my mouth or make assumptions about what I’m thinking (like you’re doing again) then it’s not a discussion worth having.
Click to expand...
I just can’t resist pointing out that you are doing the same to me. Focusing on one part to nitpick while ignoring the broader discussion part or minimizing it at least by your nitpicking on one detail. So if I changed to to say “I only want half, so if everyone quits bidding I’ll sell the other half cheap” it would be ok?
 
ekricket said:
I just can’t resist pointing out that you are doing the same to me. Focusing on one part to nitpick while ignoring the broader discussion part or minimizing it at least by your nitpicking on one detail. So if I changed to to say “I only want half, so if everyone quits bidding I’ll sell the other half cheap” it would be ok?
Click to expand...
If you made a number of points then I focused on one of many sure but you didn’t. Have a great long weekend.
 
How about this scenario where a bidder offers to sell another bidder part of the set and negotiates in the thread?
Bidder placed a bid then offers to sell part of it to stop others bidding


Bidder 1. $XX
offers to sell fracs $(Y) dollars per frac to bidder 2

Bidder 2. Nope. $XX

Bidder 1 $XX
Counteroffers $(Y-.50)per frac?


I didn’t make this up
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

A
Paulson Classic Set Top Hat & Cane - 476 chips - advise where to next
Replies
12
Views
351
Tonysquander
Tonysquander
Damo
Used chip value
Replies
8
Views
375
Damo
Damo
T
Used Paulsons a worthwhile investment?
2
Replies
46
Views
1K
TheWhat
TheWhat
A
Thoughts on these Paulson chips
Replies
11
Views
757
allinchips
A
MrPOKA
Why isnt there a wider variety of china clay poker chips in the market?
Replies
20
Views
1K
Coyote
Coyote
Back
Top Bottom
Cart

Cart

Total -