The allegations regarding shilling by Heritage Auction using the ID of "Gresham" is unfair and wrongly directed.
I'd thought about this for a bit when it was first brought to the forefront. First, the accuser who took this to the media was trying to deflect attention away from what he had been doing himself. But, putting that aside, I considered what the implications were in an auction house bidding on items that it wanted.
I don't believe for a moment that HA shills, shilled or ever shilled.
But, I can believe that HA would want some items for itself. I don't begin to presume to know why HA chose to use a moniker to bid, but I have my guess. I acknowledge that it doesn't look great to a third party to see that HA used a fake name to bid. But if they wanted to keep it private, why shouldn't they? The use of a fake moniker does not necessarily indicate that nefarious deeds are going on. The leap to this presumption, while not without reason, is also not without its own fallacy and weakness as well.
I don't like to have people know what I bid on, and I know for a fact that people have looked at my bid history on eBay. When I was told by a few people that they watched what I buy, I stopped leaving feedback for sellers because when sellers replied in turn, this was a way in which my winnings were tracked. I really do not like this. It's my business and if I want to share it, I will -- which I sometimes do, but at least it's by my choice.
During the two live auctions for Battlestar Galactica props in January and May of last year, the owner of the company contracted by NBCUniversal/SyFy to manage all the auctions, including the auctions on eBay, wanted many of the items for himself. He didn't do the actual bidding himself at the live auctions and had someone else do it for him. Now, this stand-in is the human equivalent of the "N.P. Gresham" that Heritage uses. Was the human stand-in a way for the owner of the contracted company to shill to fetch higher prices? Not at all. He was as much a fan of BSG as the rest of us. How else is he supposed to compete for the items himself if he can't bid on them? Is he forbidden to bid because he is the owner of the company conducting the auctions for NBCUniversal? Why should he be deprived of going after the things he wants for himself? In fact, it's only fair to the rest of us that he is forced to bid like everyone else instead of just getting to snatch up and abscond with the items before they see the light of day at auction.
Sure, his bid is raising the price, but then so is mine and everyone else's who's going after the same thing. It's why it's an auction. It's fair practice.
As far as I am concerned, this is what Heritage is doing and they have every right to do so. While they don't make it front page news, they don't make it a secret either. The have printed in their catalogs the fact that they will sometimes bid on items themselves. It's no attempt at shilling and no attempt to deceive. It is, in fact, only fair that they are forced to bid like the rest of us.
Jeannie
