[AT] Auction question

Thu Aug 2 10:54:16 PDT 2012

I also agree with your point.  My thoughts are the market will take care 
of itself.  I probably wouldn't attend such an auction unless there was 
something I really wanted.  I would then keep  in mind that I have to 
add 50% to my bid and would bid accordingly.  When I bid at an auction I 
only care about what I am going to have to pay for the item.  I have 
never worried about who get how much of the money.  When a auction 
company contracts with a seller they both have to agree on a deal where 
they both come out.   If the auctions company thinks he can only make a 
few hundred dollars on an auction and its decided its not worth his 
while, the seller loses also. (not to mention the buyers).  So, a way 
around this situation is for the auctions company to charge a buyers 
premium.  Given the choice I don't want to pay a buyers premium but 
sometimes its either that or no auction.  Also, if the auctioneer says 
at first that he is here to rob the bidders then I think you would agree 
that it would be prudent to just leave.
On 8/2/2012 1:20 PM, Charlie V wrote:
> I agree with you on both of your points, Dan.  Here in NY we have
> probably more government control than in most other states and it is
> way overboard.  Bidders may also walk if they choose.  I merely wish
> to point out that much has been said about working for the seller.
> When a hefty buyer premium is charged, it seems only common sense that
> the auction service owes some small amount of consideration to those
> folks making a good part of his paycheck (the buyers), at least to the
> extent of sticking to fair business practice.  I can not say first
> hand if some of the practices I have I have read about in this thread
> happen in NY, but they seem quite a ways from fair business practice.
> Many states do not require auctioneers to be licensed so practice may
> vary widely.  I once had a friend who was a working auctioneer as well
> as a licensed real estate broker.  He kept very much on the straight
> and narrow, knowing that folks from the state Attorney Generals office
> were never far away.  Some regulation is not always a bad thing.
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> Charlie V.
>
> P.S.  If a robber walks up to someone and advises he is about to steal
> all of their money, and the intended victims do not run away, does
> that make the theft all O.K. and legal????
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Dan Glass <dglass at numail.org> wrote:
>> I have to respectfully disagree. Auctions can charge 50% buyers premium
>> if they want to, I don't have to participate in that auction.  It seems
>> to me that every time the government gets involved we lose something.
>> We try to make something better and the government always makes it
>> worst.  If people opted out of the auctions the auction company would
>> change to accommodate the buyers. After all, 15% of nothing doesn't
>> amount to much.
>>
>>
>> On 8/2/2012 7:56 AM, Charlie V wrote:
>>> With many auctions demanding a 12-15% buyers premium, it would seem to
>>> come into question who the clients really are.  The seller may
>>> contract the service, but the buyers are picking a hefty piece of the
>>> tab.  It seems that a thorough review by ethics boards and state
>>> legislatures may be in order now.
>>>
>>> Charlie V.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Mark Greer <markagreer at embarqmail.com> wrote:
>>>> They auction farms around here that way all the time. Offered in parcels and as a whole and its anyone's guess which way it might end up selling. Sometimes after taking bids on the parcels, and then bids on the whole farm, they'll even allow the parcel bidders to get together and up their bids to beat the price for the whole farm.
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> Mike,
>>>> An auctioneer trying to get the most amount of money for his client. I don't
>>>> think I would consider that practice very ethical. He has wasted two bidders
>>>> time.  I don't think I've ever seen that done at any auction I've been to.
>>>>
>>>> Dean Van Peursem
>>>> Snohomish, WA
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
>>>> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Mike Meulenberg
>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2012 8:38 PM
>>>> To: at
>>>> Subject: [AT] Auction question
>>>>
>>>> I was at an auction today, and the way they sold one item was new to me,
>>>> maybe some of you can shed some light on why they did it this way. Up for
>>>> bid was a nice Kubota 4x4 tractor that was billed as coming with a 3 point
>>>> backhoe. The backhoe was a nice Woods unit. So first they auction off the
>>>> tractor, it brought 17,500. Then the backhoe, it brought 2100. Then the
>>>> auctioneer said he was going to sell the package of tractor and backhoe
>>>> together, and opened the bidding at 20,000. Only one guy bid the 20K and it
>>>> wasn't the guy that originally bought the tractor for 17,500, or the guy
>>>> that bought the backhoe attachment for 2100. Why would they do something
>>>> like that, why not just auction the package in the first place. Oh, before
>>>> he opened bidding on the package he offered both the buyer of the tractor
>>>> and the backhoe a chance to sweeten their bids, neither did.
>>>>
>>>> Mike M
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AT mailing list
>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AT mailing list
>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AT mailing list
>>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AT mailing list
>>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at