• This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

SOLD 20 - Purple Nevada Lodge $25 Sm. Crown chips (5 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
RivieraDanny said:
I can’t even with this thread. Ugh
Click to expand...
giphy (7).gif
 
Fwiw. I know Matt’s been working on these for a very long time. I also know he would not at all collude to fix an auction. I’m sure there’s more to the story than this reads on the surface. Sorry for the de rail @JWC GLWA!
 
Just catching up with all this. I can’t believe I need to contradict an attorney on the concept of “collusion”, but I have zero to gain here.

- I collect NL chips, so was excited to see this auction. I started bidding.
- @Lil Tuna reminded me that he’s been searching for these for a while, and that he hasn’t even completed a rack yet.
- I told him I’d be happy to let him have it.
- i publicly posted that I was acquiescing to him
- in case the bids went higher later, and Matt was no longer going to participate, I didn’t want to be called out for being deceptive if I bid again, and so I made that clear.

That’s not collusion, that was a gesture from me to someone in the community who has been looking for these specific chips. Not sure what the exact issue is.
 
TheB00T said:
I usually don't support revealing one's future intentions during in auction. However, I am wondering if WW's public departure may actually encourage some to get in or get back in as they may have a chance now. :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Or the opposite would discourage someone from bidding as they feel they wouldn't have a chance and bidding now would only either a) increase the amount Matt (a fairly well loved member) would have to pay to win them or b) cause Matt to not get them and all the while they would know the chance they'd actually still win them is just about zero.
 
TheB00T said:
I usually don't support revealing one's future intentions during in auction. However, I am wondering if WW's public departure may actually encourage some to get in or get back in as they may have a chance now. :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I don’t think you successfully read between the lines.
 
Perhaps next time I will clearly define wondering as curiosity and not a declaration of fact. Or not. I haven't decided.
 
Windwalker said:
Just catching up with all this. I can’t believe I need to contradict an attorney on the concept of “collusion”, but I have zero to gain here.

- I collect NL chips, so was excited to see this auction. I started bidding.
- @Lil Tuna reminded me that he’s been searching for these for a while, and that he hasn’t even completed a rack yet.
- I told him I’d be happy to let him have it.
- i publicly posted that I was acquiescing to him
- in case the bids went higher later, and Matt was no longer going to participate, I didn’t want to be called out for being deceptive if I bid again, and so I made that clear.

That’s not collusion, that was a gesture from me to someone in the community who has been looking for these specific chips. Not sure what the exact issue is.
Click to expand...
In this case, your stated intention places a chill on others’ bids. If, for example, a bidder exceeds Matt’s upper limit, your statement could very clearly be read as a threat to jump in again. Essentially, you were saying “if someone outbids Matt, I will bid against you in retaliation.” This threat, whether real or not, could be seen as collusion, especially since others are not privy to the communications you yourself admitted occurred.
 
gopherblue said:
In this case, your stated intention places a chill on others’ bids. If, for example, a bidder exceeds Matt’s upper limit, your statement could very clearly be read as a threat to jump in again. Essentially, you were saying “if someone outbids Matt, I will bid against you in retaliation.” This threat, whether real or not, could be seen as collusion, especially since others are not privy to the communications you yourself admitted occurred.
Click to expand...

I don’t understand this. He was already bidding. He openly bowed out to let someone else get something they were working on. People do this all the time and I have never seen anyone catch heat for it. I don’t understand the cynicism that leads one to believe he would be emotionally invested in retaliating against another member. And he is being completely transparent. Someone probably would have called it fishy if he dropped out of bidding until someone else took the lead over LittleTuna. He was clearly interested in the chips himself and will to continue bidding save for a gesture to step aside for one specific person who has long been hunting these. What am I missing here?
 
Eloe2000 said:
I don’t understand this. He was already bidding. He openly bowed out to let someone else get something they were working on. People do this all the time and I have never seen anyone catch heat for it. I don’t understand the cynicism that leads one to believe he would be emotionally invested in retaliating against another member. And he is being completely transparent. Someone probably would have called it fishy if he dropped out of bidding until someone else took the lead over LittleTuna. He was clearly interested in the chips himself and will to continue bidding save for a gesture to step aside for one specific person who has long been hunting these. What am I missing here?
Click to expand...
See the below exchange and let me know if it changes your view.
liftapint said:
Not so fast.
Click to expand...

Windwalker said:
Please note that I was acquiescing to Matt because he PM’ed me. If he ends up dropping out, I will jump back in.
Click to expand...

liftapint said:
Always good to be reminded that dreams are out of reach.
Click to expand...

These quotes are not taken out of context, and in fact, WW quoted Mel's "Not so fast" in his post.
 
The word "collusion" has a really negative connotation with it that usually implies ill-intent. In this specific case there may not have been malicious intent, but it does seem that the auction result has changed in two ways:
  1. Through PMs, @Windwalker was convinced not to bid higher, denying the seller $$ (the fact that people consider the price "high" is irrelevant. only the counterfactual matters)
  2. @Windwalker declaring his intent to potentially jump back in changes future bidding behavior of participants
Whether this is okay or not seems ideological. What seems undeniable to me is the auction price is currently lower than what it would have been otherwise.
 
I am mainly confused by the various references to Mel/Matt. Are these the same person?

Maybe we all need to start posting pronouns in bios? </ducking>





GLWA
 
gopherblue said:
See the below exchange and let me know if it changes your view.
These quotes are not taken out of context, and in fact, WW quoted Mel's "Not so fast" in his post.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I misread and thought he said it was “not because” of a PM. Generally the PM activity around auctions is shenanigans that is meant to impact the sale price of the auctions. However, as far as what WW did, it was transparent.

I don’t understand the relevance of the other quotes. I think people should bid what they value the item at and be done with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JWC
  • Locked
SOLD Odds and ends lots
Replies
9
Views
954
JWC
JWC
JWC
  • Locked
SOLD Two great small crown singles
Replies
4
Views
545
JWC
JWC
Skagglio
  • Locked
SOLD TRK Nevada Club / Nevada Lodge $1 Chips
Replies
10
Views
881
Skagglio
Skagglio
Skagglio
  • Locked
SOLD TRK Nevada Club/Nevada Lodge White $1 Racks
Replies
10
Views
837
Skagglio
Skagglio
JWC
  • Locked
For Sale Sm. Crown chips - 4/13
Replies
6
Views
548
JWC
JWC
Back
Top Bottom