* With the impending launch of Peter Contarino's, Sean Linkenback's and Ken 
Schacter's auctions (vs. fixed price sales which are there now), I've 
been visiting their MoviePosterExchange.com site.  It's easy to navigate and 
very user-friendly.  (BTW, where in the 
heck did the highly-touted $850,000 "Metropolis" 3-sheet go?  I can't 
find it!  Did it sell?)  At any rate, while visiting the site's FAQs, I read 
that it has partnered with GavelSnipe, the sniping program service, 
which will be available to bidders for timed auctions.  That's good 
news.  

* But what's interesting - and this has nothing to do with 
MoviePosterExchange.com - is GavelSnipe "appears" to be owned by Heritage.  If 
I'm wrong, please correct me - and a thousand apologies if I am.  I'm 
less concerned about potential abuses like shilling and what not with 
Heritage's auctions - than I am about transparency.  
GavelSnipe's murky origins are troubling.  I couldn't find much info 
about who owns or runs it.  This is NOT a criticism of 
Grey - who I consider a pal.  The issue of GavelSnipe's ownership - if 
indeed Heritage is its "owner" - is out of his hands.  It's bigger than 
him because it's available to bidders in Heritage's other departments.

* If true, this is NOT like PayPal being 
owned by eBay.  It's more like GavelSnipe being owned by Sotheby's or 
Christie's, e.g., a conflict 
of interest where potential abuses "could" occur - despite

 assurances that a "sniping subsidiary" of Sotheby's or Christie's - can 
operate independently - with an iron-clad ability to preserve the 
confidentiality of all scheduled "snipe" bids submitted online.  Do you trust 
this, given what you've read in the news about Sotheby's, Christie's, price 
fixing, Wall Street buddies in bed with politicians trading stocks with 
confidential info, etc.?  

* By using 
ANY sniping program, you are imparting the same trust you already give to 
auction sites when submitting "absentee bids" for "live" showroom sales. 
 The difference is you can't be "run-up" while using a sniping program, 
or so you think, because your bids are placed in the last few seconds of a
 timed sale.  But what if the wall protecting "sniped bids" is 
breached by another department in the SAME building?  Here's what I know:  
GavelSnipe is based in Dallas and "uses SSL encryption (so that) your passwords 
are secured and not VIEWABLE by GavelSnipe personnel."  I have no reason to 
distrust this.  But what about actual snipe bid amounts before a sale closes?  
In the effort to make "sniping" available for 
clients like myself who've clamored for it - I hope Heritage hasn't errantly 
opened a can of worms 
by OWNING GavelSnipe - instead of PARTNERING with an 
independently-run third party company - such as JustSnipe or others like it.

* Before most of you scoff and dismiss what I'm saying as "manufactured 
paranoia" or "no big deal" - please know that I'm approaching 
this as a 
person who has personally GAINED by buying and 
consigning items with Heritage over the years - hence I'm not inclined 
to see it stub its toes for ANY reason.  Again, I'm
 more concerned about transparency than abuse when it comes to Heritage.  And 
that's mostly because of Grey.  But visit the GavelSnipe site.  It "feels" like 
it has something to
 hide - as if it already knows that there's ZERO benefit 
to be PROACTIVE with consumers - about who's "really" signing the paychecks for 
GavelSnipe's employees. -d.                                                     
                                                                                
                                                                  
         Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
   ___________________________________________________________________
              How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
                                    
       Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
            In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
                                    
    The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

Reply via email to