I thought ebay owned ensipe. I'm almost sure that they do. Kirby
Kirby McDaniel MovieArt Original Film Posters P.O. Box 4419 Austin TX 78765-4419 512 479 6680 www.movieart.net mobile 512 589 5112 On Apr 19, 2012, at 2:51 AM, David Kusumoto wrote: > Ha-ha, Rich. In sum - I could be wrong on some of these, but as far as I > know: eBay doesn't own a sniping company. Sotheby's doesn't own a sniping > company. MoviePosterExchange.com doesn't own a sniping company. Bonham's > doesn't own a sniping company. Christie's doesn't own a sniping company. > Profiles in History doesn't own a sniping company. eMoviePoster doesn't own > a sniping company. The reasons are economic - and also because of how it > would look to consumers, regulators and politicians. If ONLY DEALERS have a > blind spot about this, I'm not surprised. Or, shoot, this could all just be > a "specific-to-Texas" anomaly. > > Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:30:15 -0700 > From: sa...@comic-art.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > There's no story here, move along. > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 23:27:52 -0700 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > * My goodness, Dale, there are so many huge holes in your rebuttal that I > could fit a freight train through each one without touching any of its sides. > But why bother? In my view, you need to reboot your writing skills and come > up with a debating strategy more substantial than, "what you're writing about > is fire and brimstone over nothing and I personally think you just hate > Heritage." > > * What has Heritage done to me personally that would warrant an accusation > like that from you, Dale Dilts, a person I know nothing about, who doesn't > register anything on my radar at MoPo - nor do I care based solely on your > inability to string words together in a way resembling intelligent thought? > Your note does suggest, however, that you're ignorant of what's been > published in the business sections of news sites since 2008. I've already > disclosed that I've personally gained as a consignor and buyer of Heritage. > I think its movie poster department is run by an a blue-chip, top-flight guy > named Grey Smith, who built his operation out of nothing 10 years ago. > Unlike Geraldine, I'm not a disgruntled Heritage client in any way. Or maybe > you, Dale Dilts, think it's classier to observe a "gentleman's agreement" > about things that seem odd, you know, keep everything under the table where > it belongs, and not stir up "trouble" - that we should all just leave things > with a "wink," and as you say, "move on." I hope you're not working in P.R. > or in the customer relations operations of any company. Because never in a > million years would I hire you. You're poison. > > * BTW, did you know that your last line, "There's no story here, move on," is > the CLASSIC cliché rebuttal that editors mock every day in newsrooms around > the world? When ANY person utters it, it means there IS a story. Didn't you > get the memo that I've been on both sides of this ugly business - and have > professionally handled "conflict of interest-type stories" as a news guy - > and as a P.R. guy? You really think a story about this - would NOT resonate > with a news editor? Really? You're the one who's not thinking this through. > And I'm sorry, but your line, "There's no story here, move on" - sounds like > famous last words etched on a tombstone. You sound like Richard Nixon. -d. > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:47:32 -0500 > From: ddilts...@mchsi.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > OK, I tried to put these mails on auto flush, but come on stick a pin in it, > who cares. > > Heritage is in the auction business last time I checked. Ebay allows people > to use their API to build sniping programs because it makes bidders feel all > warm and fuzzy making bids, so why shouldn’t Heritage pilot their own with a > smaller user base. > > These mails have really come across to me as you have a chip on your > shoulder for heritage plain and simple. > > Your second point makes no sense to me at all. Banks cannot own investment > companies, soft drink companies cannot own a snack company. Oh my god, Disney > owns ABC and ESPN and don’t forget…. Marvel Comics… the sky is falling. > > There is no story here, move on. > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:26:23 -0700 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > Thanks, Kerry, for that bit of info below. > > * Meanwhile, I'm sorry, but the word, "conspiracy" implies seamy dealings > involving more than one person or companies gaming a system or flouting a > law. I haven't suggested that about Heritage. And as an ex-news guy, my > litmus test is to demand things in writing - or to get personal testimonies > backed with dates, numbers and other facts - not conjecture. Every company > or person, including Heritage, deserves that. Kerry's sleuthing shows that > Heritage registered the GavelSnipe domain name - but this doesn't necessarily > mean it still owns it. > > * However, whether Heritage is a "financial backer or an owner" - always > matters in the world of business - in the same way that it matters to us that > Bank of America owns Merrill Lynch, that PepsiCo owns Frito-Lay, that Disney > owns ABC and ESPN, that ComCast owns NBC and that Rupert Murdoch owns the NY > Post, Fox Sports, the WSJ and movies and shows produced or distributed by > 20th Century Fox. I have not suggested Heritage is breaking the law nor is > running up bids - yet the mildly defensive responses thus far - address only > that specific element. I don't care about that part personally (although it > is a salient concern) - because my experiences with Heritage have been > largely positive. > > * But I always care about transparency and proactive disclosure. So if we > say that "the ownership of Gavelsnipe by Heritage corporate was never > hidden," what does that mean exactly at the level of a consumer? Does "never > hidden" mean it is being disclosed proactively, being disclosed upon request, > "never disclosed officially" - or is this simply "universal common knowledge" > among those "in the know?" I could not find a one thing addressing this on > GavelSnipe's site. That's odd, I thought. It's like having a light bulb go > on while I'm visiting a website. I always want to know who owns or runs it. > And I was led to this only because of my curiosity - in relation to my praise > for the MoviePosterExchange.com site and reading its FAQs. > MoviePosterExchange will use GavelSnipe as a third party service, rather than > doing it by itself. No conflict there. > > * I repeat: Doesn't your objectivity get tested when you replace the word, > "Heritage" - with the word, "Sotheby's?" Or how about with the words, > "Rupert Murdoch" or "Keith Olbermann?" I think it does make a difference. > In sum, all of this then becomes a personal preference based on the level of > trust you impart to a Sotheby's or a Murdoch or an Olbermann - combined with > the number of positive experiences or relationships you have or have had with > these people or entities. > > * Would it bother me a little if Sotheby's owned a company like GavelSnipe > and integrated it into a timed auction? Speaking for myself, the answer is > yes. For Heritage, the answer is no, but I think disclosing its relationship > with GavelSnipe is a "pre-emptive" strike to prevent others with ill > intentions from "discovering" it on their own. When you've got material info > that may be controversial - my P.R. rule is to always get your message out > FIRST to prevent being placed in a defensive position and/or losing control > of a potential story about your brand. -d. > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:37:44 -0700 > From: loveno...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I found this ownership info, not on the Gavelsnipe.com website (I > looked thru their Terms and Conditions and FAQs--and could find > nothing about who it's corporate owner is on either page), but on a > third party site, called website.informer.com. > Heritage is stated as the owner/registrant. > > Created: 2006-03-14 > Expires: 2013-03-14 > Owner: Heritage Auctions Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC > (http://www.godaddy.com) > Hosting company: PSINet, Inc > Registrar: GODADDY.COM, LLC > IPs: 38.107.251.34 > DNS: ns1.gavelsniper.com > ns2.gavelsniper.com > > Registrant: > Heritage Auctions > Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com) > Domain Name: GAVELSNIPE.COM > Domain servers in listed order: > NS1.GAVELSNIPER.COM > NS2.GAVELSNIPER.COM > > -Kerry > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:20:07 -0700 > From: sa...@comic-art.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I don't recall how I found out that Heritage is a financial backer of > Gavelsnipe (which is probably more appropriate than calling them a corporate > ownership), but I've known, it's been talked about on Comic Book forums and > the like.. But I have never been worried one bit about leaving my bids on > gavelsnipe and it's easy for me to see how much money I have saved on both > ebay and Heritage auctions by looking at my snipes and how mostly, they've > never gotten close to my winning bids > > then again, I'm not a conspiracist. > I know the only way for two people to keep a secret is if one of them is dead > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:50:53 -0700 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > Rich > > How did you know? Through the site itself (which is key) - or through pals > or by just "being in the know?" If a consumer signs up with GavelSnipe for > the first time today, is there a PROACTIVE disclosure in GavelSnipe's terms > and conditions about its relationship with Heritage? If so, it undercuts > everything I've written and I owe everyone a big apology. -d. > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:41:37 -0700 > To: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com; MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > From: sa...@comic-art.com > Subject: Re: [MOPO] Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by > Heritage? > > David > > the ownership of Gavelsnipe by Heritage corporate was never hidden.. I knew > about it the day I set up my own account > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:24:52 -0700 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I agree with Kirby too, particularly with his comment: "Any proxy bid system > could be undermined with enough 'nefariousness' at work." > > Hence while I wrote my "essay" with a level of air-tightness - I was trying > to convey less personal suspicion about any "nefariousness" at work by > Heritage - (and it's only because I know and trust Grey) - but with more > concern about the link between GavelSnipe and Heritage - and how in my view, > it has a level of newsworthiness with the media that Heritage doesn't need. > Don't think so? Just REPLACE Heritage's name in my "essay" below - with > Sotheby's or Christie's or Profiles in History. You see, your emotional > reaction is based on the type of relationship and comfort level you may or > may not already have with any auction house on earth. This is really a > personal preference thing with people, e.g., they either trust the "leash" > between the two entities - or they don't. I just put it out there because I > know most people will read it - and most as a result will mull it over as > another quirky element that riddles all hobbies, not just ours. -d. > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:20:39 +0200 > From: i...@motionpictureart.com > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I agree with Kirby. We've been using Gavelsnipe for eBay for quite some time, > we don't buy from Heritage, and never had any problems. > Ron > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:05:48 -0500 > From: ki...@movieart.net > Subject: Re: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I have used Gavelsnipe many times for Heritage and Ebay auctions and I have > never had even one whiff > of a feeling that I was being run up. I'm glad that this service exists > because I like the snipe process. I > can set it and forget it. > > Doesn't mean it couldn't happen if some nefarious persons wanted to pollute > the process. > > Any proxy bid system could be undermined with enough "nefariousness" at work. > > Kirby > > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 02:13:00 -0700 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Potential Conflict of Interest? Is Gavel-Snipe owned by Heritage? > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > * 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. 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.
