Rob:
Perhaps my writing skills are so poor that my story lead you to an erroneous conclusion; however, since I now stand acused of criminal conduct, I am compelled to defend my actions. First of all, there is a huge difference between the simple discussion of a gun, or any other object offered for sale, by two or more individuals; and the act of collusion, or conspiring for the purposes of price fixing. At no point in any contacts with Ross or Harry was there ever any discussion of how we could/should work together to set/fix a price on this gun; or, in any manner, keep the price of the gun low. In the course of a converstion with Ross I voluntarily provided Ross with my maximum bid number as that amount represented my opinion of this gun's value, but that discussion was not shared with Harry (all Harry knew was that Ross and I were interested in the gun). For reasons known only to Ross and Harry, they elected to allow me first dibbs on this gun; however at no time was either individual asked, nor was it implied that I receive such concession! Again, I am at a loss to understand why, other than the fact that these men obviously have a generous spirit, they should be so gracious to me personally; and although I was thrilled to be allowed that courtsey, there was absolutely no certainty at any time during the entire auction period that the gavel would drop in my favor. And although Harry didn't share his plans with me, Ross had planned to begin bidding if/whenever the auction price exceeded my max; which I assure everyone not a large amount. The auction lasted 7 (maybe 8 days?), during which time the gun was posted for the entire world to see. The gun was viewed many times, and was also bid on by others; one of whom was the oft and viciously maligned (by some members of this forum) ED1, who stopped bidding presumably due to the fact that he was unwilling to bid any higher. Clearly the gun was sold at what was deemed a fair price by the interested participants.
Now trusting that everyone clearly understands the facts of this matter, I shall ask the following; how many readers can recall the numerous times they have read member posts regarding items in various auctions where a comment of this nature was made "I didn't bid on that gun because I knew you were bidding and I didn't want to bid against you"? With such being the case, why then would an action such as just described be considered noble and my actions "collusion" with intent to price fix? And we all know such discussions take place on a regular basis; a fact especially true at live auctions where friendly collectors with common interests regularly discuss an item/s prior to bidding commencement. Do these friendly discussions actually constitute illegal criminal activity? If so, do those forum members presently engaging in such illegalities realize this is criminal conduct and they are therefore subject to prosecution under existing collusion statures? I personally think not, as such individuals still possess no advance knowlege of the bidding plans of others who will be participating.
As to the dealer, I have no idea if he is affiliated with this forum or not; but he seemed to be very pleased with the auction results; and, at my request, stated he would be glad to see if he could research any history of the gun. Most likely the dealer chose to sell this gun via on-line auction, as opposed to over the shelf in his shop, because he knew it would fetch more dollars sold in that manner than it would ever bring if limited to his local customer base. I have no idea what the dealer felt this gun would/should fetch at auction; but presume he would have placed a reserve price on the gun had he felt it should command a specific dollar amount. Once again, there was never at any time any attempts by me, or the aforementioned individuals, to set the price of this gun or in any manner defraud this dealer. If viewers of the auction had felt the gun was more valuable; then that feeling would have been reflected in the final selling price, and I am insulted that anyone should make such sweeping and totally unfounded charges of collusion for the purposes of price fixing!
I haven't forgotten that the original subject of this thread was manners; and when I posted last evening I believed that my remarks would be viewed within the positive context of good manners, gentlemanliness, and generosity. Although I have no idea how my comments will be received, I have made every effort to present my responce in a gentlemanly and mannerly fashion. My sincere apologies to all for screwing up this thread so badly. Going forward I shall be much more cautious in the event I should ever get the itch to make another post.
Mr. Schotz, good to hear from my friend in the great frozen north country! Seems I've somehow misplaced your telephone number, send same in an email so that I can give you a call.
Tom
