Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I noted the following descriptions of two Winchester 1886’s in an upcoming auction and the descriptions left me scratching my head. I mean, if you want to be one of the “big boys” you should either “know your stuff”, and maybe the individual(s) in charge of writing the auction descriptions simply do not know–but they should–or, maybe it is “lying by omission” or…??? This particular auction house is no worse or better than any of the rest, but one would expect a professional description or evaluation, as these auction houses are in the profession of auctioning firearms. Maybe best to let you draw your own conclusions here, but here are two case examples, and there may be others out there in this upcoming auction, or in upcoming auctions of this auction house’s competitors, that are better examples…
Case #1: http://www.auctionzip.com/auction-lot/lot_98541149F1
Look at Photographs 4 & 10. Note the crack that originates at the left rear of the upper tang and progresses in a downward and rearward fashion. It is significantly greater than a hairline crack, and no mention is made of this in the auction house’s description of this firearm. Worse than not mentioning the crack is the fact that the auction house states the following: “The wood is simply magnificent.” I suppose the fact that a fairly significant crack exists in the wood contributes to its magnificence?
Case #2: http://www.auctionzip.com/auction-lot/lot_5A9439695A
This one defies logic. It seems like the auction house goes to great lengths to defend what isn’t than to describe what really is–e.g., significant abrasions to the face of the muzzle that originated when 2″ was cut off the barrel, an amateur job replacing the front sight, and an obviously inappropriate bevel to the outside of the barrel at the muzzle. Here is what is written: “The factory does not denote the special 24″ barrel (2″ short than standard), but given the condition of the rifle, special order features, the perfect muzzle and perfect front sight set back 1″ on center, it is definitely all factory and features everything noted in letter with the exception of the rear sight that has a marble blank and sports a period tang sight. ” Of course the factory does not denote the special 24″ barrel, because it was originally 26″, and yet it is “definitely” (beyond a shadow of doubt) original. This rifle is described as being “High Condition”. NRA Antique Condition Descriptions consist of the following: Factory New, Excellent, Fine, Very Good, Good, Fair, and Poor. “High Condition” does not neatly translate into one of these categories, but it is fairly obvious that a cut barrel creates condition issues.
Caveat emptor!
mrcvs said
…one would expect a professional description or evaluation, as these auction houses are in the profession of auctioning firearms.
A “professional description,” from the pro auctioneer’s viewpoint, is one that minimizes or ignores problems, not points them out, because you’re working for the interests of sellers, not buyers.
clarence said
mrcvs said
…one would expect a professional description or evaluation, as these auction houses are in the profession of auctioning firearms.A “professional description,” from the pro auctioneer’s viewpoint, is one that minimizes or ignores problems, not points them out, because you’re working for the interests of sellers, not buyers.
Regardless of who the auction house is working for they are basically advertising items for sale (very expensive items for sale, I will add) and I assume fall under Federal Truth In Advertising Laws.
Truth In Advertising
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
The “Cased Volcanic in excellent shape” wasn’t cased when it sold at Julia’s a couple years ago. Pistol has been buffed and artificially aged since then. Lucky guy found the case somewhere laying around.
nanzca said
The “Cased Volcanic in excellent shape” wasn’t cased when it sold at Julia’s a couple years ago. Pistol has been buffed and artificially aged since then. Lucky guy found the case somewhere laying around.
That’s why I stated this auction house is not any better or worse than the others. I am sure many such examples exist, but the two I chose as examples seem particularly blatantly obvious when it comes to “stretching the truth”.
I should add, most fortunately, I developed my knowledge base long before the advent of the internet. Not that someone wanting to misrepresent something didn’t exist before the days of the internet, but it just seems more commonplace and seems to go to greater lengths than before. I can honestly say that if I hadn’t developed my skills long ago, I don’t think I’d want to be getting into collecting Winchesters now. The intent to deceive, the altering of firearms and acoutrements to achieve financial gain, and the high value placed on these Winchesters, and, therefore, the chance of losing significant sums of money, was simply not as extreme.
mrcvs said
I should add, most fortunately, I developed my knowledge base long before the advent of the internet. Not that someone wanting to misrepresent something didn’t exist before the days of the internet, but it just seems more commonplace and seems to go to greater lengths than before. I can honestly say that if I hadn’t developed my skills long ago, I don’t think I’d want to be getting into collecting Winchesters now. The intent to deceive, the altering of firearms and acoutrements to achieve financial gain, and the high value placed on these Winchesters, and, therefore, the chance of losing significant sums of money, was simply not as extreme.
I know what you mean. I’ve been collecting Winchesters for just over a year and if not for a few guys who have helped me learn what to look for and look over my potential purchases I probably wouldn’t be collecting them.
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
Kevin Jones said
Truth In Advertising
Guess FTC bureaucrats don’t watch much TV; if they did, about 90% of TV ads would have to be withdrawn.
clarence said
Guess FTC bureaucrats don’t watch much TV; if they did, about 90% of TV ads would have to be withdrawn.
I agree, the “all for $19.95; but wait, act now and we will send you a second _ _ _ _ just for the price of shipping” folks seem to get a pass, however FTC keeps pretty close tabs (especially when complaints are received) on auto, real estate and drug ads. Most DMVs have a dept that police auto dealers / auto advertising etc.
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
A few notes on auction descriptions from personal observation of the actual cataloging process at major auction houses:
1. Many renowned auction houses employ/sublet outside experts who are not full time house employees to write descriptions.
2. Descriptions are dictated to a secretary, and not personally typed in by the cataloger.
3. Outside experts fly/drive in and leave shortly afterward, and are present for only a matter of hours to a few days at best.
4. Most individual item descriptions are developed in a matter of three to five minutes, tops.
5. Full time auction house employees are responsible for researching provenance and/or factory letter information, and are not experts on the firearms themselves. The cataloger rarely sees the items of provenance or factory info, and describes only the gun itself. There are exceptions, if a cataloger notes a major discrepancy between the firearm and the listed provenance.
6. During auction inspection periods, many description discrepancies are discovered by customers and confirmed by auction house managers. An addendum is then added/announced at the time of the item bidding. But not all addendum texts can be transferred to a printed catalog or internet description in a timely manner, so it is critical to listen to live auction feeds to catch addendum information.
The points above are in no way intended to defend the auction house, nor to dispute the keen observations which are given in the two examples which are noted in the OP. Just hoping to expand the understanding of the overall process for those who haven’t had the opportunity to observe auction cataloging first hand.
Personally, I think that a cataloger could simply have missed seeing the crack in the first example. And if the crack is brought to the attention of the auction house, a manager should add an addendum.
The second example is not as cut and dried (no pun intended on the shortened barrel!). Some creative wording is certainly in play. But again, the discrepancies between the pictorial evidence and the description should be brought to the attention of management, and hopefully, a proper resolution will be taken before bidding begins.
Thanks for listening. – Matt
Kevin Jones said
FTC keeps pretty close tabs (especially when complaints are received) on…drug ads.
On prescription drugs, perhaps, but I think the most shocking worthless products hyped on TV are over-the-counter meds.
US and New Zealand, incidentally, are the ONLY two countries in the world allowing prescription drug TV ads. No idea how this came about in NZ, but here, the privilege was bought & paid for lobbyists for the big drug companies.
Maybe I don’t understand what is being said in this thread. I don’t disagree that some of the descriptions are bogus on some of the Auction Zip auctions, but from their home page, Auction Zip is:
Who We Are
AuctionZip is the world’s largest online auction marketplace. We’re the go-to destination where more than 25,000 professional auctioneers and 13 million auction buyers come together each year to list and find auctions. AuctionZip Live! is the nation’s largest online bidding destination. Every week we list thousands of new items at auction, and live auctions around the world.
They are what it says they are…an online auction market place. They only present what the sellers give them. They are not like, and don’t claim to be like Julia, RIA, Cowan’s, Morphy’s and other auction houses that sell firearms. AuctionZip does not have people on staff that know forearms and can write a true and honest description of firearms. They provide a service to sellers who want to sell firearms and, by looking at their website, every other type item you can imagine. To me they are very similar to eBay or Amazon…they all provide a place for sellers to sell…whatever they want to sell. One can not blame eBay if a seller is dishonest in his description. That being said, both eBay and Amazon have in place ways to take care of buyers if the item is misrepresented in the sellers description. So do the firearms auction houses for the most part. With AuctionZip’s no guarantees policy, and the way they conduct business, I wouldn’t even consider buying something from them. That is not meant to fault them, but it’s pretty evident from reading their home page that it is buyer beware and they don’t try and hide that.
Just my opinion, Peter
Thanks Matt & Kevin. A good dialogue for collectors to read, especially newer ones and auction only buyers.
Bill
martin08 said
A few notes on auction descriptions from personal observation of the actual cataloging process at major auction houses:1. Many renowned auction houses employ/sublet outside experts who are not full time house employees to write descriptions.
3. Outside experts fly/drive in and leave shortly afterward, and are present for only a matter of hours to a few days at best.
Thanks for listening. – Matt
All Good points Matt, I had some experience with the above as RIA reached out to a knife collecting association I founded to enlist our member-experts to help them with descriptions/price estimates. I had thought about taking them up on the offer but was too busy at the time. In retrospect, wish I had as I would have had more knowledge of what goes on behind the scenes which would be beneficial now.
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
These two examples are being presented by Morphy’s. In reference to post #12, above.
Precisely. Morphy would be the guarantor of the description. Auctionzip is merely an intermediary for sales exposure, and has no liability.
Back when I practiced there was a substantial body of common law which allowed for puffing, stretching, distorting, hyperbole and unreasonable subjective interpretation of advertising. When it comes to age-old common law, developed over hundreds of years by the judiciary, and over which they feel a certain paternal coddling, then any legislation, including “truth in advertising”, would face a high hurdle of specificity and clarity to overcome it. In other words, the legislature better not leave the court *any* room to breathe when it comes to messing with it.
I’m not saying it can’t be done. It’s just that legal defense teams usually win absent fraud and specific intent, both of which have their own elements and are tough nuts to crack. You’d have to find a specific duty owed by the seller to the buyer to disclose that which could not be discovered via due diligence by the buyer. The buyer has his own burdens if he doesn’t want to get screwed. There is no obligation on the part of the seller to not screw the buyer, or to tell the buyer everything the buyer would like to know, or to tell it in a way that the buyer will understand, or in a way the buyer would like to hear it. If you aren’t getting the information you want in the way you want it, don’t buy.
1 Guest(s)
