Kelleher Auctions Updates

IMO it already is. Kelleher will do 10% but you have to come to the table with a couple of hundred thousand in estimates to get it. Raritan charges 10% to sellers and I believe that Cherrystone does as well unless it went up.

PS: I can see charging a seller 20% because that is where the labor is. Scanning, describing, printing, the actual auction itself, answering questions etc. 20% on the buyer end is ridiculous and it only reduces the consigners take because bidders factor it in.

I,ve got to get my head around the 10/15% vs 20/20%. Large enough to factor in now.

It used to be 10%/10% waaaay back in the day. I remember standing around the office and talking about how one of the auction houses raised their selling % to 12% (I cannot remember for the life of me who that was), and discussing whether we should follow that move. In the end, the owner died and the company went under within the year.

Many stamp values have remained stagnant over the years - a set of Zepps probably costs less today (in current $$$) than it did in the 1980's (in THEN-current $$$. This doesn't even take into account inflation). The cost of living has far outstripped stamp values over almost any time period you care to look at. Sooooo, in order to feed Junior on a regular basis (and buy chlorine for the pool), auction houses have had to increase their fee structure. What used to be a 20% spread, has now become something like a 50% spread. I live in the Seattle area, and our local sales tax is 10.1%. Right there, I am at a disadvantage to most other bidders (some states - Oregon, specifically - has 0% sales tax) when bidding at an auction house that charges state sales tax for all states. If you are into stamps for the money, you are a fool. Or you know more than 99% of collectors out there.

Western Australian ACE stamp auctions, Rates.

Last recent auction realised $400,000
Bottom line, no sale, no fee.

For most auction houses whether there is a no sale fee or not depends on whether the house is allowed to set the minimum bid or whether the seller insists on a minimum.

I have been consigning for years and have never once had to pay a fee on a lot that did not sell. I have never set a minimum. Kelleher, Cherrystone, Raritan, Siegel, Rasdale, Regency-Superior (RIP), HR Harmer etc. do not charge a fee for lots that do not sell. A few of my lots did take a pass the first time and were offered again and sold.

My major concern, and one that is paramount IMO to making a good consignment decision, is payment terms. More precisely, will the auction firm actually meet their terms. That info comes from talking to other collectors and gauging what may happen when it comes to payments. There is a major East Coast firm that, at least until a couple of years ago, was painfully slow in paying up. I am talking months and months after the monies were due. I had to chase them, and it was very unpleasant. Their excuse was that the bidder did not pay and contractually most firms do have language giving them an out in this regard. But this firm could have floated the cash without going hungry. Is it really a consignor's issue if they let a regular long-time customer slow walk payment? Not in my view. They qualified the bidder and let them bid. The last time that it happened I was told by the owner that the deadbeat bidder was coming to their next auction to floor bid and he would ask them to pay their bill at that time. Overall, it took me almost a full year to be fully paid. I know for a fact that the bidder was a regular for years that had a relationship with the auction firm. Not good at all.

So, caution is well warranted.

The stamp auction houses have always had problems with bidders who are slow to pay . It gets nasty when these same buyers show up at the next auction and want to bid on more material. Their arguement has always been the same ......give me the material so I can sell it at the shows {now it is give it to me so I can sell it online }, then they can pay their bill .

I once had a good discussion with Gregg at Gregg Manning Auctions in his office Over the list he had of " NOT ALLOW TO BID" there was many names that I knew in the stamp trade .Every auction firm trys to clean up that list before each auction because a lot of these people will show up to bid again . It is like a high or a drug to them to be at the auction and being a bidder , that is what Gregg said .

A certain dealer frequently named on these pages was on it for sure.

Talk about taking a risk. It's one thing if the material is owned by the House but quite another if it is owned by a consignor. Can somebody say, "Lawyer Up"?

So many shenanigans. Remember this chestnut:

As to getting paid, at some point the auction house has to step forward. If the buyer really refuses to pay, should the consignor be the one out in the cold? Of course not. The consignor's contract is with the auctioneer. Hopefully, the auctioneer has vetted his client list well enough. But remember, good and dependable customers can go bad. If the transaction is really at a stalemate, what recourse does the consignor have with the buyer?? If everybody's doing their job right, the consignor doesn't even know who the buyer is. You can't possibly sue someone that you cannot name. The contract is between the consignor and the auction house. It's the auction house that is caught in the middle, but that's the business model that they selected. Just cuz a business relationship between an auctioneer and a buyer goes South, shouldn't and doesn't have any bearing on the contract between the consignor and the auctioneer. They may try and tell you otherwise, but they are just trying to buy time. At some point, the auction house will need to pay the consignor, whether the buyer has paid or not. Unless the auction house goes bankrupt - a la Regency Superior - then you will (be lucky to) get pennies on your dollar.

rogdcam, I hope you were not caught in the death throes of Regency Superior. Many people got burned in that mess.

"A certain dealer frequently named on these pages was on it for sure."

It was indeed the case. And his twin was also a slow pay if you know who I mean. There are others that aren't as well known.

They had my material just exactly when it all went completely South. I received a call from Penny Kol telling me that there was 'a problem" and that Rasdale was going to take material from them if it was OK with me. I said yes and received a call from Rasdale the same day saying that they were headed to R-S right away to pick up material and verifying that I was good with that. I signed an agreement, and they picked up and sold my goods. Later I discovered how lucky I was. Of course, when I consigned to R-S I had zero idea that they were not paying people.

Between the R-S debacle and not getting paid by others I have anxiety when it comes to selling at auction.

There should be a Bond requirement for auction houses. In the event that they fail that Bond can fulfill their obligations. Forget insurance because it just becomes a drawn-out litigious nightmare. Arguing over what you are really owed because you have retail value, catalog value and estimates besides proving that each item was in a certain condition to merit the value. Getting a migraine thinking about it.

Buying from overseas adds a further dimension of risk, including sudden changes in exchange rates, high transport costs to send large lots, customs taxes often applied at random, and limited knowledge of the financial stability and reputation of the auction house. On the face of it an attractive lot in an overseas auction is always a temptation, but then you need good pictures and descriptions. When all costs are factored in the material ends up at an inflated price, if it arrives! Forums like this help with auction house reputational issues!

Regency didn't have the problem that other stamp auction firms had at that time , they were selling to a huge group which was regular collectors or high percentage of collectors who could pay on the auction day as high bidders ,were as other firms were selling to dealers or resellers who had money issues .

Regency's three problems, Regency had was 1} consignors who placed high minnium bids for their stuff . 2] the firms buyers were poor at buying of material for their auctions ,others words they were not getting what they needed to cover expenses,it was selling at their cost . 3} Their operating expense was too high for the fees they collected . All three factors pull the firm down ......notice in the bankrupency there was not a large pool of receivables .