... the true value of the flag was $50,000?

>> Were people joining groups to decrease the final price or where they doing so to pool there assets in or order to buy the chips. <<

Either way, it's the same thing -- anticompetitive. If we were talking major corporations doing the same thing, the Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Department would be all over their fannies.

>> If collectors recognized that they would not be able to buy the whole lot do to the expense but enter into a collective group to buy the lot and then share it, such an arrange is not anti-competitive, it is in fact good for the auction. <<

It's still anti-competitive, though it IS possible it would be good for the seller (that is, if none of the participants would otherwise have bid on the lot). Of course, we know that's not the case, because at least one member of the group bid before the group was initiated. I DIDN'T bid because I didn't want to go against the group (even though I got left out :-( because my email wasn't working). I would otherwise have been willing to bid $750 on the lot; it sold for $601. That's about as anti-competitive as it gets (of course, someone else jumped the bid at the end, so none of us got the chips).

>> Why is it good for the auction? It increased the number of bidders who would pay a higher price. It made more money available to bid. Such an arrangememnt would only be anticompetetive if all the bidders entered into one collective group. <<

Why don't you try that argument in the MicroSoft case? If it works, Bill Gates will probably be willing to make you a millionaire. ANY collusion between two parties who would otherwise be competitors is anti-competitive, by definition. The group was still only making one bid, so there was actually a decrease in the number of potential bidders. As for the people who actually joined the group, we don't know whether or not the group bid made more money available. But, we do know for a fact that the group dynamic made less money available in the end (see my comment above).

There's no doubt in my mind that the objective of the group bid was to get a good deal at the expense of an uninformed seller. That was certainly my intent in inquiring about a group effort to begin with. And, in fact, would have been my objective even if I'd decided to bid on an individual basis. AND, in fact, what did happen in the end (albeit the good deal was had by someone else).

Not being judgmental, just observational. ----- jim o\-S