russo and steel chop job camaro copo

[motion68]

[ QUOTE ]
How in the world would you dismantle every musclecar that comes thru the door for auction ?? You have to at least try and rely on the integrity of the seller at some point. If people knew they had to have the car dismantled for inspection they will just do the work better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the auction house doesn't have to dismantle a car. Remember, I suggested the auction house set it's standard for disclosure. Therefore the seller dosen't have to "prove" his car. The seller just has to meet the house standard. Since buyers and seller both know the standard, they both "know" what they sold or bought. AND, the auction house that currently gets money from both, WILL have some skin in the game. In my view, under auction SOP today, the auction house always wins, 'cuz they represent a car to the max (per sellers representation), they get money from both the seller and buyer, and if the deal turns out to be bad for seller or buyer, the house is out without fault or responsibility. That said, for me, it's not about money - mine or the auction house - it's about the integrity of the hobby! The auction house CAN help with that issue and in the process strengthen their sales and bottom line. So, how about it Drew, since you are on this thread, give us some feedback on the concept. Up or down, good or bad, how about some ideas. Thanks in advance

[Belair62]

I hear you Bob...but if a guy is going to re-body a car he won't have much interest in spilling the beans so you dpend on that persons integrity. And if a person unknowingly goes to sell a car that he has no idea was a re-body...he can't disclose it either. Mauybe a hefty penalty for the seller if a car is discovered "bad"

[Drew Alcazar]

Hello Motion68,

From an idealistic standpoint, I very much agree with you. Where things start to get “sticky” is when the Auction House, in any way what so ever, begins to involve itself in the representation process (from writing descriptive text, to implementing research, to initiating disclosure measures) we then are placed in a position of liability and responsibility for the integrity of the transaction. Very true, we benefit a great deal from this transaction (in almost 20 pages of posting, I never heard any one mention that we had significant commissions on the table over this deal that completely disappeared when it went south) so there is indeed tremendous value to the auction company to ensure that a car is correctly represented so that a deal “sticks” and we can pay some bills with the applicable commissions.

To that end, and with a very pragmatic and “realistic” perspective, I would very much enjoy a conversation and suggestions as to how we can provide this measure of accountability without exposing my company to undue liability. By contract, we have specific provisions that address this to some extent, but as we all know, there are numerous ways to be “duped” either maliciously or unknowingly by a seller.

I think the very best scenario has been inviting (and many times we do) known authorities in the hobby to attend our sales. Galen Govier for example has been a tremendous help, as has Kevin Marti, Ed Meyer, Jim Wicks, etc. There are also many organizations that have lots of archived information. Look at the Shelby American Automobile Club for example. The larger question is, how can any auction house scrutinize hundreds of cars when so much of what our discussion has been about in this instance requires some degree of dismantling?

Just to cross-reference the Ford VIN number (on file with SAAC) requires the removal of the Shelby SFM VIN Tag. Some could argue that simply drilling the rivets out could be an illegal act, but can you image if I accidentally slipped when drilling them out and let my Makita slide across a freshly restored fender? Yikes!

I am already in the process of re-painting the cowl panel off the silver Camaro we have been discussing as it was scratched to hell from removing the wipers and then tossed in the trunk by the defaulting buyer. Here we go again, another couple of hundred bucks to ‘fix’ something following shipping charges, entry fees, lost commissions, and two upset clients. No problem Drew, just keep smiling…

As you can see from just these two scenarios (one hypothetical and one sadly very real) getting involved with this level of discovery by the Auction House has some real serious liability associated with it.

So the question is: how do we provide some level of assurances to our buyers (over and above what is stipulated by contract) – maintain a ‘level playing field’ for all – and not open our selves up for tremendous risk while still fulfilling the objective of what we all want: Honesty.

Lord knows we work pretty hard to deliver to our bidders the very best level of customer service I know of. From Josephine’s killer food buffets in Scottsdale to full coverage insurance binders from Grundy Worldwide to offering free shipping for 6+ purchases, not to mention our block being reserved only for credentialed clients, I believe this evidence clearly demonstrates how much Russo and Steele values their Bidders.

I am open to suggestions on how to address providing an additional level of protection to our buyers. These discussion forums are great tools to “hear what the hobby has to say” – learn, adjust and continually work to improve our level of service and integrity.

I will look forward to realistic and constructive comments and suggestions. We are all stronger together than we are apart.

Drew Alcazar

[Charley Lillard]

Ahhh..The kinder-gentler Drew.....nice post.

[motion68]

You're right. There will be cars that still fall through the cracks, exceptions to the rules, someone put one over on someone else. But, I'm thinking that particularly for the rare high dollar cars, there may some benefit here. In January at RS, I bid on a blue 396 Nova (didn't win and I'm still crying). I did everything I could to check the car out in the 2 days before it went on the block. Spoke with the seller, spoke with the sellers agent, called my Nova "expert" and reveiwed the car in detail with him on the phone. In the end, I bid on the car because Stefano was brokering the deal and I trusted his judgement. Boy would I like to have that same trust in the auction house. 'Cuz, guess what? I would have cheerfully handed over about $5K of my money to the house. And, guess what again? If the car didn't meet the sellers descripton that the house published - I think my money had wings in full flight - never to return to me. I just can't get past the feeling that it would be so good for the hobby AND would I believe make the house more money. As someone else said on this thread before me - it's a no brainer. Will someone talk about the downside of such a plan? And Drew, if your house institutes such a plan of disclosure and attendant responsibility, can I buy a share of your deal?

[Mr70]

Is Drew available to speak at weddings?

[rich p]

[motion68]

Yes Charlie, it was a nice post. And thank you Drew for the comments. I too think such a disclosure process will bring additional (and unknown) potential liability to your firm. But I also think that businesses build into their revenue stream a recovery of those costs. It's a cost of doing business - so charge more to the buyer or seller or both. Hey, when I got the itch for the Nova, it really didn't matter your fee - but I did want the car AS IT WAS REPRESENTED, and wanted recourse if not. I'd pay for that level of responsibility. BTW - the buffet was great - my son and I probably cost you some money next year.

[HiHorse]

Realistically, I can't see the auction house doing to much here except include the serial number to a car in their listings. With the internet, camera cell phones, etc their is a lot of resources available to the buyer, so the bottom line is the onus is up to the buyer to do the homework.

Carmine

[motion68]

Its a good point Carmine. I think that is the case with most of the products we purchase. I want every consumer to be responsible for the puchase choices they make. After all, we're free to do business with whom we wish. But, I also want recourse to the parties who represent the deal. In the auction scenario, the house represents a car as ABC, SUPER DUPER with options that make it 1 of kind. So the house get's money from the buyer, who, let's say relied on the representation. Then, when the car is not as represented, the house position is "sorry, not our representation, but rather, the seller". But the house has the benefit (read enhanced revenue) of representing this glorious car as 1 of a kind (read expensive) without ever having to stand behind the claim. Somehow that just doesn't feel good to me. I'm not bashing RS (I spent 3 full days and nights there in January and only 2 hours at the "other place". And will go again as soon as I can). I'm not trying to get the buyer to absolve himself of responsibility, but I am proposing the house take more responsibility for its representations.