4 ms·

Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. It is not really th

by jaclaz 5y ago

Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. It is not really the "Dune" book, but rather its storyboard, more details and a few photos here: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211122-doomed-dune-storyboards-sell-for-2-7mn-euros https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211122-doomed-dune-s...

o_m 5y ago
Sounds like a great way to launder money
- carl_dr 5y ago
  Spending €2.6M on something worth €26,000? Sounds like a crappy return to me.
  - kstrauser 5y ago
    Not if it’s a pump and dump. The DAO collected a couple million dollars of other people’s money and used it to win an expensive auction, thus “proving” that the idea is worth lots of money. Now their second DAO can collect even more because it’s been legitimized.
  - ed_elliott_asc 5y ago
    Unless you already owned it and are now selling it via auction.
  - fmajid 5y ago
    If the person who owned the book is the same as the bidder, or in cahoots, they can buy cryptocurrency with dirty money, buy the book at an inflated price, get ostensibly legitimate money back but have to pay the auction house a commission for the privilege. Since most of the crypto world does not do AML-KYC, it is a very attractive for money laundering, and I would say this is by design.
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    The seller of the crappy book now has €2.6M of 'clean' money...
  - caymanjim 5y ago
    Auctions always sell for exactly what the item is worth.
- mcv 5y ago
  You know what's even than laundering money by bidding ridiculously high on an auction for something you're selling? Being overbid by idiots.
TheDong 5y ago
> Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. I see nothing perplexing about it because this was not an ordinary auction, but an auction with one member being a public DAO, where the amount of money the DAO will bid is thus public. Let's say the DAO bids $100, but they have $200 in contributions. Someone can then safely bid $190, knowing that the DAO will raise to $200. It's in the agreement for the DAO more or less, and because it's on the blockchain and organized in a public-ish discord server, their cap is absolutely public. So, who has the motivation to make these known-bad bids? Anyone who profits off the sale being more, and anyone who just doesn't like crypto-techbros and wants them to lose more money than they would otherwise. I think the use of DAOs for auctions is quite funny for this reason. A private company that kept the total contribution amount private until just after the auction ended would end up with a much more favorable dynamic than this "the amount we can bid is on the blockchain, you already know our move when you bid". Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander
- jaclaz 5y ago
  >Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander Sorry, but how do you know it was a DAO (whatever it is)? From what I could find: https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard-du-projet-maudit-de-jodorowsky-vendu-une-petite-fortune-1420723 https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard... >Les enchères se sont rapidement envolées et ont donné lieu au final à une rude bataille entre deux enchérisseurs étrangers, au téléphone. L'enchérisseur gagnant est américain. it was a normal auction with two bidders (on the telephone). EDIT: Ok, found some more info: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amansethi/spicedao-dunedao-soby https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amansethi/spicedao-dune... the winning bidder was a guy for TheSpiceDAO, but who was the other bidder?
  - TheDong 5y ago
    The twitter thread this post is to retweets the DAO in question claiming responsibility, specifically this twitter account: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO Googling finds this website: https://dune.foundation/ https://dune.foundation/, and some info about the etherium they raised here https://juicebox.money/#/p/spicedao https://juicebox.money/#/p/spicedao Maybe this is some sorta elaborate hoax, but it looks like it's real eth, so unless juicebox is also in on it, it seems like a hard hoax to pull.
Arnt 5y ago
1. I think the winning bidder posted that right away. How terrible it must feel to wonder whether there's anyway to stop payment, cancel, back out, anything. 2. And what luck the runner-up must feel. (Who may now perhaps offer the winner 40k for the book.)

by jaclaz 5y ago

o_m 5y ago

Sounds like a great way to launder money

carl_dr 5y ago
Spending €2.6M on something worth €26,000? Sounds like a crappy return to me.
- kstrauser 5y ago
  Not if it’s a pump and dump. The DAO collected a couple million dollars of other people’s money and used it to win an expensive auction, thus “proving” that the idea is worth lots of money. Now their second DAO can collect even more because it’s been legitimized.
- ed_elliott_asc 5y ago
  Unless you already owned it and are now selling it via auction.
- fmajid 5y ago
  If the person who owned the book is the same as the bidder, or in cahoots, they can buy cryptocurrency with dirty money, buy the book at an inflated price, get ostensibly legitimate money back but have to pay the auction house a commission for the privilege. Since most of the crypto world does not do AML-KYC, it is a very attractive for money laundering, and I would say this is by design.
- londons_explore 5y ago
  The seller of the crappy book now has €2.6M of 'clean' money...
- caymanjim 5y ago
  Auctions always sell for exactly what the item is worth.
mcv 5y ago
You know what's even than laundering money by bidding ridiculously high on an auction for something you're selling? Being overbid by idiots.

TheDong 5y ago

> Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. I see nothing perplexing about it because this was not an ordinary auction, but an auction with one member being a public DAO, where the amount of money the DAO will bid is thus public. Let's say the DAO bids $100, but they have $200 in contributions. Someone can then safely bid $190, knowing that the DAO will raise to $200. It's in the agreement for the DAO more or less, and because it's on the blockchain and organized in a public-ish discord server, their cap is absolutely public. So, who has the motivation to make these known-bad bids? Anyone who profits off the sale being more, and anyone who just doesn't like crypto-techbros and wants them to lose more money than they would otherwise. I think the use of DAOs for auctions is quite funny for this reason. A private company that kept the total contribution amount private until just after the auction ended would end up with a much more favorable dynamic than this "the amount we can bid is on the blockchain, you already know our move when you bid". Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander

jaclaz 5y ago
>Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander Sorry, but how do you know it was a DAO (whatever it is)? From what I could find: https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard-du-projet-maudit-de-jodorowsky-vendu-une-petite-fortune-1420723 https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard... >Les enchères se sont rapidement envolées et ont donné lieu au final à une rude bataille entre deux enchérisseurs étrangers, au téléphone. L'enchérisseur gagnant est américain. it was a normal auction with two bidders (on the telephone). EDIT: Ok, found some more info: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amansethi/spicedao-dunedao-soby https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amansethi/spicedao-dune... the winning bidder was a guy for TheSpiceDAO, but who was the other bidder?
- TheDong 5y ago
  The twitter thread this post is to retweets the DAO in question claiming responsibility, specifically this twitter account: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO Googling finds this website: https://dune.foundation/ https://dune.foundation/, and some info about the etherium they raised here https://juicebox.money/#/p/spicedao https://juicebox.money/#/p/spicedao Maybe this is some sorta elaborate hoax, but it looks like it's real eth, so unless juicebox is also in on it, it seems like a hard hoax to pull.

Arnt 5y ago

1. I think the winning bidder posted that right away. How terrible it must feel to wonder whether there's anyway to stop payment, cancel, back out, anything. 2. And what luck the runner-up must feel. (Who may now perhaps offer the winner 40k for the book.)