Largely unsubstantiated news is circulating rapidly across card groups over the last 24 hours regarding shill bidding on Probstein’s new platform Snype.

Snype had already made news when its first major auction crashed hard. But that might be only the tip of the iceberg. And shilling has been a hot topic this month after seemingly pro-shilling comments from Dr. James Beckett. So this is just fuel on the hobby dumpster fire.

Shill bidding isn’t new and is surely rampant–precisely because it is impossible to prevent. What is shill bidding and why should you care?

Shilling Defined

Shill bidding is the act of placing deliberately fake or collusive bids to artificially inflate the price of an item. At its core, it’s a simple concept. Shill bidding involves a seller (or someone working with them) placing bids on their own item to drive up the final sale price. This not only deceives genuine bidders, but also potentially rigs price “comps” that other collectors use to value their cards. It may cross the line into illegal behavior, and even where it’s not prosecuted, the ethical implications threaten the integrity of auction platforms.

Shill bidding is as old as auctions and the idea that you might be competing against phantom bidders should always be in your mind. But recently, the sports collectibles hobby has been rocked by fresh controversy, involving major players like Rick Probstein’s Snype, Fanatics Collect (and high-profile collector Pat Ryan who was found to be bidding on hos own card), and even recent commentary from Dr. James Beckett himself seemingly defending “defensive bidding.” .

Snype: New Platform, Old Concerns

Snype, the recently launched auction platform by long‑time eBay seller Rick Probstein, was meant to bring innovation — but its debut quickly raised red flags. Shortly after going live, the site reportedly faced “system‑wide technical issues,” causing sniping (last-second bidding) features to misfire and even triggering early auction terminations.

Some users have gone further, accusing Snype of having major backend vulnerabilities that exposed bidder data — including account info and bid histories. On certain flagged listings, clusters of accounts allegedly linked to the seller or associated network placed heavy, synchronized bids, raising suspicions of coordinated bid inflation.

The exposed data, if accurate, appears to be not only damning, but highly illegal:

Fanatics Collect: High-Profile Fallout

A more public face of the debate involves Fanatics Collect, the rebranded auction arm of Fanatics (formerly PWCC). In a widely covered scandal, collector Patrick Ryan admitted that he had placed a large bid — reportedly around $20,000 — on his own card. The lot had been consigned through Acquir into a Fanatics Collect auction. Because Acquir submitted the card on his behalf, Fanatics reportedly didn’t know he was the original owner. Once the issue came to light (via Ryan’s own Instagram), Fanatics pulled the item from auction and temporarily restricted his account.

Dr. James Beckett Weighs In

Perhaps the most scrutinized voice in this debate has been hobby veteran Dr. James Beckett. In a revealing two-part podcast (episodes 1453/1454 of Sports Card Insights), Beckett discussed his conversation with Patrick Ryan about shilling. He openly questioning whether Ryan’s bidding behavior stemmed from a genuine mistake or a more deliberate, “defensive” shill tactic.

In a follow-up episode (1457), Beckett broke down the difference between “defensive” and “offensive” shilling. He noted how difficult it can be to police such behavior. Some hobbyists interpreted a comment from Beckett as an admission that shill bidding is tolerated among insiders. The quote is: “I wasn’t going to let some idiot get a good deal on a card, so we shilled it.”

Regardless of intent, the comment stirred renewed debate across the hobby.

What This Means for Collectors