You’re right about how premiums are adjusted to make deals happen. Commissions paid shouldn’t be added to the trading value of a car. The live auction houses benefit from advertising the total price because it makes them look like they fetch stronger numbers for the cars they sell and they hope that the higher number will encourage people to bid more on a comparable car at a future auction, in turn earning them more commission.

Buyers' premiums obviously vary from House to House, online and Physical. The important part is that, for almost every car, this is what the buyer actually pays. There will always be examples where the house "Strikes a deal," but these are few and far between. Most cars, for the most part, sell for the listed (recorded) price. Never focus on the outliers, always go for the Meat and Potatoes. No one always has a seat at the table where deals are made - whether it's houses, cars, or Beanie Babies. We should record what each house has to say, and, if necessary, editorialise if we feel something seems off base. Dave Kinney

This educates the reader more in terms of what's really happening in the market. As you say, there is often more going on which we can't see but I feel that premium+sale price gives readers the most information.

Sale/Hammer prices accurately reflect the vehicles value. Buyers fees are a variable cost of doing business, that don't inherently reflect the value of the vehicle and incorporate the value of post sales services that the marketplace provides. For example, Hagerty charges 7% while all of their competitors charge 5%. Their justification is that they provide post sale transaction services (pay and title). That said, Hagerty's post sale services are sub par, cumbersome and time consuming and in reality don't justify their increased buyers fee. The same post sale services can be provided by a third party in a more seamless and timely manner for a fraction of the cost when purchased through their 5% competitors where the post sale process is facilitated by the buyer and seller.

In international business all deals are done NET. Fees vary from auction Platform to platform. If you quote all in you cannot longer compare prices.

While there may be reductions in premium later, most bidders are expecting to pay that full amount when the hammer drops. Yes, at live auctions some haggling often happens at the block if the owner's present, but I think that's the exception. Don't know how often BAT adds money to get something done, but that too has gotta be the exception.

It would be more informative to see the “out the door” price. Even though we all know to add about 10% to what we see now.

Hi there. I say the sale price as far as the on line platforms. That keeps it simple. Thanks so much for all you do.

Other reporting platforms do not add in the premium for online platforms. But with that said a lot of the valuation tools will use the number including premium when working on value guides. It doesn’t matter as long as it’s being stated which is used.

Since the last you mentioned this issue I was all in with adding selling costs for the final number, but some thoughts came to mind since then. Let's look at home sales, which when using a broker involved a commission. When sale gets reported it does not include or add selling costs of any kind. I have also become aware of "deals" being made behind the scenes which typically are a reduction of a commission. So if I pay a 10% commission added to the car price and my friend Bob buys a almost completely similar car and pays only 5% what's the price/value of that car. How do you way if Bob got a bargain price when we both paid the same price for the car?

At the end of the day, you are acknolweding that neither method is perfect, in the "sale price only" the number you are reporting is 100% wrong all the time, because its not the "all in" number. Some high percentage of the time, the "all in" number will be spot on. Simply continue to remind readers that you don't know what might have happened behind a closed door, so that these numbers have some play in them. But, that goes for the brick and mortar houses too. Make sense?

Different platforms have different buyer's premium structures. An all-in number helps the reader understand the true sale better. What is even better is reporting both the hammer price and the "expected" buyer's premium.

Don't worry about post sale negotiations.... nearly all the time you will be correct with the rolled up price. That's good enough as it saves the reader going back to figure what % a particular platform charges as a fee. Consider adding the listing fee as well?

Buyers’ premium in the industry is looked at as if it were a tax on the purchase of a vehicle. Despite this, the once-leader in the live auction sector - Barrett-Jackson - began reporting the premium within their sales results decades ago to give the illusion a car brought more money. Others followed suit, making it industry standard, because of the illusion. It truly is nothing more than an additional expense, and it is misleading when considered part of the value of a vehicle. (Source: I’ve been in the industry a couple of decades.)

The reason the auction houses want to report the sale result including fees is to inflate their total numbers when compared to the competition. If an argument can be made for including the commissions, the same argument can be made for using the amount that the seller received i.e. hammer price less sellers fees.

It's not half of the time that the auction houses deal on the buyers premium, trust me it's rare. Where they negotiate is on the sellers premium to get the consignment.

When you are bidding on the car you are focused on the hammer price. When you end up owning the car you look at the total price you paid. If someone offers to buy it from you and they justify their low ball offer based on knowing the hammer price you paid you say, "Yeah but I really paid that plus the buyer's fee." You will always look at it that way.