BaT took complete control of the top 3 yesterday. Not a surprise considering they sold 157 vehicles!

Want to dive deeper into any of these listings? Just click on the car to take you directly to the listing.

First off, a big thank you to everyone who took part in yesterday's survey about what collector-car auction platforms could be doing better. We had a great response, both through the polls and from people who emailed me directly.

Some of the results surprised me. Others confirmed things I've been hearing from sellers for quite a while.

And the more I looked at the answers, the more I realized that most of these complaints have something in common.

Sellers don't necessarily want more control. They want better information, better communication, and a little more say in decisions that could cost them thousands of dollars.

Here are four results that stood out:

That last pair is particularly interesting.

Sellers want their cars listed quickly, but most would rather wait than go head-to-head with a nearly identical car on the same platform.

Which makes perfect sense. There's a big difference between waiting because a platform is disorganized and waiting because someone is looking out for your interests.

To be fair to the platforms, they will tell you a lot of the delay is down to the seller finding all the documents, providing the right photographs etc..

And that brings me to something that came up repeatedly in emails and conversations.

A number of sellers told me they feel pressured to go no reserve, even when that's not necessarily what they want.

The feeling is that listing and sales teams sometimes push pretty hard in that direction.

Now, I understand why platforms like no reserve. The car is guaranteed to sell, the bidding can be more exciting, and the platform doesn't risk spending time and resources on an auction that ends without a transaction.

But here's my problem with treating no reserve as the preferred answer.

A guaranteed sale and the best possible sale aren't necessarily the same thing.

We've already done a fairly extensive analysis of reserve versus no-reserve results on Bring a Trailer, and one of the biggest takeaways was that the difference isn't consistent across cars.

Some makes and models behave very differently from others. What works for a Porsche 911 might not work for a Mercedes SL, a Ferrari, or a BMW M3.

And even within the same model, mileage, specification, condition and market conditions can change the equation.

So why should every seller get essentially the same pitch?

I'm also curious how the people making these recommendations are incentivized. I don't know whether individual listing teams benefit financially from encouraging no-reserve auctions, and I'm certainly not suggesting they all do.

But it's reasonable to ask whether the incentive to complete a sale always lines up with the seller's goal of getting the best possible price.

What many of you would like to see is simple. If a platform recommends no reserve, show the seller the evidence. What have comparable cars achieved with a reserve? What have similar no-reserve examples sold for? How often did the reserved cars actually sell?

Then explain why one approach makes more sense for that particular car. That's a proper conversation. Not just a sales pitch.

And it brings us back to another result from yesterday's survey.

71% said the most important information they'd want before choosing a platform is how similar cars actually performed there.

I think that's telling us something.

One reader, made a point in the comments that I thought was worth sharing:

He's not the only person raising that issue. (now of course no-one tells you how brilliant the platforms do, so we have to take everything with a pinch of salt)

In our survey, the leading frustration before an auction goes live was not knowing why a car had been rejected. Reserve negotiations, waiting for acceptance and the back-and-forth involved in preparing a listing also featured.

And when we asked what platforms should improve overall, transparency and post-sale accountability came out ahead of simply giving sellers more control.

I don't think platforms necessarily have to accept every car, agree to every reserve, or let sellers choose exactly when their auction runs.

There are good reasons for having experienced people make those decisions.

But when someone trusts you with a valuable car, explaining those decisions shouldn't be an unreasonable request.

If a car is rejected, tell the owner why. If a reserve is too high, show them the evidence.

If you're delaying an auction to avoid competing listings, explain that and give them an idea of when it might go live.

And if you're recommending no reserve, explain why it's the right decision for that specific car. None of that seems particularly complicated.

I don't think the answer is to hand sellers complete control of the auction process. That's not necessarily what the survey suggests either.

The platforms have expertise, access to buyers and knowledge of what works. That's why sellers come to them in the first place.

But expertise is far more valuable when you share the thinking behind it.

And frankly, we now have enough real auction data that some of these conversations shouldn't have to rely entirely on someone's opinion.

It's one of the reasons we've been building out GoAskSam. (more to come on this very soon… Our free selling tool let owners explore how comparable cars have performed, compare auction platforms and look at reserve versus no-reserve results before making a decision.

You can also revisit our earlier analysis, Reserve or No Reserve? We Finally Have the Answer, which digs into how differently the two approaches can perform.

I want auction platforms to succeed. A competitive market with strong platforms is good for buyers, sellers and the collector-car hobby as a whole.

But if there's one thing I'd take from yesterday's feedback, it's this:

Sellers aren't asking platforms to stop making decisions. They're asking them to show their work.

And I think that's a pretty reasonable request.

Thanks again to everyone who voted, emailed and shared their experiences. Keep the feedback coming. It's useful to hear what's working, what's frustrating and what you'd change.

Enjoying The Daily Vroom?

Pay it forward by sharing this newsletter with an automotive aficionado in your circles. Your endorsement allows us to accelerate our growth.