Subject:
|
Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:38:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
733 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.auction, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I (as well as all other participants) got a note from Ian Bishop in
> early March about a proxy quandary that had arisen.
>
> Seems he had a bidder that had bid 285 (a winning bid at the time) with
> proxy cap of 300. Someone else subsequently bid 300. Ian awarded
> (rightly, to my way of thinking) the winning bid to the first bidder,
> since that bidder had bid 300 "first".
>
> Makes sense to me.
>
> But consider many auctions run by software. I suspect, but can't
> confirm, that the outcome might be different, at least in some. This is
> based on my interpretation of how I believe they work.
>
> In particular, if you look at bidding history, I think this is how
> AucZILLA works. But I could be wrong, which is why I am asking.
>
> Consider this scenario. 1 dollar minimum bump.
>
> Item starting bid is 10.
> Bidder A puts in a bid of 10 with a proxy cap of 13.
> Bidder B puts in a bid of 11. This exceeds A's current bid, and B gets
> the item "temporarily".
>
> The auction software ratchets A's bid to 12, taking the item back.
> Bidder B puts in a bid of 13. This exceeds A's current bid. B gets the
> item.
>
> No further bids ensue
>
> For the software to allow A to overbid B, A would have to have a proxy
> cap of 14. But A does not. His cap is 13, so the software cannot bid him
> to 14, nor should it. So B retains the item.
>
> Yet A had signaled willingness to go to 13, and had done so well before
> B bid that amount. By rights, the item should have been won by A. He
> "bid 13" first. Had he put in a hard bid of 13, he would clearly have
> been there first under AucZILLA rules, right?
>
> Am I all wet? Does AucZILLA work this way? Do other auction systems? Do
> any work the other way? (that is, when a new bid comes in, the current
> proxy bid is first raised to the new bid level, if possible, to see if
> it was there "first")
I think AucZILLA works differently (but I can't recall for certain - that's
Todd's baby) I know e-bay does it differently(1), which implies, at least,
that Everyauction and similar servers would follow suit.
I know that on most e-bay bids I lose, I get outbid by the standard incriment,
but every so often when I place a bid, I will get a 'you have been outbid for
this item, the current bid is now n' where n is the amount I bid, and the
current bidder is the person I was attempting to outbid.
I can't recall for certain, but I'm fairly certain that I've seen updates like
this in aucZILLA:
7 Blue Fibble-worbits 2.90 Me ---> Some other guy
7 Blue Fibble-worbits 3.00 Some other guy ---> Me
7 Blue Fibble-worbits 3.10 Me ---> Some other guy
7 Blue Fibble-worbits 3.10 Some other guy ---> Me
This implies, to my limited understanding, that we both proxied $3.10 on the
lot, but because I had it in first, the auction gives it back to me, even
though the price doesn't increment.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| I (as well as all other participants) got a note from Ian Bishop in early March about a proxy quandary that had arisen. Seems he had a bidder that had bid 285 (a winning bid at the time) with proxy cap of 300. Someone else subsequently bid 300. Ian (...) (25 years ago, 19-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
96 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
