Subject:
|
Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:52:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1117 times
|
| |
|
|
> Someone bids $100 with a proxy max of $500. Now it's climbed to $150 and
> the bidding is still hot, and the high bidder realizes he doesn't have $500
> after all (maybe it was a typo, or maybe he was counting on some money to
> come in which didn't come in, or maybe he was laid off from his job). He
> wants to lower his proxy max from $500 to $200, but he can't! So he sits
> there in horror as the bidding climbs to $200, then to $250, then to $300,
> and finally closes at $425. So great, now he's got it for $425 and he • can't
> afford it. So he defaults on the bid, hurting himself, the seller, and the
> other bidders (all of whose time has been wasted).
>
> Or, in desperation, to save his own face, instead of defaulting on the bid
> and just prior to the auction closing, he gets creative. He fills out a • new
> bidder account (fake name, fake identity, fake yahoo/hotmail e-mail • address)
> and outbids himself.
>
> Real safe, huh? :-/
I would contest that a more reasonable way to get out of the bid is to
let the seller know well before the auction ends that the bidder is unable
to pay for what he has bid. Then that bid can be canceled. I see this as
an easier and more honest solution than creating an alias. We are free to
disagree, but I feel that this is a more honest way. Plus, it keeps bidders
honest with themselves from the get-go, without having the ability to repeal
a bid, except in extreme situations. Where I thought at first this was
really bad, I do see your points in this and other posts, but I still hold
my original opinion.
> > OK. This is a psychological thing as well. Which can be harmful to the
> > seller's cause. If an auction has been running its course, and is on its
> > last day, with only one bid, other possible bidders may believe it is not • a
> > good value, since seemingly no one wants to bid on it. Giving the buyer
> > this manipulative skill may be pleasant for the buyer who can wield it, • but
> > if its allowed, and it hurts a seller, it may hurt the auction site, too.
> John, I don't mean to be harsh, but you do not appear to be thinking things
> though carefully before making these statements.
> Postulate for the moment the existence of an auction system which allows
> only proxy bidding and does not allow firm bids (i.e., it does not allow
> large jumps in price).
> If you try to design a system which does not allow large jumps in price,
> you'll quickly find that any such system -does- in fact allow large jumps • in
> price, no matter how much you try to prevent it. To manipulate the system
> into allowing this, a bidder has only to post a proxy bid with a large
> spread, then ask a friend to post a follow-up bid to cause the proxy bid to
> raise to its maximum.
> It is far better to design the system to allow such behavior via legitimate
> means than to allow it only via trickery, especially when it is a commonly
> requested and useful feature.
I concur - if this is an often requested feature, maybe it should be
implemented. Still, as a seller, I don't like bidders being able to scare
other bidders away from my auction. This is a personal preference, of
course, and I do understand that no auction can suit all of my preferences,
and everyone else's. Your basis, though, I disagree with. It assumes that
people will act in a dishonest way - which is a certainty. However, to
circumvent the dishonest practice by allowing it in a different form is IMO
not the right solution. Either way, some auctions may allow it, and some
won't, so its moot.
> > In the event the auction designer feels that increments are necessary, I
> > have a recommendation. I bring this up as I don't design auction • software,
> > and there will indubitably be increments in any software made. Design it • so
> > that the bid a second bidder enters is only matched by the first bidder's
> > higher proxy. Meaning A places the opening bid of $50, with $100 proxy. • B
> > bids $60, and the current bid rises to $60, not $61, as most have it now.
> > This way, there is no chance to discover the other proxy without • exceeding
> > it.
> Excellent suggestion. My system is currently broken in that it would jump
> to $61. And although you still wouldn't know whether $61 was the max, you
> -would- know that $60 wasn't the max. Alternatively, if you now bid $100,
> you'll see it go back to the other bidder for the other bidder's max of • $100
> (not $101) and you would see that $100 was the max. This is an anomaly, so
> it probably should only have jumped to $60. I'll have to think about this
> more, but it sounds like a great recommendation!
I am pleased that for this we can see eye to eye. With all this
discussion, at least we have come up with one applicable adjustment. With
the number of complaints about various auctions, the only way to improve
them is to debate, and decide what needs to be and can be made better. (For
which Larry said, "Lets thrash this out now.") Maybe after years of this, a
perfect auction (sure) will be devised. I think every auction is "broken"
in at least a few places, and yours (Todd) is one of the best, because you
spent a lot of time on it, apparently giving everything more thought than
some others have. I appreciate that, and hope that bigger and broader
auctions will think things through as carefully.
> > Adding to that, only allow bids of incremental numbers. If the
> > increment is $1, only allow bids in even dollars. If the increment is • ten
> > only allow bids in that increment, such as $70, $80, but not $75. See?
> > This eliminates bumping, I think, if I am not overlooking anything this
> > time. I think this is what I was referring to earlier (above and • before),
> > but did not lay it out fully.
> This part sounds good too. If the increment is $10 and you don't allow • bids
> of $75, it's impossible for someone else to bid $75 and see their bid • bounce
> back to the other person at $75.
> It's important not to be able to see the other person's maximum even by
> outbidding them because they might have applied that maximum on several
> similar lots, and bidders could use this knowledge in a mischievous way.
> --Todd
One last point regarding eBay. The system which is so unfair, and causes
so many people frustration also causes many people pleasure. As with any
kind of "system", those who understand and know how to play (or cheat) the
system are able to be successful, and enjoy that success. So, the same
features which are aggravating to some, are also beneficial and pleasing to
others. Therefore, the users either learn eBay tactics or get out of the
ring. It is psychological (both the pleasure and the angst), and does not
give a beautiful view of humanity, but it is an accurate view. I am
defending it - eBay, like any person or system contrived by humans has its
shortcomings. But I have purchased many Lego sets there that I wanted and
also have sold them there without any hassles. I don't know of a place with
a better selection at any given time. From time to time there is great
emotional pain (for some thats harder to admit than others) especially
regarding one Yellow Castle I had wanted. I still don't know why I didn't
bid another $100 on that. The price I had already bid was well above the
realm of sanity, so why I stopped there, I still do not know. Maybe a
better auction will prove itself, maybe one already has. I hope I find it.
Apologies to anyone who has found my number of posts objectionable and
thanks to this who participated in this discussion. It has been
enlightening.
--
Have fun!
John ( jdiri14897@email.msn.com ) remove NOSPAM:
John's Lego Web Trade Page:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
MOC,CA[cl,bf,cr,fm,bk+++ wp,dm,rk,df++ fk-]++++(6035)
SW,TR,old(456)+++ TO++ PI,SP+ DU--
#+++++ S LS¼ Hy? M+ A+++ LM-- IC12m
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| (...) Yes, but a large measure of the pleasure is a negative pleasure, that of intentionally hurting other people. I'm pretty sure most people who snipe don't think much about it, they're just playing the game by the rules, but there are also plenty (...) (26 years ago, 23-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| (...) Large jumps delight me. I've had lots that were bickering in the $1 range suddenly be upped by bidder # 1 to $3. Then, after being raised to $3.10 by #2, the #1 it again to $7. I'm delighted because I wouldn't expect it to make it that far on (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| (...) Someone bids $100 with a proxy max of $500. Now it's climbed to $150 and the bidding is still hot, and the high bidder realizes he doesn't have $500 after all (maybe it was a typo, or maybe he was counting on some money to come in which didn't (...) (26 years ago, 22-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
|
|
|
|
