Subject:
|
Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Apr 1999 22:05:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1134 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.market.auction, jdiri14897@email.msn.com (John DiRienzo) writes:
> > 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.
>
> Sure, of course it's more honest if the bidder bows out honorable way. But
> not everyone is going to do that. If you allow people to renege on their
> high bid without any penalty or record-blackening, the result over time is
> many frustrated sellers as many acts of bid sabotaging. So there has to be
> a penalty for reneging. As long as there is a penalty for reneging, there
> are going to be people that try to figure out ways around the penalty. So
> you might as well allow people to lower their private maximums. If you
> don't, you'll spend all of your time either policing the system or
> responding to complaints.
I don't know if eBay spends ANY time policing their system. I am sure
they do, but its not evident. The feedback thing seems to be the main thing
thats used. And if you fail to pay for an item within reasonable time, you
will receive negative feedback.
>
> > Plus, it keeps bidders
> > honest with themselves from the get-go, without having the ability to
> > repeal a bid, except in extreme situations.
>
> What qualifies as an "extreme situation"? And what sort of black mark goes
> on the bidder's record for calling upon relief from an extreme situation?
The eBay rules don't give exact examples, but I conclude that they mean
anything that happens to a bidder which will make it very hard or impossible
to pay for the item he has bid on. The bidder must give an explanation to
the seller, not to eBay, and if the seller finds it reasonable, then he is
allowed to cancel that bidders bid(s). About a black mark, if you had to go
to the emergency room for whatever reason, and had to shell out all your
savings to pay for treatment, do you really believe you deserve a black mark
for being unable to pay?? eBay sellers do talk to one another, and if a
person backs out frequently, he will receive negative feedback. However, if
his reason is legitimate, and he is otherwise a good eBay participant, I
don't feel that a black mark is just. Of course, many bidders do not have
legitimate reasons, and never bother to pay, and they get negative feedback,
the black mark, which they deserve. I think this is straightforward and
allows for a good buying and selling environment, and it does work.
BS>> > 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.
> But you have no choice. The issue is a moot one: A bidder can always
> attempt to scare away other bidders in your auction, choosing from a myriad
> of techniques, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that you or I or
> anyone else as a seller can ever do about it.
No kidding! But why would I support a feature that simplifies this kind
of tactic, if I dislike these tactics? And, obviously, I can not eliminate
the wise bidding habits that a few people possess, but I can choose the
forum which makes those habits the least harmful to me.
> > 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.
> I think you misunderstand. The practice of making large bid jumps is not
> dishonest -- not by any stretch of the imagination. Show me an auction or
> barter or negotiation system anywhere in history or in the present where • the
> jumps are limited by rule to relatively small amounts and I'll show you a
> system that participants are wasting their time in, are acting dishonestly
> in, and are frustrated with.
No, I did not misunderstand. What you had written was something about
allowing firm bids because if you don't allow them, then bidders would
resort to devious bidding (using an alias) (see line marked "BS" above).
For that exact statement, there is no way in hell I could ever agree with
it. Its much like saying, "People do drugs and they must break the law
(rules) to use them, so, instead, lets legalize them and let doctors
prescribe them!"
I disagreed with the particular defense you had used for allowing firm
bids in a proxy system. I only lightly touched upon this asinine logic when
I stated that I disagreed with your "basis". For the record, I do not see
large bid jumps as dishonest, only disheartening for this auction
buyer/seller, who will likely use an auction that does not have that feature
(that avoids trickery!) enabled (but not necessarily). I am sure you have
other reasons (others have already posted some good ones) to allow firm bids
in a proxy environment, but the defense you chose to use definitely deserved
the argument that it received, and probably more, which it just received.
In other posts, I have seen some valid arguments that answered my question
(what is the use/need for firm bids in proxy auctions). For further
clarity, I also stated that as a seller I don't like firm bids, and that we
can drop this because some auctions will allow firm bids, and some won't, in
the line below.
> > Either way, some auctions may allow it, and some won't, so its moot.
> Actually, all auctions allow it. Yes, all auctions. It is mathematically
> impossible to design an auction system which prevents it so long as you
> don't control the minds and completely limit the intercommunication of the
> bidders. ("It" being the orchestration of large bid jumps.) So it's a • moot
> issue for a different reason. :)
Well, either way, its moot! Lets move on...
> > > > [$60 vs. $61]
> > > [agreement]
> > 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.
>
> Amen to that!
>
>
> > 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. [...]
>
> How do those two classes of people relate (those deriving pleasure from it
> and those being frustrated by it)? Is it a 50-50 mixture? 60-40? 20-80?
I don't know an exact percentage. Looking at the number of sales made,
and the price of the stock, I am guessing that there are more than a few
happy customers. I do believe the animosity that *seems* so prevalent is
only a small percentage of the actual users. I believe the happy users far
out weigh the disgruntled users.
> Would your mother or your grandmother derive pleasure or frustration from
> it? How about a grade school kid? How about high school kid on summer
> break?
God rest her soul... I firmly believe my grand mother would be in love
with eBay had she stuck around a little longer. Perhaps you are not asking
the right person, and I am confident you are aiming at the wrong niche - it
is amazing how many middle age or older ladies love eBay. But so do young
and old men. Using eBay quite a bit, I have dealt with a lot of happy
people. I have heard some "horror stories", in fact they aren't uncommon,
but people still manage to enjoy it. Of course, perfection has not been
achieved, and I personally hope that the smaller auctions can find their
niche on the net and that some auction can grow to compete with eBay on its
scale.
> --Todd
--
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 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| (...) You can't eliminate Firm Bids, PERIOD. If I wanted a firm bid of X in an auction that didn't allow them, I'd bid a Proxy of X-minincr and X. That's a waste of bidder's time, is it not? I personally use Ebay (and of course at least half of the (...) (26 years ago, 22-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| I like the idea of lugnet.market.auction.d (discussion) since most of the people must be looking for auctions in this particular group. Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) People like options. Right. But people, myself included, can hear of some (...) (26 years ago, 23-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
