Subject:
|
Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Fri, 8 Oct 1999 19:06:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2214 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.theory, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> James Brown wrote:
> >
> > That is how eBay does it, I believe. However, Larry (among others, myself
> > included) feels that you should be required to exceed the proxy by the • minimum
> > bid, not just the current bid. I'll let Larry explain the reasoning behind
> > this, he's better at it than I am.(1)
>
> I was going to chime in with an explanation like Eric's but now I don't
> have to. I would be keen to hear an explanation of why one proxy should
> have to beat another by a full increment.
>
> Say I'm selling my car and the current bid is $5,000 and the bid step is
> $500 (example step, not the ones eBay uses). If two bidders place proxy
> bids of $6,000 and $6,300 which one should get it?
>
> My opinion is that the one willing to pay more should, but it sounds
> like you and Larry think that the one who placed the bid first
> (regardless of being lower) should. Do you think that because of some
> innate fairness issue or because of the verbiage used by eBay in
> discussing how it works?
Well, it's sort of an innate fairness, I suppose, but also partly a difference
of opinion about what a proxy bid is. I'll attempt an explanation.
1: eBay as written, allows the system to be cheated. Let's assume, for the
sake of argument, that (in your example above) 1 bidder places a proxy of
$6000. The second bidder, uses a shill account to bid $99999999, and sees
that he gets it at $6500. He then withdraws the shill bid, the first bidder's
bid gets re-instated, and he uses his real account to bid $6000.01, saving
himself ~$500.
2:In a more theoretical sense, is it not nonsensical for minimum increments to
apply to some bids and not others? A bid is a bid is a bid. It doesn't
matter whether you place the bid yourself, or instruct the system to place the
bid for you. If a bid is placed on my behalf, anyone attempting to exceed
that bid should need to exceed it by the minimum increment.
3:Essentially, eBay is lazy. It doesn't negotiate the bids out (like Auczilla
does, for example. see: http://www.auczilla.com/lego/x/7.html for a more in-
depth explanation there), but instead simply uses (AFAICT) a simple less
than/greater than equation. So, it will check an incoming bid. If it is
greater than the current bid ->by at least the minimum increment<- and it is
greater than the proxy ->by any amount <- it will accept the new bid.
Ironically enough, eBay has no problems with faulty internal logic. Check
their definition of 'minimum increment', and see if you can spot the
inconsitency:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/basics/g-bid-increment.html
HTH
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken
|
| (...) bid of $10 for fifteen identical lots with the current bid at $3. I come along and say, "Wow, look at those!" and bid $12 on one lot, Auczilla will proxy every single lot you have up to $10. That will basically cause some dissatisfaction. (...) (27 years ago, 10-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken
|
| (...) I was going to chime in with an explanation like Eric's but now I don't have to. I would be keen to hear an explanation of why one proxy should have to beat another by a full increment. Say I'm selling my car and the current bid is $5,000 and (...) (27 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
