 | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) preface: eBay can do it whatever way they want. And the URL given later in the thread makes it clear they acknowledge the way they do it may result in a bump. Their place, their rules. My thesis is NOT that they "can't" run things that way, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | (...) Success isn't always about being best, sometimes it's much more about being first, and as far as I remember, eBay WAS the first major auction site. (25 years ago, 9-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Steve Demlow
|
| | | | | (...) E-bay now has the popularity/momentum/visibility to do just about whatever they want and continue to get away with it. I find it unfortunate that their somewhat sloppy idea of online auctioning is now considered the standard. Steve (25 years ago, 10-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | In lugnet.market.theory, Larry Pieniazek writes: <major snippage> (...) My two cents worth (had to outbid that lousy 1 cent raise) is I'm with Larry. In his example, PF bid $50 *first*. It is now incumbent upon any bidder to raise it by the minimum (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Naji Norder
|
| | | | From a seller's standpoint, a proxy bid is not as powerful as a "FIRM" bid. A proxy is better than a minimum bid (with no proxy) though. High Firm Bid -------- | | (proxies in here somewhere) | | -------- Minimum Bid The question is, where should a (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Steve Demlow
|
| | | | (...) Yes. I haven't seen any disagreement on this one, except from e-bay. :/ (...) No. Philosophically, AFAIC, a bid is a bid - proxy or not - and shouldn't be retractable. There is also at least one practical problem with proxy retraction: timing. (...) (25 years ago, 16-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) I tend to say no. Part of a proxy is the notion of what TIME it was given. If I am at 30, have a proxy for 50 which I then raise to 70, it seems to me that the 50-70 part should not be stamped as having the same TIME as the earlier 30-50 part. (...) (25 years ago, 16-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: why eBay proxy bidding is broken —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) I tend to say yes, with the proviso that the time-stamp gets updated, so the bid looks newer. But I wouldn't give this capability a high priority on the implementation schedule. Steve (25 years ago, 18-Oct-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
| | | | |
