Subject:
|
Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 18:21:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
549 times
|
| |
|
|
> > I agree that [eBay's] system has more than a few loose hoses, but
> > designed for the cashflow and glory of the designers and sellers?
>
> Sure, look at how successful the whole thing is from Wall Street's point of
> view: eBay's stock has been trading in the $200-$300 range for the past two
> months. On the day of their IPO last November, several people became
> instant millionaires overnight. You can retire on that kind of money.
> "It's a good business." :)
Fair enough. :) Relatively few people receive that cashflow from
eBay's operation/existence. Many more receive cashflow and/or save time
by finding the items they've been looking for, so I don't consider
eBay's money-making for its owners a significant issue. Anybody could
have come up with what eBay did (and arguably done a better job :) , but
I don't hold it against eBay that they happened to be the ones who did
it.
> > Their sniping didn't work, because they both made the false assumption
> > that they were going to be the last sniper standing. Proxy bidding
> > without sniping always works for me. I either get the product I want, or
> > I prevent myself from spending more than I wanted to.
>
> You've never lost out to a sniper and wished with 20-20 hindsight that you
> had gone just a teensy tiny bit higher in case the sniper's proxy bid was
> lower than you really would have gone?
Never. I hate second-guessing myself (or anyone else). It's also
possible that I don't care as much about what I bid on, in relation to
other bidders. I can't ever remember being outbid and disappointed in my
bid. To be sure, I was disappointed that I didn't get what I wanted at
the price I was willing to pay, but never disappointed in my
determination of my bid.
> > > I don't believe that for a second. I must be misunderstanding you. Let me
> > > see if I understand what you're saying... You're saying that you'd
> > > willingly pay $50.00 for something, but you wouldn't pay $50.01?
> >
> > That did sound ridiculous, didn't it. :) To clarify: Yes, that's
> > exactly right, but there's more to that 1 cent than just the money. In
> > addition to deciding what I'm willing to spend monetarily on something
> > at an auction service, I'm also making a *time* commitment. The person
> > who ekes in that extra $0.01 is also spending a half an hour on their
> > sniper perch.
>
> I wonder if sophisticated snipers have written eBay-monitoring scripts so
> that they don't have to spend that time. :)
True enough. :) But then they're doing the same thing I am--they have
a maximum bid, and they're not going to pay any higher. The only
difference is that my bid goes in at the beginning, and theirs goes in
at the end. The success of their "sniper scripts", when it happens, is
possible only because of people who are less efficient at "creeping"
their bids. Again, this is irrelevant to people who put in maximums
ahead of time.
> > So yes, if they're willing to spend 1 cent plus one half
> > hour more than I, more power to 'em. That's more than the total time +
> > money I'm willing to expend.
>
> Someone wastes away their life picking their nose and sitting on a sniper
> perch waiting to steal your bid away from you and you say more power to 'em?
>
> OK...
<laughing> That was the nicest phrase I could come up with for that
kind of practice. :) Like I said, you sure won't find me doing that.
The time they spend doing that is the time I spend doing something else
worthwhile (like building lego!). They're "better off" if they win, but
in no case am I ever worse off.
> > To the cent is extreme (very, huh? :), but within a couple percent
> > (usually a couple of dollars)? Absolutely.
>
> Interesting. :) OK, how do you figure at the time you place your bid that,
> say, $127 is a good number, $124 is insufficient, and $131 is too much?
> Just intuition?
Pretty much, although the difference between 124-127-131 isn't even 1%,
so that's like quibbling over $50 to $51. My bid formulation process
goes something like this: Figure out what sets I'd be willing to trade
for the set I want, if I had the option. Research what the desired set
has done in the past on RTL, Lugnet, and eBay, and do the same for the
"tradable" sets. If the two numbers are pretty close, then I know that
I've got a shot at winning the set. So I bid the worth of the "tradable"
sets, plus a little more for quibble room/margin of error.
Concrete example: I sold my yellow castle about a month ago. It was
complete, with instructions, and in decent shape. I would have loved to
have had a Futuron Monorail in similar condition. I would have been
willing to trade the yellow castle, plus another smaller set, for the
monorail. The going price for the castle at the time was about $180. Add
$20 for additional smaller set. Finally, add another $10 that I'd be
willing to quibble over if push came to shove. So that comes to $210,
and at the time, that was my maximum valuation for a Futuron Monorail.
That also happened to be about the going price for the monorail, but
nobody had one available for trade or sale at the time. If I had bid on
a monorail for $210, and got outbid by $212, they superceded my bid
amount *and* my quibble amount. Because I factor in quibble room on my
bids, being outbid by a couple of dollars doesn't bother me.
<snip>
> > original bid we desire. If you meant that eBay's system of rigid time
> > limits prevent accurate bid changes or "quibbling", then I think that we
> > may need to agree to disagree on the importance of being able to do so.
>
> OK, that probably sums it up perfectly. You are able to guess your maximums
> accurately enough that your are able to place little (or no) importance on
> the ability to tinker with a bid (specifically, additional chances to rebid
> when outbid, even near the end).
>
> Now let's turn that on its head.
>
> What would you do in the following scenario?--
>
> You have a budget of $200 which you intend to spend on acquiring old long-
> lost Space sets for your collection. Someone comes along on eBay and offers
> up five different old sets for sale simultaneously, all with nearly
> identical closing dates (oh, say, within a half hour of each other).
Good example! Especially since I'm a space nut. :)
> The opening bids on these sets range from $50 to $100, and you know from
> experience that the prices on these particular sets will probably climb to
> between $75 and $150.
>
> You'd really like to acquire two of these sets, three if possible.
>
> How do you place your proxy bids?
If $200 is my absolute maximum, I choose the sets on which to bid,
based on what is most important to me, and what I believe to be the
least important to others. Based on those prices, I'm probably only
going to shoot for two. If those sets have a chance to peak at $150,
trying to pull off three sets with only $200 isn't likely. So I bid $100
on two of the sets.
> What are the possible outcomes of those bids (collectively)?
Staying away from the unlikely extremes ($50 for each set, and $150 for
each set), it will most likely be a variation of two or three sets in
the $75-$100 range, and two or three sets in the $100-$125 range. In
other words, I've statistically got about a 25% chance of getting both
sets or neither set, and about a 50% chance of getting one set. So 75%
chance says I'll get at least one set without sitting around the
computer. While that only gives me about a 25% chance of getting both
sets, I think factoring in my estimations of which sets will go and
which won't will help that figure.
Now, if all five auctions ended pretty close to each other (say, in the
span of about half an hour to an hour), I would be sitting around with
five browser windows open for that time, just as I would spend the hour
at a real-life auction. But *only* if I knew that I had a *very* decent
shot (almost a sure thing) at getting two sets that I really wanted.
That's the crux of the misconception that I think people have about
online auctions, or at least doesn't affect me the way it seems to
affect others. To me, bidding on an auction is not about what an item is
generally worth. It's about what the item is worth *to me*. 5 items with
an almost guaranteed shot at two for $200 plus an hour of my time is
worth it. If those same 5 items were spread out over the course of the
day, forget it. Two proxy bids, and that's it. Maybe I don't come up
with anything. But I didn't lose my $200, and I didn't lose much time,
and there will be more space lego.
Adam
bwappo@ee.net
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
| (...) Sure, look at how successful the whole thing is from Wall Street's point of view: eBay's stock has been trading in the $200-$300 range for the past two months. On the day of their IPO last November, several people became instant millionaires (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
