On Apr 21, 3:10 pm, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> MdntTrain wrote:
> >>But I don't want my bid to be an emotional incentive to someone
> >>who will outbid me, or at least drive up the final bid, who would
> >>not have done so without my bid as an "incentive".
>
> > You seem to be arguing for the merits of sniping.. ;-)
>
> That's exactly what I'm arguing for. ;-)
>
> Ever since my third auction, I've sniped. It became clear to me
> that sniping was the most rational strategy for winning items at
> the lowest cost.
>
> > But I could also argue that putting in a bid *sooner* without the time
> > pressure, would lower emotional incentives for others to bid
> > recklessly.
>
> There are ways to snipe that allow setting the snipe amount
> far in advance, without any emotion or middle-of-the-night
> woes. I don't even "follow" the auction--I just wait to see
> if I won or lost.
>
> I'm usually happier when I win, but I'm satisfied when I lose.
>
> > But key here is the word, "auction." In a real auction,
> > people get to bid against each other.. until no one else has a higher
> > bid, at which point item is truly sold to highest bidder. Ebay, for
> > better or worse, is a perversion of normal auctioning... where items
> > are often sold to not what might have been the highest bidder, but to
> > whomever got in the last highest bid before the clock ran out. Kinda
> > a weird process.. trying to minimize amount to seller, yet outrun
> > other bidders.
>
> There are many different types of auctions. The kind you describe
> is a common type, in which it is hoped that the emotional competitive
> spirit of the crowd and the clever incitement of the auctioneer will
> raise prices for the sellers.
>
> But another common type, used often in business and government when
> large amounts are at stake, is the sealed-bid auction, in which all
> bidders submit sealed bids which are opened at the "closing time"
> to see who won.
>
> I much prefer the sealed-bid auction, since it avoids the emotional
> games--though it does introduce an element of strategy if you know
> who the other bidders are.
>
> eBay auctions are hybrid auctions, with both interactive bidding--
> significantly augmented by automated proxy bidding--and last-minute
> "sealed-bid" bidding.
>
> >>I don't see any advantage to tipping my hand in a "gentlemanly" way,
> >>and it sounds like you're willing to pay a 10% premium. I do not
> >>notice any "gentlemanly" protocols on eBay--just people.
>
> > There's no advantage to it, other than just me wanting to show a
> > little bit of honor in the process. Since I tend to snipe, which some
> > view as dishonorable, I at least advertise my presence to the auction
> > several days before the bloodletting.
>
> Ah--like saying "Check" in chess or "Atari" in Go. ;-)
>
> There is no dishonor in sniping--just people who misunderstand its
> advantages. Even the slang name, "snipe", has a negative connotation
> based on some presupposition that everyone has a right to know who
> they are bidding against. eBays recent "cloaking" of bidders IDs
> clearly shows that they disagree with that proposition.
>
> There is nothing unfair about using the published rules of the
> auction to gain some advantage against those who wish that the
> rules were different.
>
> People who think sniping is wrong actually think that the eBay
> auction rules are wrong. Many would like to change them (as the
> original post in this thread suggests) to extend the closing time
> anytime a bid is received. That's simply *their idea* of what a
> "good" auction is.
>
> A good auction is whatever the rules say it is--and that disconnect
> puts people who disagree at a strategic disadvantage.
>
> I responded to the OP stating my opinion that eBay-style auctions
> have much to recommend them, clearly for buyers and, as noted in
> earlier posts, even for sellers (who would not like to open their
> auctions to indefinite extension by a series of minimum bid increments).
>
> The "anti-sniping" auction rule essentially means that bidding will
> go on until all but one deep-pocketed competitive bidder gives up,
> often having bid more than he or she intended (though I suspect that
> over-bidding is usually a result of testosterone poisoning ;-).
>
> Why that outcome is "fairer" eludes me.
>
> >>Perhaps you intend your early "announcement" bid for your friends,
> >>who, upon seeing your interest, may lay off the item.
>
> > Neither friends, nor pack of wolves. Just about honor.
>
> I guess I don't see what principle is involved here. It's just
> a matter of converting the auction to sealed-bid. Proxy bidding
> does something similar, but puts your bid into an "envelope" that
> others can steam open (at some risk of becoming high bidder themselves).
>
> >>If you're mad if someone got an item for $2 over your max bid, then
> >>your *real* max bid was at least $2 higher--it's the bid for which
> >>you say "let them have it".
>
> > IN practice, that doesn't work well for me, because it ALWAYS seems
> > like, "what's another mere 50 cents, or mere $2?". No, I first have
> > to pick my max that I'm comfortable with, then pick a percentage over
> > it. A head fake. I get angry if I pay over my max, but at least
> > don't suffer the "but if only for another 50 cents! dammmmitttt!@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
>
> Yes, that's a fundamental issue with proxy bidding and minimum bid
> increments--the selling price is set by the *second* highest bidder,
> and the winner gets it for one minimum bid amount over that price.
> As a result, the second highest bidder always "loses by a hair", which
> can raise emotions and regrets--"If I'd only..."
>
> But, in fact, you have no idea what the winner's maximum bid was, only
> that they were willing to pay more than you.
>
> If your "head fake" works for you, great. ;-)
>
>
>
> >>If you bid your real max bid as a snipe, you will either: 1) lose the
> >>item to someone paying more than you would be happy with, or 2) win
> >>the item for a price you are happy with, and often at a substantial
> >>discount. There is no outcome which is unhappy--except possibly
> >>a regret that someone else wanted it more than you did.
>
> > So taking what you just said, if I bid my real max + overhead
> > percentage, I either: 1) lose item to someone willing to pay way more
> > than I was at which point I'm only feeling astonishment that someone
> > would be so loose with their money, or 2) win the item at my max or
> > under (thus am perfectly happy), or 3) win the item in my OVERHEAD
> > ZONE.. at which point I'm really pissed that someone caused such COST
> > to me, but happy that I have the damn item.
>
> > I know. I'm weird. lol.
>
> No, just human! ;-)
>
> -michael
>
> NadaPong: Network game demo for Apple II computers!
> Home page: http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/
>
> "The wastebasket is our most im****tant design
> tool--and it's seriously underused."
eBay auctions are, to me at least, a version of a "silent" auction.
For anyone who doesn't know what a silent auction is I'll try to
explain simple and short. Basically you have an item up for auction
with a sheet of paper by it where you write your name and the amount
you will pay for the item, if someone raises the bid you can of course
raise your bid. There is a set amount of time to the silent auction
and whoever has the highest bid when time is up wins the item.
The difference with eBay is that you can put in your max bid at the
start, unless like me you prefer to use a snipe program, and eBay will
incrementally raise your bid for you if someone else raises the bid.
Like Michael I prefer to snipe because that way I set what I'm willing
to pay and either win it or lose it without having to watch the
auction to the end.
Just my two cents worth,
Dean
|
