audio recording on IC -help wanted

[Michael A. Covington]

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i8hqblki7m573@corp.supernews.com...

My own personal feeling is that you (and others) are engaged in a
somewhat quixotic quest here. You're trying to persuade eBay (or some
other site) that there is One True Right And Best Way to run auctions,

eBay already offers some alternatives, such as reserve auctions; maybe
they'll offer another.

What I *actually* advocate is eliminating sniping by automatically extending
the auction as long as bids are going up sufficiently fast. That's how
real, live auctioneers work.

eBay could offer this as an alternative, too, and let people choose it if
they want.

A "sealed bid, winner pays second-highest bid plus minimum increment
at that level" would certainly have some advantages for some parties.
It would add the sort of sense-of-fairness that you seem to desire,
and it would (as you note) eliminate the advantages of sniping over
non-sniping. That might be good.

On the other hand, it would eliminate feeding-frenzy bidding wars,
which would probably be good for buyers as a group, bad for sellers,
and bad for eBay (all for the same reason: it'd lower the average
winning bid by some amount).

But sniping already eliminates that. With auto-sniping, you can't see other
people bidding against you.

It'd also remove the sense of
gambling-excitement which some customers seem to feel (or crave?) and
might reduce eBay's attractiveness to people who go in for gambling.

Yes... people have told me they enjoy the game of sniping. But auto-sniping
software is eliminating that game, too.

If you truly feel that there's a different set of auction rules which
result in a superior system, do what eBay did - go out and create a
system which uses them, publicize it, and support it. If it's really
superior, in the eyes of the public, it might win business away from
eBay.

Been there, done that... www.astromart.com. I was involved in helping
them design their auction system. It's mainly for amateur astronomy,
though; there isn't much non-astronomical merchandise.

At this point it's getting repetitious. This has been a long thread. I
encourage people who tuned in late to look back over it.

VY 73
N4TMI

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Commander Dave" <cmdr-dave@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:10i64n88hom2646@corp.supernews.com...

The advantage of sniping is that you disguise your interest in an item
and
avoiding "bidding fever" by the other guys.

You don't change the bidding fever; it still goes on between the other
bidders. You, the sniper, just don't participate.

If you bid your max, and someone comes along and bids their max (which
is
below yours), they instantly know they lost the auction unless they
bid
more. So frequently they decide to bid more after all... which up's
the
price (a bidding war). If you snipe, they other guy bids his max and
he is
the high bidder until you snipe it and win (or lose as the case may
be). The
other guy has no chance to rethink his max bid.

Bidders shouldn't have to rethink, if they've assessed the auction
properly. If they absolutely have to have the item, then they should
reflect that in their initial bid. Anyone that bids a second time is
trying to have his cake and eat it: he's trying to outbid others, but
not give the seller too much. But with ebay, the seller never gets the
maximum bid amount, he only gets the second highest bidder's amount. So
there is no point in rebidding a higher amount. The initial bid should
be your final bid. You should never get into a bidding war, you should
look for another auction for the same item.

Someone said that the seller gets a small increment more than the second
highest bidder. But that's not always true. If two bidders bid the
same amount, the bidder with the earliest bid wins and the seller gets
the second highest bidder's bid amount, which happened to be the same as
the earliest bidder.

Of course, you don't win everything by sniping. You still have to
determine
your max bid ahead of time, but sniping can make a difference. I've
gotten
hate mail before when I've won an auction by sniping.

Make a difference, but what difference? What advantage does sniping
give?

I've been sniped out of a few bids. I bid three times on a collectible.
The first two I bid $70 and was outbid and lost by a dollar, and the
second I reassessed and bid $75, and lost by a dollar. The third bid -
these things are old, and the finish was a bit pitted, so I bid $60 and
got it for $40. So I made out better than if I had bid too much for the
first two. I knew from searching for the item on the internet that I
could buy one new old stock in the original package for a hundred, so I
wasn't going to bid that much on ebay. I got what I wanted for less
than half the price of a NOS one. And I didn't get into a bidding,
sniping war with the first two auctions.

And then there are the snipers who get into a sniping war. They snipe
each other. Seems to me the snipers are like those women in their huge
SUVs who zoom past you at 50 on a 40 MPH street, and end up waiting at
the stop light, where us other law-abiding people catch up to them. ;-)

Other problems with sniping is that if the bids are low on an item,
the
seller will sometimes pull the auction thinking he won't get what he
wants
for the item. Live by the sword and die by the sword... but of course,
another similar item will eventually come along.

My 2 cents...
-Commander Dave

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com
wrote:

Why should it be? You place your maximum (sensible, informed) bid,
come
back after the auction has ended, and find out if you won. What
diff
does it make if bidders wait to the last millisecond to bid?


--
John Miller

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cfvg41$jrp$1@n4vu.com...

Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover" wrote:
Why should it be? You place your maximum (sensible, informed) bid,
come
back after the auction has ended, and find out if you won. What
diff
does it make if bidders wait to the last millisecond to bid?

Because if it's an in-demand item and you place your max bid days or
hours
before the end, and it's a sensible bid (as opposed to unreasonably
high),
the probability of losing is pretty high. Why? Because visibilty of
your
bid provides other people, who may not have your good judgment
regarding a
reasonable max price, with the opportunity to bid the item up to an
unreasonable amount.

Your maximum bid isn't visible.

There is no "sensible bid (as opposed to unreasonably high)" A bid is a
reflection of what you're willing to pay. If one bidder is willing to
pay twice as much for an item, it wasn't unreasonably high to him.

The probability of losing by sniping is pretty high. All he gets to see
is that he's lost the bid later.

Fools who don't have your good judgment should be allowed to bid the
item up to as much as they want to pay (hey, it's an auction!), and if
they pay too much, that's okay. A fool ans his money are soon parted.

--
John Miller

 

[John Miller]

Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover" wrote:

Your maximum bid isn't visible.

Never said it was. Please re-read.

--
John Miller
Email address: domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

Wanna buy a duck?

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in message
news:41237bb2$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com
wrote
in message news:10i5trsnut3cm6c@corp.supernews.com...

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in
message
news:41229583@mustang.speedfactory.net...

But how could sniping be eliminated?

As I said a while back, do what www.astromart.com does and do what
real
auctioneers do: Extend the bidding as long as the bids are still
going
up by
more than a specified small percentage. Instead of stopping at a
prearranged time, you stop as soon after that time as the bidding
actually
stops.

But what is this supposed to accomplish? Take away the advantage of
sniping? Looks to me that they don't really have that much of an
advantage, because they still have to do what the other bidders to,
bid
a maximum amount they're willing to pay. They, too, must wait until
the
auction is over to find out who won.

Why do traditional auctioneers do it? Because it leads to higher
selling
prices.

And it does that by making it a completely open auction. Some people
are
willing to pay more if they *know* that others are willing to pay
more.

Also, people who are inexperienced in a particular field want to see
each
other's bids, to help them judge what something is worth on the open
market.

eBay pretends to be an open auction, but because of sniping, it works
like a
sealed-bid auction (except that the second-highest bid actually sets
the
price). If sniping is welcome, eBay should perhaps abandon all
pretense of
being an open auction.

But Ebay is Ebay, and everyone has to play by their rules.

Sellers have some options, too. They can put a reserve on the item.
They can do a minimum bid. They can do 'buy it now'. Snipers can't do
anything about those things. That's why they probably don't snipe those
items.

Mike, I see you're trying to make a point, but what is this supposed to
do? Is it supposed to take away buyers' advantages and give them to the
seller? Or is it supposed to take away the sniper's advantages and give
them to the other buyers? What is this 'wrong' that you're trying to
right?

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Don Bruder" <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:LbNUc.8416$54.122899@typhoon.sonic.net...

In article <41237ab7@mustang.speedfactory.net>,
"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote:

Sadly, there are those who view sniping as a sport (a kind of
racing) and
who have lost sight of the real purpose of the auction. Sorry, I
don't go
to eBay to play sniping games... I go there to buy and sell things.

Which is precisely the reason I am, and will continue to be, a sniper.

I'm not interested in bidding games. I want the item. I know what it's
worth to me. I could care less what it's worth to you. And I damn well
don't care at all if some poor seller doesn't get top-dollar for a
"commodity" item.

Therefore, I figure out what I'm willing to pay when I find a listing
that interests me, then I sit back until a second or two before the
end
of the auction, and drop that amount in as a bid. So far, I've never
paid more than I valued the item at, and have never been "out-sniped".

Those of you crying foul overhaving an item sniped out from under
you...
"Too bad, so sad". You should have bid what you were willing to pay,
and
made sure that amount was more than what I was willing to pay.

And that's the long and short of it: You anti-sniping folks are crying
because you got something taken away from you by someone who knew what
they wanted, knew what it was worth to them, and wanted it worse than
you did. Get over it.

--
Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net

I think most of the whining is because the bidders have their hopes
dashed at the last moment.

Well, DUH!

If you really wanted the item that bad, you should've bid more for it!

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg07iv$q64$1@n4vu.com...

Michael A. Covington wrote:
Sadly, there are those who view sniping as a sport (a kind of
racing) and
who have lost sight of the real purpose of the auction.

Let's be fair, Michael. We know you don't like sniping, but I can't
imagine
anyone sniping just for the sport of it, whose real purpose isn't to
buy
something. (Oh, I can imagine it, but we also have to know that kind
of
behavior is pretty self-limiting.)

Sorry, I don't go
to eBay to play sniping games... I go there to buy and sell things.

There's no sincerer eBay purchaser than me, and I've discovered
through
hard-won experience that the practical way to be successful in eBay
auctions is to snipe.

What's the advantage?

Sniping or not, You bid low, You Lose.

Don't think for a minute that I prefer it that way, but the world is
what it
is, and not always what we would wish for it to be.
--
John Miller
Email address: domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

"It doesn't much signify whom one marries for one is sure to find out
next
morning it was someone else."
-Rogers

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i7ai5jnntfn77@corp.supernews.com...

In article <LbNUc.8416$54.122899@typhoon.sonic.net>,
Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:

Sadly, there are those who view sniping as a sport (a kind of
racing) and
who have lost sight of the real purpose of the auction. Sorry, I
don't go
to eBay to play sniping games... I go there to buy and sell things.

Which is precisely the reason I am, and will continue to be, a
sniper.

I'm not interested in bidding games. I want the item. I know what
it's
worth to me. I could care less what it's worth to you. And I damn
well
don't care at all if some poor seller doesn't get top-dollar for a
"commodity" item.

Therefore, I figure out what I'm willing to pay when I find a listing
that interests me, then I sit back until a second or two before the
end
of the auction, and drop that amount in as a bid. So far, I've never
paid more than I valued the item at, and have never been
"out-sniped".

My own feelings, and my own experience are similar to yours. I do use
sniping software, to avoid triggering peoples' "bidding war"
instincts.

Bidding war? Instincts? It's an AUCTION, for cryin' out loud!

I've lost an occasional sniped auction because I *was* outbid...
sometimes by another sniper, more often by someone who put in a bid
higher than mine several hours or days earlier, and once because my
high bid didn't meet the seller's reserve price. All of these are
"fair" losses, to my mind... I simply wasn't willing to pay as much
for the item, as someone else felt that it was worth to him/her.

That's the whole point. Sniping doesn't stop you from losing. The only
thing that stops you from losing is to bid the right amount, whether you
snipe or not.

Those of you crying foul overhaving an item sniped out from under
you...
"Too bad, so sad". You should have bid what you were willing to pay,
and
made sure that amount was more than what I was willing to pay.

Right. And, eBay makes this point very explicitly in their FAQ.

eBay's auction style works to the advantage of the knowledgeable
buyer. It's similar to the old "auction by candle" style.

An auction system which keeps the auction open until bids stop
arriving tends to favor the seller, as it promotes real-time bidding
wars.

The seller already has his options, reserve, minimum bid, buy it now,
etc.

eBay may have made a very explicit decision *not* to use this auction
style, for any of several reasons. One might be that an auction
system which favors the seller, can end up with higher overall
winning-bid prices, which would then tend to eliminate any reputation
that the site has for being "a bargain place to buy." A lot of people
feel that eBay is a buyer's-bargain marketplace, even though (as
several people have noted) this often isn't the case.

If ebay was as bad as it has been portrayed here, then it wouldn't be as
popular as it is.

And that's the long and short of it: You anti-sniping folks are
crying
because you got something taken away from you by someone who knew
what
they wanted, knew what it was worth to them, and wanted it worse than
you did. Get over it.

And, let's also note that using sniping works to the *dis*advantage
of a sniper who doesn't think his/her "maximum bid" value out very
carefully in advance. If you set your snipe time very close to the
limit (so that it's a true snipe and not just a last-minute bid), and
you don't exceed an earlier bidder's high limit, you have *no* time to
react and re-bid.

Exactly. That hidden amount takes away much of the sniper's advantage.

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org
AE6EO

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in message
news:4123f05c$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg07iv$q64$1@n4vu.com...
Michael A. Covington wrote:
Sadly, there are those who view sniping as a sport (a kind of
racing) and
who have lost sight of the real purpose of the auction.

Let's be fair, Michael. We know you don't like sniping, but I can't
imagine
anyone sniping just for the sport of it, whose real purpose isn't to
buy
something. (Oh, I can imagine it, but we also have to know that
kind of
behavior is pretty self-limiting.)

People told me they did that, when I was gathering information to
advise the
people at Astromart. I was surprised.


Don't think for a minute that I prefer it that way, but the world is
what
it
is, and not always what we would wish for it to be.

But there's more than one way to run an auction, and we shouldn't
assume
eBay has it perfect.

Perfect? No. Good enough? Well, the easy way to judge that is now big
a share of the online market ebay has. Just about all of it, so ebay
has it good ebough.

When you can say that about astromart, then we'll start believing you.
But loing before that time, ebay will add a choice for the seller to
make, whether he wants to extend the ending time. And people than can
make their own choices
on ebay.

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i7sfrorfghq64@corp.supernews.com...

In article <4123efda$1@mustang.speedfactory.net>,
Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote:

And that's the long and short of it: You anti-sniping folks are
crying
because you got something taken away from you by someone who knew
what
they wanted, knew what it was worth to them, and wanted it worse
than
you did. Get over it.

Er... Can't we say the same to YOU? If you know what you're willing
to pay,
why do you snipe?

Because, I think, that doing a snipe (with a value of "the maximum I'm
actually willing to pay") generates a higher number of wins, and a
lower average winning bid, than doing a non-snipe with exactly the
same value.

I don't think the diff is enough to make it worthwhile. There are other
factors that are more important. Choosing a seller that doesn't accept
Paypal usually gets you a lot lower bid. But you may have to go to the
P.O. and buy a a money order. Etc., Etc. Etc.

The reason is that many competing bidders do *not* follow the eBay
recommendation of "bid your maximum" - they try to game the bids in
real time, and they tend to get caught up in emotional bidding wars.

It's an AUCTION! DUH!

Against competitors who follow the "know what it's worth to you; bid
that much, and no more" rule, sniping is powerless.

Excellent point.

Against competitors who don't follow this rule, sniping raises your
chances of winning (because competitors don't have an opportunity to
bid up),

Not true! YOU don't have the opportunity to join the bidding war! It
*goes on* without you!

and can also reduce your costs (because competitors are less
likely to be stimulated into a feeding-frenzy bid-it-up battle).

No, competitors still are competitors, just that YOU are not one of
them!

Yes, it will still reduce your costs, because you lost the auction!

Sniping also gives you additional time to do research (deciding what
the item is actually worth) or look for alternatives (e.g.
newly-listed items which you'd prefer to wait for).

Adding an auction to your watch list gives you time.

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org
AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page:
http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

 

[Michael A. Covington]

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote
in message news:10i8urafbs376a9@corp.supernews.com...

And then there are the snipers who get into a sniping war. They snipe
each other. Seems to me the snipers are like those women in their huge
SUVs who zoom past you at 50 on a 40 MPH street, and end up waiting at
the stop light, where us other law-abiding people catch up to them. ;-)

Well said! In short, all sniping achieves is to annoy people.

 

[Michael A. Covington]

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote
in message news:10i91nnhd8thocc@corp.supernews.com...

Mike, I see you're trying to make a point, but what is this supposed to
do? Is it supposed to take away buyers' advantages and give them to the
seller? Or is it supposed to take away the sniper's advantages and give
them to the other buyers? What is this 'wrong' that you're trying to
right?

Simply this: Sniping is an inefficient way of doing what it does. Proxy
bidding by sealed bids would accomplish the same thing (concealing
everyone's bids until the last minute) with a lot less work for everybody,
and with complete assurance that everyone's bid actually does get
considered.

In a typical eBay auction today, you have 3 things that I think are either a
waste of effort or a source of economic inefficiency:
(1) The bids that are displayed do not reflect the bids that are actually
going to take place, because most bidding (not all) is withheld until the
last minute;
(2) People who want to snipe have no assurance they will actually get
their bids in. A slight computer delay, or a slight miscalculation of the
time, and *poof* -- they're out.
(3) People can't tell which kind of auction they're in, so they don't know
whether to conclude anything from the published bids. The published bids
are useful information only if the snipers haven't lined up.

So if you think sniping is good, sealed-bid proxy auctions (where all bids
are concealed and the second highest bid determines the selling price) are a
better way of doing the same thing.

And if you think sniping is bad, auctions ought to be snipe-proof somehow,
such as by automatically extending the time as long as bids are rising.

I wish eBay would offer both of these as options (alongside the various
kinds of auctions they offer now) and see what people actually like.

In short -- We're not finished inventing the online auction. eBay isn't
perfect, just as UNIX isn't perfect, even though each has a large crowd who
think it is.

 

[Michael A. Covington]

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote
in message news:10i92fpmkpbic65@corp.supernews.com...

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg07iv$q64$1@n4vu.com...

There's no sincerer eBay purchaser than me, and I've discovered
through
hard-won experience that the practical way to be successful in eBay
auctions is to snipe.

What's the advantage?

Sniping or not, You bid low, You Lose.

See how little consensus there is about the real effect of sniping? I think
this is because sniping is an unreliable and inefficient way of doing what
it does. Sealed bids would do the job reliably.

 

[Don James]

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in message news:<4123efda$1@mustang.speedfactory.net>...

"Don Bruder" <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:LbNUc.8416$54.122899@typhoon.sonic.net...
And that's the long and short of it: You anti-sniping folks are crying
because you got something taken away from you by someone who knew what
they wanted, knew what it was worth to them, and wanted it worse than
you did. Get over it.

Er... Can't we say the same to YOU? If you know what you're willing to pay,
why do you snipe? Why don't you do what you're telling us to do?

Michael, there are many advantages to bidding very late besides
possibly getting a lower price:

1) I'm less likely to be shilled (yes, shill bidding happens on eBay,
and it costs buyers a lot of money)

2) I don't have to wait for the auction to be over before I bid on
another similar item (remember, even if you're outbid on eBay, a
retraction or cancellation can make you the winner; if you don't want
two of something, you have to wait for the auction to end once you've
bid)

3) I don't become someone's "personal shopper" (someone who bids early
on a lot of items, allowing others to find things by scanning his
bidding history)

4) I'm less likely to get "auction fever" and bid more than I can
afford; I get one shot, and have to decide how much an item is really
worth to me.

There are others, but the point is that sniping isn't done just to
take advantage of the uninformed bidder. It would be fine with me if
eBay restricted people to one bid per item (as you suggested), but I
think they like the bidding wars.

Automatic extensions may be OK for some sites, but I doubt they'd be
well-received in a global, 24/7 environment like eBay. You're
proposing a system that would virtually require users to be at their
computers when an auction is ending, in order to defend their bids (I
wouldn't expect eBay's proxy bidding system to survive if other
bidders could nibble away at the proxy for as long as they wanted;
that would be paradise for shill-bidders and "win at all costs"
bidders). That gives me a one-hour time window; if an auction for
something I want doesn't end in that window, I won't be bidding. That
doesn't sound like an effective system to me.

BTW, Yahoo Auctions offers extensions as an option. It's rarely used.
If eBay offered it, I'd expect the same level of success.

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg0sar$vpu$1@n4vu.com...

Michael A. Covington wrote:
But there's more than one way to run an auction, and we shouldn't
assume
eBay has it perfect.

Absolutely. And if your notion is more acceptable to the marketplace,
it's
a grand opportunity for someone (maybe you) to become a billionaire by
starting an auction site with that superior business model, and
gaining
more market share than eBay.

Snowball's chance in hell. I'm not saying it can't be done, but there
are other auctions beside Ebay and they're not gaining market share
apparently.

--
John Miller
Email address: domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in message
news:4124066e$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg0sar$vpu$1@n4vu.com...
Michael A. Covington wrote:
But there's more than one way to run an auction, and we shouldn't
assume eBay has it perfect.

Absolutely. And if your notion is more acceptable to the
marketplace,
it's
a grand opportunity for someone (maybe you) to become a billionaire
by
starting an auction site with that superior business model, and
gaining
more market share than eBay.

I'm not a business partner -- I was just one of the people they sought
advice from -- but that's the idea behind www.astromart.com. For
amateur
astronomy gear, it has 2 advantages: a different auction model, and a
generally more knowledgeable clientele. It has been a thriving
classified > ad site for a long time, and they recently added auctions

as well as other > features. There's some electronics there, but not
much -- mostly the

occasional ham rig and the like.

VY 73
N4TMI

Speaking of ham rigs. I found that Ebay has restrictions on selling
such things as transmitters, because the FCC requires buyers to be
licensed. In Ebay's case, anyone could buy one; if no one reports the
violation to the Ebay people, the auctino will very likely go on, even
tho it's in violation of their rules.

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"John Miller" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cg129j$1fv$2@n4vu.com...

Michael A. Covington wrote to Dave Platt:

So you should snipe, and we should not?

Not very Kantian...

It *is* an individual choice, after all...

Has anyone noticed this? If you do a web search for something that
might be sold on Ebay, you might come across a website that is not Ebay,
but has called up an Ebay webpage and displayed it.

I believe that some metasearch engine is doing its thing between Ebay
and the searcher. Of course the searcher still has to login to Ebay to
participate, but it is kind of weird when it happens.

--
John Miller

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i8d9fo3r5h7e8@corp.supernews.com...

In article <41240699$1@mustang.speedfactory.net>,
Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote:

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i7sfrorfghq64@corp.supernews.com...

And that's the long and short of it: You anti-sniping folks are
crying
because you got something taken away from you by someone who knew
what
they wanted, knew what it was worth to them, and wanted it worse
than
you did. Get over it.

Er... Can't we say the same to YOU? If you know what you're
willing to
pay,
why do you snipe?

Because, I think, that doing a snipe (with a value of "the maximum
I'm
actually willing to pay") generates a higher number of wins, and a
lower average winning bid, than doing a non-snipe with exactly the
same value.

So you should snipe, and we should not?

That's not at all what I said, sir. Please don't put words in my
mouth.

If you read back through my postings, you'll see that I wasn't telling
you (or anyone) not to snipe.

I've pointed out that if you DON'T snipe, and if you DON'T follow the
"make your best, real bid" advice from eBay, then you are putting
yourself at a disadvantage against snipers and other late bidders.
That's neither a prescription nor a directive... it's just a statement
of what I believe to be fact.

Not very Kantian...

Your _interpretation_ of my words has a non-Kantian cast, it's true,
but since that wasn't my intent, it's not terribly relevant.

Sniping software is available to everybody, sniping can be done
manually with nothing other than a web browser and a decent watch, and
(as I see it) the playing field is entirely level. The Categorial
Imperative applies fully, I believe.

If you _choose_ not to snipe, or to enter lower-value bids rather than
what you're willing to pay, that's entirely your voluntary choice.
You're welcome to whatever advantages this gives you, and you should
accept whatever disadvantages come with this strategy.

What happens in this scenario? The item is going for $5 up until a few
seconds before the end. You're willing to pay ten. You snipe ten a few
seconds before the end, but it's already at 11, and Ebay won't let you
enter an amount less than that. What happens? Software says snipe
failed?

Anyway. my contention is that sniping doesn't give the sniper any
significant advantage. And you the sniper still have to sit back and
watch a bidding war that's going over the maximum you're willing to pay.

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org
AE6EO

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Michael A. Covington" <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote in message
news:412439fd$1@mustang.speedfactory.net...

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i8d9fo3r5h7e8@corp.supernews.com...

Sniping software is available to everybody, sniping can be done
manually with nothing other than a web browser and a decent watch,
and
(as I see it) the playing field is entirely level. The Categorial
Imperative applies fully, I believe.

OK, then why don't we petition eBay to change over to a completely
sealed-bid format (with the proviso that the second highest bid
determines
the selling price, rather than the highest as in a true sealed-bid
auction).
That would work exactly like a perfectly efficient sniping system, and
it
would save everybody a lot of trouble.

Why should they have to "change over"? Why not make it an option that
the seller can choose?

There are so many followups in this thread that I haven't had a chance
to find out if you replied to my earlier question. What is this
supposed to accomplish? Is it supposed ro remove any purported
advantage the sniper has and level the playing field for the buyers? Or
is it supposed to help the seller?

You keep on talking about Ebay not being what it is, yet I (or we) have
said that Ebay is what it is, and it doesn't try to hide that fact.

Come to think about it, Ebay could give the buyer the option of turning
off the bid amount in his own screen. If he bids, Ebay could just tell
hime whether it was accepted or not up until the end, when it would
reveal the ending price.

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10i8hqblki7m573@corp.supernews.com...

In article <412439fd$1@mustang.speedfactory.net>,
Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote:

Sniping software is available to everybody, sniping can be done
manually with nothing other than a web browser and a decent watch,
and
(as I see it) the playing field is entirely level. The Categorial
Imperative applies fully, I believe.

OK, then why don't we petition eBay to change over to a completely
sealed-bid format (with the proviso that the second highest bid
determines
the selling price, rather than the highest as in a true sealed-bid
auction).
That would work exactly like a perfectly efficient sniping system,
and it
would save everybody a lot of trouble.

"What you mean _we_, white man?"

More seriously... go right ahead and petition, Michael. They might
listen. I really doubt it, given their size and the fact that they
seem to be quite satisfied with their approach, but I'm quite willing
to be proven wrong.

My own personal feeling is that you (and others) are engaged in a
somewhat quixotic quest here. You're trying to persuade eBay (or some
other site) that there is One True Right And Best Way to run auctions,
based on your own (subjective) analysis of the situation. I don't
believe that the object of your desire exists... there _is_ no single
auction system which you can conclusively prove is "best". All you
can say is that various sets of auction rules exist, and that each of
them has certain advantages and disadvantages for the various parties
who participate in the auctions. You can only argue superiority vs.
inferiority based on a starting set of axioms about what's "best", and
these axioms can't be proven.

No, axioms are regarded as self-evident truths. You mean _theories_.
The theories can't be proven.

A "sealed bid, winner pays second-highest bid plus minimum increment
at that level" would certainly have some advantages for some parties.
It would add the sort of sense-of-fairness that you seem to desire,
and it would (as you note) eliminate the advantages of sniping over
non-sniping. That might be good.

Good for whom? The buyer? The seller? Level the playing field for the
sellers? Good for whom?

On the other hand, it would eliminate feeding-frenzy bidding wars,
which would probably be good for buyers as a group, bad for sellers,
and bad for eBay (all for the same reason: it'd lower the average
winning bid by some amount). It'd also remove the sense of
gambling-excitement which some customers seem to feel (or crave?) and
might reduce eBay's attractiveness to people who go in for gambling.

Why do you call it gambling? There's a big difference between betting
and bidding.

Due to the fact that this rules change could have a negative effect on
eBay's bottom line, I doubt that you'll persuade them to accept it.

Some or all of these changes could be optional.

If you truly feel that there's a different set of auction rules which
result in a superior system, do what eBay did - go out and create a
system which uses them, publicize it, and support it. If it's really
superior, in the eyes of the public, it might win business away from
eBay.

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org
AE6EO