i've seen that auction that bob refers to. my recollections is that the auction end is extended by a couple of minutes whenever a high bid is entered WITHIN THE LAST MINUTE of the auction. this way the previous high bidder always gets another chance to beat the current high bid. auctions end when somebody actually mutters to themselves "let him have it." sniping services are of no use in this type of auction.
what i don't know is if anybody can jump in and start bidding during an extension of time, or it's a privilege reserved only for the previous high bidder.
either way, ebay could easily offer this format and make even more money - i wonder why they don't. for all practical purposes, the auction end really only gets extended by a very short time overall. i think it would actually be more fair for both buyers and sellers, since the person truly willing to pay the most will win, without involving guesswork, strategy or third-party services.
imagine the duels we would witness in that format!
ray dobbins
miami florida
>
\r?\n> In a message dated 10/27/05 1:49:56 PM,
\r?\n> classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org writes:
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> > Sniping does indeed limit maximum selling price in many cases..
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > In the case of sniping, the potential buyer enters the maxiumum
\r?\n> price
\r?\n> > they are willing to bid, then sits back and lets the electronics
\r?\n> take
\r?\n> > over.
\r?\n> > Once the dust has settled and the item is sold to the highest
\r?\n> bidder, a
\r?\n> > quick query to the loser is often (almost always!) that they in
\r?\n> fact
\r?\n> > would have paid more, especially now that they have lost that
\r?\n> auction.
\r?\n> > Some dispassionate bidders may say no, but most would have squeezed
\r?\n> the
\r?\n> > piggie bank a little harder to take the prize. Conventional
\r?\n> auctions
\r?\n> > use this factor to drive the prics ever upward but eBay and other
\r?\n> > "timed" inline auctions eliminate the upward spiral that emotion
\r?\n> could
\r?\n> > play by stopping all bidding at the end of that proscribed time.
\r?\n> Hence
\r?\n> > the logical (and legitimate) tool called sniping was created....
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Some of us use a sniping tool precisely because of that, i.e. it
\r?\n> > prevents us from being stupid and impulsively bidding higher than
\r?\n> we
\r?\n> > really should!
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Dale Brown
\r?\n> > Greensboro, NC USA
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Exactly right. I recently watched an auction in New Zealand drift
\r?\n> upwards
\r?\n> beyond where I am sure it would have ended in the US because their
\r?\n> auction
\r?\n> software extended the close time for another two minutes every time a
\r?\n> bid wa
\r?\n> s
\r?\n> entered.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Since I spend more time as a buyer than a seller, I'm the last guy
\r?\n> who'd wan
\r?\n> t
\r?\n> to see higher auction prices, but I have to admit that New Zealand
\r?\n> auction
\r?\n> site's method seems to make more sense. Or at least it more closely
\r?\n> resemb
\r?\n> les
\r?\n> a 'traditional' auction, in that the event does not end at some
\r?\n> arbitrary
\r?\n> time... it ends after the warning "going once, going twice, sold!"
\r?\n> when ever
\r?\n> yone
\r?\n> has had a moment for second thoughts and no one wants to bid any
\r?\n> more.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Bob Hovey
\r?\n> Columbus, GA