After this, lets go off-list perhaps?
Jay's post re-written to state what he implies is that sellers who post an item which "takes off" in price are greedy and they have no scruples.
How the heck does the posting of an item which takes off in value suddenly change the moral character of the seller? The logic is completely beyond me. The item is not misrepresented, nobody is forcing anyone to bid - why the negative comments on the person who happened simply to offer the item for sale?
If the person thinks the selling price is too high, then he should sell the item for the top dollar and donate some of the proceeds to charity. This would actually be the economically "efficient" outcome.
Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> And it's also possible that the seller is not greedy, has realized that the bids
\r?\n> are getting ridiculous, and is satisfied with the amount of money he/she will be
\r?\n> getting for the derailleur. There are still people with scruples out there in
\r?\n> the bike world.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Jay Sexton
\r?\n> Sebastopol, CA
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:39:02 +0000
\r?\n> From: hersefan@comcast.net
\r?\n> To: haxixe@gmail.com, "Mark Fulton"
\r?\n> Cc: oroboyz@aol.com
\r?\n> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
\r?\n> Subject: Re: [CR]A new record? - and way early sales!
\r?\n> Message-ID:
\r?\n> <101820071339.7194.471761F6000A974D00001C1A2200745672020E000A9C9D0A08@comcast.ne
\r?\n> t>
\r?\n> Content-Type: text/plain
\r?\n> MIME-Version: 1.0
\r?\n> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
\r?\n> Precedence: list
\r?\n> Message: 11
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Actually I can think of a reason...
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Let us suppose someone said to the seller "I'll give you 10K instead of the 5K
\r?\n> if you end the auction now". Perhaps this buyer was willing to go as high as
\r?\n> 12K on the bidding, and thinks there is a chance someone else might even go
\r?\n> higher.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> But the seller, as everyone else, knows that there is also a chance that no
\r?\n> other buyer will go much higher than the current 5K. In this case, the seller
\r?\n> locks in another 5K by selling early with certainty, and the buyer gets the
\r?\n> piece for 2K less than what their max bid would be. For the seller, if the
\r?\n> certain additional 5K exceeds the expected value of seeing the auction to the
\r?\n> end, it makes perfect sense to end the auction early. And of course, sellers
\r?\n> relative aversion to risk is also crucial in this calculation (i.e if a gambler
\r?\n> than might want auction to go to end unless early payoff is even greater). This
\r?\n> analysis also assumes relatively thin markets where buyers "reservation prices"
\r?\n> may vary by considerable amounts.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> In general, I've never wanted to end ebay auctions early since usually the
\r?\n> seller is always made worse off. But now I realize that if the payoff for early
\r?\n> sale is great enough, it can make perfect economic sense.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Mike Kone in Boulder CO
\r?\n> Boulder Bicycle
\r?\n> Rene Herse Bicycles Inc.
\r?\n> Housingmetrics Inc. - data analysis for the housing biz
\r?\n>
\r?\n> -------------- Original message --------------
\r?\n> From: "Kurt Sperry"
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> > > "*This listing () has been removed or is no longer available. Please make
\r?\n> > > sure you entered the right item number. *
\r?\n> > > If the listing was removed by eBay, consider it canceled. Note: Listings
\r?\n> > > that have ended more than 90 days ago will no longer appear on eBay.
\r?\n> > >
\r?\n> > > Some kind of underhanded dealing it looks like. I can't think of a rational
\r?\n> > > reason why a seller would be advantaged by ending an auction early. At
\r?\n> > > least not voluntarily. An auction is a legal agreement to sell to the
\r?\n> > > highest bidder at the scheduled auction close. This one smells funny.
\r?\n> > >
\r?\n> > > Kurt Sperry
\r?\n> > > Bellingham WA
\r?\n> > > USA