Prev: BS from BS
Next: AC current sensors with interface...
From: Bart! on 21 May 2010 21:30
On Fri, 21 May 2010 23:37:25 +1000, Sylvia Else
<sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote:

> The winner at the end of the auction is the
>person who, at that point in time, has entered the highest maximum bid.

Nope. The winner is the last bid that the computer system was able to
enter before the OVERRIDING program that ends the auction ends it.

The highest bid offered does not always win, and if you were not so
goddamned clueless, you might one day grasp that fact.
From: Bart! on 21 May 2010 21:43
On Fri, 21 May 2010 14:29:04 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote:

>Show me a proof of that. I evaluate auctions every now and then to
>determine bid patterns on particular items. I've never ever seen an
>auction for which the highest bid didn't win.

You cannot know, idiot, because you would never "see" ANY of the bids
that were culled out at the close of the auction.

How can you be even more stupid than the Sylvia ditz? Oh... that's
right... you are "whine boy". How pathetic.
From: Sylvia Else on 21 May 2010 23:15
On 22/05/2010 11:30 AM, Bart! wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2010 23:37:25 +1000, Sylvia Else
> <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote:
>
>> The winner at the end of the auction is the
>> person who, at that point in time, has entered the highest maximum bid.
>
> Nope. The winner is the last bid that the computer system was able to
> enter before the OVERRIDING program that ends the auction ends it.

What makes you think that the system works that way. It would be an
absurd implementation, and it could mean that people who entered higher
maximum bids earlier wouldn't win. They would certainly complain about that.

More likely the processing of each bid, and its effect on the price, is
atomic, and there is no seperate program entering proxy bids.

Sylvia
From: Bill Bowden on 21 May 2010 23:34
On May 20, 9:20 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...(a)not.at.this.address> wrote:
> On 21/05/2010 11:27 AM, Bill Bowden wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 19, 11:33 pm, "TTman"<someone...(a)ntlworld.com>  wrote:
> >> "Bill Bowden"<wrongaddr...(a)att.net>  wrote in message
>
> >>news:def5cd9e-7839-4505-b1c0-e14f7b2464ca(a)40g2000vbr.googlegroups.com....
>
> >>> I have bought a few items on Ebay with good transactions, and was
> >>> recently looking at a true sinewave inverter (12 volt DC to 120 VAC)
> >>> 300 watt Continuous, 600 watt peak, and so I bid $60 maximum but was
> >>> outbid by $7 and lost the auction. I then noticed the same item was
> >>> for sale again in just a few hours (maybe 18) and so I bid again with
> >>> a limit of $60 and again lost the auction with a final bid of $65. And
> >>> so I bid again on the same item with same limit of $60 and was outbid
> >>> again at $61.12. And then bid again for the 4th time on the same item,
> >>> and again lost the auction for $61.00, just $1.00 more than my limit.
>
> >>> The seller appears to have a good feedback record, but this auction
> >>> looks like somebody is bidding against me just to drive the price up,
> >>> and always wins the auction by bidding $1 more than my limit.
>
> >>> I do understand the new 300 watt sinewave inverter is worth more than
> >>> $60, probably in the $200 range, so maybe this is just standard
> >>> practice to weed out the low bidders?
>
> >>> But it still seems to be a violation of Ebay (shill) policies.
>
> >>> -Bill
>
> >> Sounds like maybe the seller is bidding ( with an alias) to avoid a low
> >> value sale....
>
> > Yes, it looks like that. I see the same item listed 8 times with
> > various bids ranging from one cent to $32 and quite a few apparent
> > bidders . But there is one listing to "Buy it Now" at $125. I suspect
> > $125 is the going price and any lower bids are automatically outbid by
> > a shill of some sort.
>
> If the seller ends up winning the auction, then he has to pay the
> commission on it to Ebay without actually having sold anything. As
> strategy, it makes no sense.
>
> The seller can avoid that by retracting their winning shill bid. If your
> bid was outbid, and that other bid is retracted, and followed by another
> bid a bit below your maximum, then you have grounds for suspicion.
> Otherwise no.
>
> Sylvia.

Time will tell. I just placed another bid on the same item for $62.50
and I imagine I will lose another auction for $62.60. It's still
listed to "buy it now" for $125 in a different listing. I can't
imagine the seller giving it away for half that.

On the brighter side, Ebay has refunded my money for another
transaction where the seller did not respond to messages, nor
delivered the item. I got my money back today. Score 1 for Ebay!!

-Bill
From: Bart! on 22 May 2010 00:18
On Sat, 22 May 2010 13:15:07 +1000, Sylvia Else
<sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote:

>
>What makes you think that the system works that way.

Before there even was auto-bidding, the last bid won. Period. Get it
through your thick skull.

In order to ADD auto-bidding as an afterthought, which is what they did
in the beginning, they did not dismantle the current bidding
chronological closure (bid ending) system that was in place at the time.

THEN the re-wrote the entire engine and now auto-bidding is fully
integrated into their system and has been for many years.

You had to be around then to get it. Sorry about you.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prev: BS from BS
Next: AC current sensors with interface...