Ebay sniper software
in [Design]
|
Prev: Thanks to the group
Next: conservation of Euros
From: Don Klipstein on 21 May 2010 19:08 In <fh1dv5tivto0dtq9l5jhco7hrnnnkr69nc(a)4ax.com>, Capt. Cave Man wrote: >On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:00:14 -0400, Rich Webb ><bbew.ar(a)mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote: > >>On Fri, 21 May 2010 12:29:05 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: >> >>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 20 May 2010 17:52:16 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor >>>><greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>I was not promoting any of the FIVE software >>>>>packages or services, or the one you posted. >>>>> >>>>>http://www.fixyourdesktop.com/index.php/2007/06/5-best-ebay-sniping-tools >>>>> >>>>>I have never USED any of them. >>>>> >>>>>A few years ago they were kind of a secret >>>>>but I noticed their behavior. >>>>> >>>>>Somebody else mentioned that some of them >>>>>use special servers to control the timing >>>>>more tightly. >>>> >>>>It's not important at all, IMHO, for anyone with normal decent >>>>broadband service. The only requirement on the timing is that it be so >>>>close to the ending time that Joe idiot can't _react_ to the 'outbid' >>>>status. Aside from that, it's actually slightly to your benefit to be >>>>a bit _earlier_, since if the difference is less than a bid increment >>>>the lower and earlier bid will stand. IOW, if you bid $243.50 3 >>>>seconds before the end, and another person bids $247.50 a couple of >>>>seconds later, you'll win, since his bid did not exceed yours by the >>>>bid increment. >>> >>>Are you sure about that? AFAIK the highest price depends on the actual >>>maximum bid. Even in your scenario I'm very sure the one bidding >>>$247.50 is going to be the highest bidder. >> >>It's been a while since I was on but, IIRC, for a bid to be accepted it >>must be at least the minimum increment above the current high bid. Else, >>they'd probably be swamped by end-of-bid rushes that are 0.01 (or 0.03 >>or whatever) over the previously accepted high bid. > > Dumbass. One bids the minimum bid PLUS $0.01 added to that to throw >off the other bidders' increments. <I SNIP a bit from here> Should that work, I expect it to be known well enough by now to those "playing the game" to do what they have to do to deal with this. In a more severe case, an eBay auction winner is either a sniper best at sniping by bidding highest as late as possible, or a sniper getting a shot in ahead of the higher later shot(s) by .7 or ..2 second or whatever and high enough to get past bid increment requirement above previous-high-bid and be outbid later only by less than the required bid increment. In a more severe case, that means to buy means either to do the sniper game manually or to do that game with software. The only unfairness I see here is to a sniper losing to someone who placed a lower bid that exceeded previous-high by the bidding increment requirement, but was high enough for the ultimate high bid to fall short of required degree of outbidding. To fix that, I would propose that eBay modifies the minimum bid incriment requirement to be a lower one once the auction is close enough to closing to be prone to bids that cannot be responded to. As in 3 or 2 or whatever seconds before auction close, or whatever the time range is for manual human snipers and sniping "bots" (even if I somewhat exaggerate) to be the main bidders. Along such line, I propose that minimum bid increment be rounded-to-higher-cent of something like .1-.99% of current-so-far highest bid. I sense that something in this range maximizes average-selling-price by a favorable combination of motivating snipers to outbid by much more than a penny, combined with reducing shortfall-of-highest-bid need of the seller to sell to someone at lower than highest bid because highest bid was one later than a lower one that was lower by less than the minimum bid increment. -- - Don Klipstein (don(a)misty.com)
From: Nico Coesel on 22 May 2010 05:46 don(a)manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote: >In <fh1dv5tivto0dtq9l5jhco7hrnnnkr69nc(a)4ax.com>, Capt. Cave Man wrote: >>On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:00:14 -0400, Rich Webb >><bbew.ar(a)mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 21 May 2010 12:29:05 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: >>> >>>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 20 May 2010 17:52:16 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor >>>>><greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I was not promoting any of the FIVE software >>>>>>packages or services, or the one you posted. >>>>>> >>>>>>http://www.fixyourdesktop.com/index.php/2007/06/5-best-ebay-sniping-tools >>>>>> >>>>>>I have never USED any of them. >>>>>> >>>>>>A few years ago they were kind of a secret >>>>>>but I noticed their behavior. >>>>>> >>>>>>Somebody else mentioned that some of them >>>>>>use special servers to control the timing >>>>>>more tightly. >>>>> >>>>>It's not important at all, IMHO, for anyone with normal decent >>>>>broadband service. The only requirement on the timing is that it be so >>>>>close to the ending time that Joe idiot can't _react_ to the 'outbid' >>>>>status. Aside from that, it's actually slightly to your benefit to be >>>>>a bit _earlier_, since if the difference is less than a bid increment >>>>>the lower and earlier bid will stand. IOW, if you bid $243.50 3 >>>>>seconds before the end, and another person bids $247.50 a couple of >>>>>seconds later, you'll win, since his bid did not exceed yours by the >>>>>bid increment. >>>> >>>>Are you sure about that? AFAIK the highest price depends on the actual >>>>maximum bid. Even in your scenario I'm very sure the one bidding >>>>$247.50 is going to be the highest bidder. >>> >>>It's been a while since I was on but, IIRC, for a bid to be accepted it >>>must be at least the minimum increment above the current high bid. Else, >>>they'd probably be swamped by end-of-bid rushes that are 0.01 (or 0.03 >>>or whatever) over the previously accepted high bid. >> >> Dumbass. One bids the minimum bid PLUS $0.01 added to that to throw >>off the other bidders' increments. > ><I SNIP a bit from here> > > Should that work, I expect it to be known well enough by now to those >"playing the game" to do what they have to do to deal with this. > > In a more severe case, an eBay auction winner is either a sniper best at >sniping by bidding highest as late as possible, > or a sniper getting a shot in ahead of the higher later shot(s) by .7 or >.2 second or whatever and high enough to get past bid increment >requirement above previous-high-bid and be outbid later only by less than >the required bid increment. > > In a more severe case, that means to buy means either to do the sniper >game manually or to do that game with software. > > The only unfairness I see here is to a sniper losing to someone who >placed a lower bid that exceeded previous-high by the bidding increment >requirement, but was high enough for the ultimate high bid to fall short >of required degree of outbidding. It doesn't work that way. The person who sets the highest maximum amount (i.e. the highest bid) wins the auction. Being able to 'win' an auction by sniping a lower bid at the right time is a fairytale. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------
From: krw on 22 May 2010 11:05 On Sat, 22 May 2010 09:46:19 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: >don(a)manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote: > >>In <fh1dv5tivto0dtq9l5jhco7hrnnnkr69nc(a)4ax.com>, Capt. Cave Man wrote: >>>On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:00:14 -0400, Rich Webb >>><bbew.ar(a)mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote: >>> >>>>On Fri, 21 May 2010 12:29:05 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: >>>> >>>>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Thu, 20 May 2010 17:52:16 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor >>>>>><greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>I was not promoting any of the FIVE software >>>>>>>packages or services, or the one you posted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>http://www.fixyourdesktop.com/index.php/2007/06/5-best-ebay-sniping-tools >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I have never USED any of them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A few years ago they were kind of a secret >>>>>>>but I noticed their behavior. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Somebody else mentioned that some of them >>>>>>>use special servers to control the timing >>>>>>>more tightly. >>>>>> >>>>>>It's not important at all, IMHO, for anyone with normal decent >>>>>>broadband service. The only requirement on the timing is that it be so >>>>>>close to the ending time that Joe idiot can't _react_ to the 'outbid' >>>>>>status. Aside from that, it's actually slightly to your benefit to be >>>>>>a bit _earlier_, since if the difference is less than a bid increment >>>>>>the lower and earlier bid will stand. IOW, if you bid $243.50 3 >>>>>>seconds before the end, and another person bids $247.50 a couple of >>>>>>seconds later, you'll win, since his bid did not exceed yours by the >>>>>>bid increment. >>>>> >>>>>Are you sure about that? AFAIK the highest price depends on the actual >>>>>maximum bid. Even in your scenario I'm very sure the one bidding >>>>>$247.50 is going to be the highest bidder. >>>> >>>>It's been a while since I was on but, IIRC, for a bid to be accepted it >>>>must be at least the minimum increment above the current high bid. Else, >>>>they'd probably be swamped by end-of-bid rushes that are 0.01 (or 0.03 >>>>or whatever) over the previously accepted high bid. >>> >>> Dumbass. One bids the minimum bid PLUS $0.01 added to that to throw >>>off the other bidders' increments. >> >><I SNIP a bit from here> >> >> Should that work, I expect it to be known well enough by now to those >>"playing the game" to do what they have to do to deal with this. >> >> In a more severe case, an eBay auction winner is either a sniper best at >>sniping by bidding highest as late as possible, >> or a sniper getting a shot in ahead of the higher later shot(s) by .7 or >>.2 second or whatever and high enough to get past bid increment >>requirement above previous-high-bid and be outbid later only by less than >>the required bid increment. >> >> In a more severe case, that means to buy means either to do the sniper >>game manually or to do that game with software. >> >> The only unfairness I see here is to a sniper losing to someone who >>placed a lower bid that exceeded previous-high by the bidding increment >>requirement, but was high enough for the ultimate high bid to fall short >>of required degree of outbidding. > >It doesn't work that way. The person who sets the highest maximum >amount (i.e. the highest bid) wins the auction. Being able to 'win' an >auction by sniping a lower bid at the right time is a fairytale. Not true. You obviously don't understand the psychology of auctions. If you put the *same* bid in a week earlier you'll most often (there is junk where there is only one bidder) lose. People get hung up on buying that pretty and will bid far more than they would pay in a store, particularly at the end of the auction. This is the whole reason FOR auctions. Sniping breaks that impulse because they think they don't see the run-up and at lease one person thinks they've already won.
From: Nico Coesel on 23 May 2010 04:15
"krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Sat, 22 May 2010 09:46:19 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: > >>don(a)manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote: >> >>>In <fh1dv5tivto0dtq9l5jhco7hrnnnkr69nc(a)4ax.com>, Capt. Cave Man wrote: >>>>On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:00:14 -0400, Rich Webb >>>><bbew.ar(a)mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 21 May 2010 12:29:05 GMT, nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Thu, 20 May 2010 17:52:16 -0700 (PDT), the renowned Greegor >>>>>>><greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I was not promoting any of the FIVE software >>>>>>>>packages or services, or the one you posted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://www.fixyourdesktop.com/index.php/2007/06/5-best-ebay-sniping-tools >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I have never USED any of them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>A few years ago they were kind of a secret >>>>>>>>but I noticed their behavior. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Somebody else mentioned that some of them >>>>>>>>use special servers to control the timing >>>>>>>>more tightly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's not important at all, IMHO, for anyone with normal decent >>>>>>>broadband service. The only requirement on the timing is that it be so >>>>>>>close to the ending time that Joe idiot can't _react_ to the 'outbid' >>>>>>>status. Aside from that, it's actually slightly to your benefit to be >>>>>>>a bit _earlier_, since if the difference is less than a bid increment >>>>>>>the lower and earlier bid will stand. IOW, if you bid $243.50 3 >>>>>>>seconds before the end, and another person bids $247.50 a couple of >>>>>>>seconds later, you'll win, since his bid did not exceed yours by the >>>>>>>bid increment. >>>>>> >>>>>>Are you sure about that? AFAIK the highest price depends on the actual >>>>>>maximum bid. Even in your scenario I'm very sure the one bidding >>>>>>$247.50 is going to be the highest bidder. >>>>> >>>>>It's been a while since I was on but, IIRC, for a bid to be accepted it >>>>>must be at least the minimum increment above the current high bid. Else, >>>>>they'd probably be swamped by end-of-bid rushes that are 0.01 (or 0.03 >>>>>or whatever) over the previously accepted high bid. >>>> >>>> Dumbass. One bids the minimum bid PLUS $0.01 added to that to throw >>>>off the other bidders' increments. >>> >>><I SNIP a bit from here> >>> >>> Should that work, I expect it to be known well enough by now to those >>>"playing the game" to do what they have to do to deal with this. >>> >>> In a more severe case, an eBay auction winner is either a sniper best at >>>sniping by bidding highest as late as possible, >>> or a sniper getting a shot in ahead of the higher later shot(s) by .7 or >>>.2 second or whatever and high enough to get past bid increment >>>requirement above previous-high-bid and be outbid later only by less than >>>the required bid increment. >>> >>> In a more severe case, that means to buy means either to do the sniper >>>game manually or to do that game with software. >>> >>> The only unfairness I see here is to a sniper losing to someone who >>>placed a lower bid that exceeded previous-high by the bidding increment >>>requirement, but was high enough for the ultimate high bid to fall short >>>of required degree of outbidding. >> >>It doesn't work that way. The person who sets the highest maximum >>amount (i.e. the highest bid) wins the auction. Being able to 'win' an >>auction by sniping a lower bid at the right time is a fairytale. > >Not true. You obviously don't understand the psychology of auctions. If you >put the *same* bid in a week earlier you'll most often (there is junk where >there is only one bidder) lose. People get hung up on buying that pretty and >will bid far more than they would pay in a store, particularly at the end of >the auction. This is the whole reason FOR auctions. Sniping breaks that >impulse because they think they don't see the run-up and at lease one person >thinks they've already won. I agree with you but this is besides the point. Don claims you can 'win' an auction on Ebay with a properly timed lower bid to fool the autobidder. That is not true. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) -------------------------------------------------------------- |