For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Post Reply
Message
Author
crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#201 Post by crickey »

The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

User avatar
Keith Levenberg
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5748
Joined: June 6th, 2009, 3:11 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 60 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#202 Post by Keith Levenberg »

Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 11:27 am Is there a public version?
sci-hub.se/10.1007/s11002-019-09487-7

This is pretty interesting. The other paper suggests a shift to earlier bidding activity and reduction in sniping. This one suggests snipers just recalibrate to snipe before the extension window is triggered, and the authors observe an increase in sniping. Tons of literature out there on this stuff!

Ken B r o w n
Posts: 55
Joined: January 10th, 2017, 8:06 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#203 Post by Ken B r o w n »

Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 11:27 am
Is there a public version? What is the diff between this and Amazon in the other paper? The conditional triggering of the extension period?

How do they draw the revenue conclusions for the Overstock rule? (Hard to tell from the abstract only.)
There's not a public version. If you believe in and/or know about Sci Hub, then you can get the full text of paper via sci-hub.se by entering its DOI.

No difference in soft-close rules between Amazon and Overstock. In both cases, the extension period is triggered if there's a high bid at 10 minutes to scheduled close. The revenue conclusion is drawn by looking at the winning bid for the same item - it's lower on Overstock. From the paper:
On both websites, a sniping winning bid for the most part is associated with a revenue loss compared with a non-sniping winning bid. For example, winning bids submitted within the 10-s window on Overstock yield a decrease of 8.48% in seller revenue. Similar sniping on eBay gives a much smaller decline of 2.21% in seller revenue.
TL;DR: soft-close hurts the seller MORE than a hard-close. Either a soft-close or a hard-close yield lower revenue for the seller vs a winning bid where no sniping is involved.

Quite a bit of early research on this subject touts the allegedly obvious conclusion that soft-close defeats sniping and increases seller revenue. More recent scholarship takes a closer look and the conclusion/results are mixed, i.e. "it depends". The paper in my post is firmly in other camp where the conclusion is not even "it depends", it's a firm negative - the sellers would be hurt.

...and this is why I asked Russ about the motivations for the change. If one were to believe this paper, sniping under any close rules hurts the seller versus non-sniping. The revenue loss increases as the rules change from hard-close to soft-close. Could Russ be looking out for (gasp!) buyers here?

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#204 Post by Rich Brown »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:28 pm The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Hey Chris - are you suggesting that users put their MaxBid in close to the end of the auction, or are you saying it doesn't matter as long as they enter their highest/best?

Ken B r o w n
Posts: 55
Joined: January 10th, 2017, 8:06 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#205 Post by Ken B r o w n »

Keith Levenberg wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:48 pm
Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 11:27 am Is there a public version?
sci-hub.se/10.1007/s11002-019-09487-7

This is pretty interesting. The other paper suggests a shift to earlier bidding activity and reduction in sniping. This one suggests snipers just recalibrate to snipe before the extension window is triggered, and the authors observe an increase in sniping. Tons of literature out there on this stuff!
Empirical evidence with a sample size of 1 - when I bid on soft-close auctions and I want to snipe, I simply wait for 10 minutes prior to close as oppose to 1 minute. (This assumes the soft close is T-10 which is usually the case). That is, my behavior matches the more recent paper - I recalibrate. If I am outbid in the extension, I may or may not get into the bidding war and that's fine, it's a choice. If I am not outbid, then sniping worked.

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19756
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 205 times
Been thanked: 126 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#206 Post by Brian G r a f s t r o m »

Ken B r o w n wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:58 pm
Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 11:27 am
Is there a public version? What is the diff between this and Amazon in the other paper? The conditional triggering of the extension period?

How do they draw the revenue conclusions for the Overstock rule? (Hard to tell from the abstract only.)
There's not a public version. If you believe in and/or know about Sci Hub, then you can get the full text of paper via sci-hub.se by entering its DOI.

No difference in soft-close rules between Amazon and Overstock. In both cases, the extension period is triggered if there's a high bid at 10 minutes to scheduled close. The revenue conclusion is drawn by looking at the winning bid for the same item - it's lower on Overstock. From the paper:
On both websites, a sniping winning bid for the most part is associated with a revenue loss compared with a non-sniping winning bid. For example, winning bids submitted within the 10-s window on Overstock yield a decrease of 8.48% in seller revenue. Similar sniping on eBay gives a much smaller decline of 2.21% in seller revenue.
TL;DR: soft-close hurts the seller MORE than a hard-close. Either a soft-close or a hard-close yield lower revenue for the seller vs a winning bid where no sniping is involved.

Quite a bit of early research on this subject touts the allegedly obvious conclusion that soft-close defeats sniping and increases seller revenue. More recent scholarship takes a closer look and the conclusion/results are mixed, i.e. "it depends". The paper in my post is firmly in other camp where the conclusion is not even "it depends", it's a firm negative - the sellers would be hurt.

...and this is why I asked Russ about the motivations for the change. If one were to believe this paper, sniping under any close rules hurts the seller versus non-sniping. The revenue loss increases as the rules change from hard-close to soft-close. Could Russ be looking out for (gasp!) buyers here?
But, consider the following:
1. sniping is less likely to occur on lots that appear to be a "deal" as auction close approaches. Therefore, one would *expect* "revenue loss" associated with winning sniper bids as compared to winning non-sniper bids. Many snipers do *not* snipe with their max bid, but rather a lower bid that they hope is good enough to win, and placed late enough to prevent others from having time in which to respond (i.e. place a higher bid).
2. If "sniping under any close rules hurts the seller versus non-sniping" is true, and if the "Quite a bit of early research on this subject tout[ing] the allegedly obvious conclusion that soft-close defeats sniping and increases seller revenue" is true (and I acknowledge that "More recent scholarship takes a closer look and the conclusion/results are mixed" on that), then the soft-close will help, not hurt, sellers.

Many snipers are trying not only to win, but also win with a bid that is less than their max. This method can be successful when bidding against someone else who is employing the same strategy: in this scenario, it is simply the last person to bid who wins. Everyone who "plays" this way is, apparently, okay with losing to a later-in-time bid that is below what their max bid actually would have been; we can call this the Cost of Hunting the Deal, and it should be taken into account.
“All these characters spend their time explaining themselves, and happily recognizing that they hold the same opinions … how important they consider it to think the same things all together.” --- A.R.

CT: grafstrb

crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#207 Post by crickey »

Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:05 pm
crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:28 pm The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Hey Chris - are you suggesting that users put their MaxBid in close to the end of the auction, or are you saying it doesn't matter as long as they enter their highest/best?
If your MaxBid doesn't change over the time of the auction, there is no reason not to put it in at the very beginning and one reason to do so: the earliest bid wins over subsequent bids at the same price. However, putting it in at the end is the closest approximation to the put-up or shut-up notion that one only really knows one's final preference at the end, i.e., it's an acknowledgement of the variable value element I described.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

mike pobega
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 11176
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 3:26 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 34 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#208 Post by mike pobega »

As a sniper, I hate this and it's reason enough to shop elsewhere.

User avatar
Rodrigo B
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 1299
Joined: June 9th, 2020, 11:21 pm
Location: New York
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 185 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#209 Post by Rodrigo B »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:32 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:05 pm
crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:28 pm The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Hey Chris - are you suggesting that users put their MaxBid in close to the end of the auction, or are you saying it doesn't matter as long as they enter their highest/best?
If your MaxBid doesn't change over the time of the auction, there is no reason not to put it in at the very beginning and one reason to do so: the earliest bid wins over subsequent bids at the same price. However, putting it in at the end is the closest approximation to the put-up or shut-up notion that one only really knows one's final preference at the end, i.e., it's an acknowledgement of the variable value element I described.
That is assuming people are completely rational and don't succumb to sunk cost fallacies by bidding incrementally higher to win their lots
B r @ g @

crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#210 Post by crickey »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:22 pm
Many snipers are trying not only to win, but also win with a bid that is less than their max. This method can be successful when bidding against someone else who is employing the same strategy: in this scenario, it is simply the last person to bid who wins. Everyone who "plays" this way is, apparently, okay with losing to a later-in-time bid that is below what their max bid actually would have been; we can call this the Cost of Hunting the Deal, and it should be taken into account.
But that's just not a rational strategy under the Winebid rules. There is absolutely no reason not to put in your MaxBid. There is no penalty for bidding non-incrementally; you will win and pay at the same or next increment above the second-highest bid (or later bid at the same level) whether your maximum was exactly that price or infinitely above it. What you are describing is someone who either (i) doesn't understand how the MaxBid feature works or (ii) isn't honest with themselves.

Everyone wants to purchase something below the price they value it; that is the very definition of consumer surplus. What you are describing, though, is someone who thinks they value something a price X, but really values it at lower price Y, the reality of Y being proven by the revealed preference of their actual bid at price Y.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#211 Post by Rich Brown »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:32 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:05 pm
crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:28 pm The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Hey Chris - are you suggesting that users put their MaxBid in close to the end of the auction, or are you saying it doesn't matter as long as they enter their highest/best?
If your MaxBid doesn't change over the time of the auction, there is no reason not to put it in at the very beginning and one reason to do so: the earliest bid wins over subsequent bids at the same price. However, putting it in at the end is the closest approximation to the put-up or shut-up notion that one only really knows one's final preference at the end, i.e., it's an acknowledgement of the variable value element I described.
Gotcha! But id argue that your theory is based upon the fact that users will never go above their originally planned MaxBid. Which I feel is just not accurate because:

A. People hate to 'lose'. Its human nature to want to win, and this absolutley carries through into auctions. Sometimes rationale goes out the window. I've seen it many times, and done it myself many times.

B. FOMO. People don't want to miss out on a bottle of wine thst they really want, or fear they might not be able to easily find again. When given the time to ponder the situation, its VERY easy to convince oneself to spend 'just a little bit more'. It's only $5, $10, etc. Again, something that I've done many, many times myself.

For those reasons (and the many others that we've already discussed), I disagree that setting your MaxBid early would alleviate sniping, nor is the best bidding strategy, even if everyone used it correctly, as it ultimately drives the final price up. And adding this additional 10 minutes for 'hot lots' will only emphasize my two points above....and as I've said multiple times...Increase the final hammer price.

User avatar
David_K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1059
Joined: July 17th, 2014, 7:01 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#212 Post by David_K »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:51 pmBut that's just not a rational strategy under the Winebid rules. There is absolutely no reason not to put in your MaxBid. There is no penalty for bidding non-incrementally; you will win and pay at the same or next increment above the second-highest bid (or later bid at the same level) whether your maximum was exactly that price or infinitely above it. What you are describing is someone who either (i) doesn't understand how the MaxBid feature works or (ii) isn't honest with themselves.
This would be true if everyone put their max bid on a piece of paper and into a hat at the same time. But by putting in a bid early, it signals to the world that it's an item that at least one person - you - thinks is worth bidding on at that price. I believe, as do some others, that there is a cost to that behavior. As discussed previously, it also tells other buyers to stop waiting for a price cut, because it won't happen for at least two more weeks (if there's even any left).
K@ntrОwi╦z

crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#213 Post by crickey »

Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:58 pm
crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:32 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:05 pm

Hey Chris - are you suggesting that users put their MaxBid in close to the end of the auction, or are you saying it doesn't matter as long as they enter their highest/best?
If your MaxBid doesn't change over the time of the auction, there is no reason not to put it in at the very beginning and one reason to do so: the earliest bid wins over subsequent bids at the same price. However, putting it in at the end is the closest approximation to the put-up or shut-up notion that one only really knows one's final preference at the end, i.e., it's an acknowledgement of the variable value element I described.
Gotcha! But id argue that your theory is based upon the fact that users will never go above their originally planned MaxBid. Which I feel is just not accurate because:

A. People hate to 'lose'. Its human nature to want to win, and this absolutley carries through into auctions. Sometimes rationale goes out the window. I've seen it many times, and done it myself many times.

B. FOMO. People don't want to miss out on a bottle of wine thst they really want, or fear they might not be able to easily find again. When given the time to ponder the situation, its VERY easy to convince oneself to spend 'just a little bit more'. It's only $5, $10, etc. Again, something that I've done many, many times myself.

For those reasons (and the many others that we've already discussed), I disagree that setting your MaxBid early would alleviate sniping, nor is the best bidding strategy, even if everyone used it correctly, as it ultimately drives the final price up. And adding this additional 10 minutes for 'hot lots' will only emphasize my two points above....and as I've said multiple times...Increase the final hammer price.
The strategy with either A or B is to set your maximum bid really, really high. As I said, there is no penalty for non-incremental bidding. Think the wine will sell for $100: bid $200, $300, $1,000, whatever. You will win. The danger, of course, is that you could run into another bidder with the same strategy, and you have to think, but I don't really want the wine for $200, $300, $1,000, whatever. That's the first step in self-knowledge. Somewhere between "I'd never pay that much for that wine" and "But I want a deal" is where you will land with your bid.

The strategies I have outlined work identically whether the lot ends at 7:00 or 7:10. Our point of disagreement is whether the extra 10 minutes will change anything. Since the winning strategies are the same in either case, I don't think prices will change in the long run. As I noted earlier, the only new hitch is the uncertainty on when to put in the "last, highest" bid. Ideally, it would be at 7:09, but someone has to do something at 6:59 in order to trigger the extension. If I have understood the Ebay/Overstock discussion above, I suspect it is the uncertainty of the "soft close" that muddles the bidding and leads to lower prices overall.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

User avatar
Jay Miller
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 15792
Joined: June 19th, 2009, 5:18 pm
Location: Jersey City
Has thanked: 75 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#214 Post by Jay Miller »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:28 pm The incentive for sniping on Winebid relies on the belief in the existence and coincidence of two phenomena:

1. There is someone out there in the world who inexplicably failed to put in their last, highest bid before the end of the auction, and
2. This same person did not understand how the MaxBid feature works and the fact that there is absolutely no penalty for using it.

In other words, it relies on people not understanding how the auction works. The way to defeat the sniper is to put in your last, highest bid using the MaxBid feature before the auction times out. You will either win at the price you are willing to pay or lose to someone willing to pay more for the wine than you. If everyone realized this, everyone would put in their last, highest bid before the auction closes and then "sniping" goes away to be replaced by the old-fashioned concept of the highest bidder wins and that's life.

The only variables left are: people who would planned to bid before the auction closed but couldn't make it to their computer at the right moment (or had Winebid have computer issues at the close, ahem) or people whose "last, highest" bid is variable even over a very short period of time. I don't consider the latter to be irrational. It's wine, not bonds, so I have no issues with people changing their minds on what they would be willing to pay for wine. I've gone back and adjusted my MaxBid on lots from time to time, and often wished I could adjust it down (just last week, in fact; fortunately, someone outbid me).
Another variable (though it could be considered a subset of your second) is people who have set an overall budget for the auction. If I've allocated $300 for the auction, have bid $100@ on 3 bottles, and am outbid on one of them shortly before auction close then I could suddenly up my bids on the other two to $150 without going over budget.
Ripe fruit isn't necessarily a flaw.

crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#215 Post by crickey »

David_K wrote: March 7th, 2021, 2:08 pm
crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:51 pmBut that's just not a rational strategy under the Winebid rules. There is absolutely no reason not to put in your MaxBid. There is no penalty for bidding non-incrementally; you will win and pay at the same or next increment above the second-highest bid (or later bid at the same level) whether your maximum was exactly that price or infinitely above it. What you are describing is someone who either (i) doesn't understand how the MaxBid feature works or (ii) isn't honest with themselves.
This would be true if everyone put their max bid on a piece of paper and into a hat at the same time. But by putting in a bid early, it signals to the world that it's an item that at least one person - you - thinks is worth bidding on at that price. I believe, as do some others, that there is a cost to that behavior. As discussed previously, it also tells other buyers to stop waiting for a price cut, because it won't happen for at least two more weeks (if there's even any left).
Yes, Adrian mentioned that earlier in this thread. You do bring up one additional consideration under the Winebid rules, where one strategy would be to wait until a later auction period to put in a bid. Fair enough. This thread is about a feature that is activated by late bidding, so I was presuming someone has bid on the lot in question.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

Wes Barton
Posts: 4323
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#216 Post by Wes Barton »

Marcu$ Stanley wrote: March 7th, 2021, 9:08 amBut this kind of stuff, 10 minutes extra at the end of an open timed auction, is far more about psychology than economics. It's all about people getting into a competitive bidding war where they get pulled into overbidding for ego reasons. The extra 10 minutes give them more time to do that, thus increasing Winebid's commission [cheers.gif]
It's more obviously about the last moment sniping being clumsy. This decision came at a time winebid hasn't solved their system overload problem, magnifying the issue of snipers not getting their week-long planned bids in. I don't think the psychology really changes. With the current system, people make those same in-the-moment decisions in those last moments, but the frenzy can stymie their intent. Probably everyone here who's tried to snipe has gotten it wrong or had it go wrong, trying to re-up a bid in the last second.

I think this idea could be implemented well or terribly. But, I also think the big problem is the system overloading, and if this is an attempt to work around that instead of solving it, people will still be waiting til the last second to get that snipe in and a bunch of those will continue to fail to get through in time, so the wines won't make the playoffs. I can imagine a lot of implementation details and game play dynamics reacting to them. It could work out poorly in a few ways, and certainly could majorly alter successful strategies.
ITB - Useless lackey

Can't stand bloody wax capsules.

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19756
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 205 times
Been thanked: 126 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#217 Post by Brian G r a f s t r o m »

crickey wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:51 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:22 pm
Many snipers are trying not only to win, but also win with a bid that is less than their max. This method can be successful when bidding against someone else who is employing the same strategy: in this scenario, it is simply the last person to bid who wins. Everyone who "plays" this way is, apparently, okay with losing to a later-in-time bid that is below what their max bid actually would have been; we can call this the Cost of Hunting the Deal, and it should be taken into account.
But that's just not a rational strategy under the Winebid rules. There is absolutely no reason not to put in your MaxBid.
Well, not exactly. If one puts-in their Max Bid early, that decreases the likelihood they'll win that lot at an amount lesser than their MaxBid than if they put-in their Max Bid at the very end. How so? This happens when the person you're bidding against is (1) trying to snipe and (2) doing so with less than their Max Bid, thereby allowing for the possibility that they run out of time to place their incremental bids.
There is no penalty for bidding non-incrementally; you will win and pay at the same or next increment above the second-highest bid (or later bid at the same level) whether your maximum was exactly that price or infinitely above it.
That's true assuming rational actors, which we frequently do not have at auction. The penalty for bidding non-incrementally is the giving of material information to others earlier than you have to, thereby giving others more opportunity to outbid you.
What you are describing is someone who either (i) doesn't understand how the MaxBid feature works or (ii) isn't honest with themselves.
I'm describing someone who either (1) isn't honest with themselves (re: their Max Bid), and/or (2) lacks self-control (willing to go above their previously-determined Max Bid), and/or (3) wants to maximize their chances of winning (late bidding can be a successful strategy against snipers who are sniping with bids lower than their Max Bid). Just as some folks only shop the sales racks in stores, some people do the same with wine. For those folks, even though they might be willing to pay $20 for a bottle, they'd rather pay $15, and are apparently okay losing when somebody else bids $16 and they run out of time to place a $17 bid. Why do they do this? Because they're looking for a "deal."
Everyone wants to purchase something below the price they value it; that is the very definition of consumer surplus. What you are describing, though, is someone who thinks they value something a price X, but really values it at lower price Y, the reality of Y being proven by the revealed preference of their actual bid at price Y.
As I (tried to) explain above, some people only want deals. Some folks only want to pay less than the price at which they value it. Yes, I understand this begs the question of, "What, exactly, does "value" mean, in this context?", but I trust you get my point, even if you don't agree with it. If not, let me know, and I'll try to explain better.
“All these characters spend their time explaining themselves, and happily recognizing that they hold the same opinions … how important they consider it to think the same things all together.” --- A.R.

CT: grafstrb

Wes Barton
Posts: 4323
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#218 Post by Wes Barton »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:22 pmMany snipers are trying not only to win, but also win with a bid that is less than their max. This method can be successful when bidding against someone else who is employing the same strategy: in this scenario, it is simply the last person to bid who wins. Everyone who "plays" this way is, apparently, okay with losing to a later-in-time bid that is below what their max bid actually would have been; we can call this the Cost of Hunting the Deal, and it should be taken into account.
Another way to look at it is a sniper watching 10 wines may have a sort of progressive view on value. So, perhaps willing to pay 70% of that person's perceived value to win all 10 and be happy, but wouldn't be happy at all paying 100% for all 10. Happy paying 100% for 4 and even 120% for one. The thrill of winning something on one side and the thrill of getting great deals on the other.
ITB - Useless lackey

Can't stand bloody wax capsules.

Jayson Cohen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3086
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 4:29 pm
Location: New York, NY
Has thanked: 241 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#219 Post by Jayson Cohen »

Ken B r o w n wrote: March 7th, 2021, 1:08 pm
Keith Levenberg wrote: March 7th, 2021, 12:48 pm
Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 11:27 am Is there a public version?
sci-hub.se/10.1007/s11002-019-09487-7

This is pretty interesting. The other paper suggests a shift to earlier bidding activity and reduction in sniping. This one suggests snipers just recalibrate to snipe before the extension window is triggered, and the authors observe an increase in sniping. Tons of literature out there on this stuff!
Empirical evidence with a sample size of 1 - when I bid on soft-close auctions and I want to snipe, I simply wait for 10 minutes prior to close as oppose to 1 minute. (This assumes the soft close is T-10 which is usually the case). That is, my behavior matches the more recent paper - I recalibrate. If I am outbid in the extension, I may or may not get into the bidding war and that's fine, it's a choice. If I am not outbid, then sniping worked.
I guess I don’t see how you are really sniping if someone else has the time and opportunity to beat your bid. It’s just normal bidding like you would have in any auction.

For Wine Bid what will happen depends on the new rule. Which we still don’t know. Whether it’s a fixed 10-minute extension. Or a ten-minute reset until there is 10 minutes with no bid. In either case if the overall psychology becomes that the putative sniper is less likely to consistently win the snipe under any of these regimes compared to the existing one, I could see that causing a decrease in revenue. Would-be snipers just don’t participate in driving up the price late in the auction. They have no true sniping strategy, given the fixed end of the auction was key, so they just don’t play. I could see that. But if that’s the case I don’t see that revenue loss as better for buyers. For us would-be snipers we are worse off. And the sellers are worse off.

Gets us back to - who wants this and why?
Last edited by Jayson Cohen on March 7th, 2021, 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 20989
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#220 Post by Victor Hong »

Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
WineHunter.

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#221 Post by Rich Brown »

Victor Hong wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:37 pm Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
Sounds like you need a new/more effective bidding strategy ;)

Jayson Cohen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3086
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 4:29 pm
Location: New York, NY
Has thanked: 241 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#222 Post by Jayson Cohen »

Victor Hong wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:37 pm Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
Low ball at 10? But this one went to 11?

Wes Barton
Posts: 4323
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#223 Post by Wes Barton »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:08 pm
Everyone wants to purchase something below the price they value it; that is the very definition of consumer surplus. What you are describing, though, is someone who thinks they value something a price X, but really values it at lower price Y, the reality of Y being proven by the revealed preference of their actual bid at price Y.
As I (tried to) explain above, some people only want deals. Some folks only want to pay less than the price at which they value it. Yes, I understand this begs the question of, "What, exactly, does "value" mean, in this context?", but I trust you get my point, even if you don't agree with it. If not, let me know, and I'll try to explain better.
We're talking economics here. Value isn't a constant, even to a given person. Consider you see a wine you like, but already have enough bottles of. Say you happily paid $60/ea. for what you have. You see a couple bottles on winebid with no bids, opening at $30. You'd be happy winning them at $40, so you put in an autobid for $40. Happy to win them for $40. More happy to win them for $30. Indifferent if someone else gets them.
Last edited by Wes Barton on March 7th, 2021, 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ITB - Useless lackey

Can't stand bloody wax capsules.

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19756
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 205 times
Been thanked: 126 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#224 Post by Brian G r a f s t r o m »

Absolutely, Wes. But I'm not sure the reason(s) behind any person's valuation of a given wine really matters --- all that matters is how much they're willing to bid, and how they go about bidding (which necessarily includes not only bid amount, but also timing of bids).
“All these characters spend their time explaining themselves, and happily recognizing that they hold the same opinions … how important they consider it to think the same things all together.” --- A.R.

CT: grafstrb

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 20989
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#225 Post by Victor Hong »

Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:43 pm
Victor Hong wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:37 pm Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
Sounds like you need a new/more effective bidding strategy ;)
Noo Yawkers need to order more noodles for delivery. Lots more.
WineHunter.

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 20989
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#226 Post by Victor Hong »

Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:44 pm
Victor Hong wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:37 pm Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
Low ball at 10? But this one went to 11?
Ten percent higher is a lot for me, unlike for all you One-Percenters and Bordeaux Ballers.
WineHunter.

Wes Barton
Posts: 4323
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#227 Post by Wes Barton »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:50 pm Absolutely, Wes. But I'm not sure the reason(s) behind any person's valuation of a given wine really matters --- all that matters is how much they're willing to bid, and how they go about bidding (which necessarily includes not only bid amount, but also timing of bids).
My point was spelling out why someone could be only willing to bid less than their valuation of that wine - the reward of attaining yet another bottle of a wine they already have enough of being less than what they value the bottles they own - and it's impact on how they bid.

But, that same early bid strategy translates to quite a few scenarios. Deal hunting in one way or another or just knowing the value. Say some mature Bdx that comes up regularly on winebid and other places, and routinely at a very narrow valuation (say $120), other than a few times getting bid up to $150. That really could be two people bid it up one auction, with one happy and not coming back for more. Next time, the other guy gets his. Then, the next time your $120 autobid wins it. You could have been a spazz and won them for $180 the first time, $150 the second time or waited and got some for $120.
ITB - Useless lackey

Can't stand bloody wax capsules.

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19756
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 205 times
Been thanked: 126 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#228 Post by Brian G r a f s t r o m »

Wes Barton wrote: March 7th, 2021, 5:34 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:50 pm Absolutely, Wes. But I'm not sure the reason(s) behind any person's valuation of a given wine really matters --- all that matters is how much they're willing to bid, and how they go about bidding (which necessarily includes not only bid amount, but also timing of bids).
My point was spelling out why someone could be only willing to bid less than their valuation of that wine - the reward of attaining yet another bottle of a wine they already have enough of being less than what they value the bottles they own - and it's impact on how they bid.

But, that same early bid strategy translates to quite a few scenarios. Deal hunting in one way or another or just knowing the value. Say some mature Bdx that comes up regularly on winebid and other places, and routinely at a very narrow valuation (say $120), other than a few times getting bid up to $150. That really could be two people bid it up one auction, with one happy and not coming back for more. Next time, the other guy gets his. Then, the next time your $120 autobid wins it. You could have been a spazz and won them for $180 the first time, $150 the second time or waited and got some for $120.
Yep. And this is why I don't stress the many times I lose at auction. I just figure there's a chance the winner is now out of the market, and I'll have a better chance next time around. Whether that is actually true is a case-by-case thing.
“All these characters spend their time explaining themselves, and happily recognizing that they hold the same opinions … how important they consider it to think the same things all together.” --- A.R.

CT: grafstrb

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#229 Post by Rich Brown »

So 2 things:

1. The site was lightning fast tonight

2. Another successful snipe. Gotta get em in while I still can :(

User avatar
Yao C
Posts: 1139
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 10:53 pm
Location: Portland / San Francisco
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#230 Post by Yao C »

Research into the "Revenue Effect" notwithstanding, something that feels more fair to sellers and certain buyers should increase their activity on WineBid, at least in the short term. It's anyone's guess as to the net result

Regardless, I commend Russ & his team for their willingness to try new things. As a bystander who's never won anything on WineBid, but buys often at K&L, this might convince me to take a second look
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: March 7th, 2021, 6:28 pm Yep. And this is why I don't stress the many times I lose at auction. I just figure there's a chance the winner is now out of the market, and I'll have a better chance next time around. Whether that is actually true is a case-by-case thing.
I have seen things go the other way: a rare wine might initially sell for a high but not unreasonable price, but then get bid into the stratosphere in subsequent auctions as buyers realize there are more of them out there than they thought and everyone gets FOMO. It probably depends on the rarity of the wine in question
C h 0 o n 6

User avatar
David_K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1059
Joined: July 17th, 2014, 7:01 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#231 Post by David_K »

K@ntrОwi╦z

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#232 Post by Rich Brown »

Yep, so its pretty much exactly what we thought it was going to be.

'Have you ever lost a bottle in the final moments of our weekly auction, and wish you had the opportunity to continue bidding?'

An extra 10 minutes for people to convince themselves to bid more than they originally planned.....which will lead to higher prices.

No questions on my end!

User avatar
Rodrigo B
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 1299
Joined: June 9th, 2020, 11:21 pm
Location: New York
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 185 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#233 Post by Rodrigo B »

Curious to know how long the extra bidding time increments will be for
B r @ g @

User avatar
Steve Saxon
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 6868
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 2:33 pm
Location: Telluride, Co
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#234 Post by Steve Saxon »

Well this is bullshit, might be time to look elsewhere.
Saxon and others have willfully trashed this thread and turned it into nonsense without substance.....Mark Squires

User avatar
c fu
Moderator
<dfn>Moderator</dfn>
Posts: 32417
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 1:26 pm
Location: Pasadena
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 120 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#235 Post by c fu »

overtime bidding - snipe twice. Once to trigger it and another at the final 10th minute of the trigger'd time. Same ol same ol. Nothing's really changed. Facebook alcohol auction groups have been doing "popcorn" time for awhile.
Ch@rlie F|_|
"Roulot is Roulot"©

ITB -Salt Vine Wines

Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/clayfu.wine

User avatar
Alan Rath
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 22785
Joined: April 24th, 2009, 12:45 am
Location: Bay Area, CA. Sometimes out to lunch.
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#236 Post by Alan Rath »

Steve Saxon wrote: March 7th, 2021, 7:42 pm
Well this is bullshit, might be time to look elsewhere.
The threat to the very existence of our democracy cannot be overstated.
I'm just one lost soul, swimming in a fish bowl, year after year

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#237 Post by Rich Brown »

c fu wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:06 pm overtime bidding - snipe twice. Once to trigger it and another at the final 10th minute of the trigger'd time. Same ol same ol. Nothing's really changed. Facebook alcohol auction groups have been doing "popcorn" time for awhile.
Yep, that will probably have to be the move - snipe twice (although the 2nd snipe will not be as 'snipey' since you'd assume that multiple peeps will potentially be engaged at that point).

The worst part is that now the final snipe will cost more.

Jayson Cohen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3086
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 4:29 pm
Location: New York, NY
Has thanked: 241 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#238 Post by Jayson Cohen »

Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:33 pm
c fu wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:06 pm overtime bidding - snipe twice. Once to trigger it and another at the final 10th minute of the trigger'd time. Same ol same ol. Nothing's really changed. Facebook alcohol auction groups have been doing "popcorn" time for awhile.
Yep, that will probably have to be the move - snipe twice (although the 2nd snipe will not be as 'snipey' since you'd assume that multiple peeps will potentially be engaged at that point).

The worst part is that now the final snipe will cost more.
It’s even a bit worse than that as I play out the different scenarios in my head. Let’s say you are either an early bidder with a max price or a bidder at T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) with a max price. Say your winning bid as of T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) is $60, but your max bid is $66. Unless the rules are more nuanced than announced tonight, someone can bid $61 at 9:59:59, and the auction extends even though you are still the winning bid at $62. That’s not right. You should win the lot at $62 unless someone bids at least $67. Maybe they will account for that.

And in any case it’s still not clear what happens if there’s a bid in the 3 minute window. So is it snipe twice? Or does the auction keep extending until there’s a three minute steady state price with no further bidding? I.e., no sniping at all.

mike pobega
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 11176
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 3:26 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 34 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#239 Post by mike pobega »

But yet no policy for bad bottles of which I have had my share (about 8 as noted in CT for last 4 years).
I also love how Russ came here with a big smile thinking the community would embrace this new policy

Or

He knew we wouldn't and as a smart businessman he wanted to cauterize this wound early and remain a good standing 'selling' member.

:)
Last edited by mike pobega on March 8th, 2021, 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Rob Lynch
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 141
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 4:45 am
Location: Connecticut
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#240 Post by Rob Lynch »

As an "early to bed, early to rise" type on the east coast: This Sucks.
How late am I going to have to stay up to find out if I've won a coveted bottle?

Make the process less enjoyable: I'll be less of a customer.

User avatar
Brent C l a y t o n
Posts: 5770
Joined: May 6th, 2009, 9:21 am
Location: Elmhurst, NY
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#241 Post by Brent C l a y t o n »

I didn't want to comment when this thread first started as I don't buy much on WineBid. A few days later and 5 pages in I am happy to see that the general consensus is what I had thought at the beginning-this idea sucks and will only drive up prices and won't fix the sniping issue.
‘Purveyor of Plonk’
Threadsinker
ITB Sales
IG@bigdaddyb420wine

User avatar
Jay Miller
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 15792
Joined: June 19th, 2009, 5:18 pm
Location: Jersey City
Has thanked: 75 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#242 Post by Jay Miller »

Brent C l a y t o n wrote: March 8th, 2021, 6:02 am I didn't want to comment when this thread first started as I don't buy much on WineBid. A few days later and 5 pages in I am happy to see that the general consensus is what I had thought at the beginning-this idea sucks and will only drive up prices and won't fix the sniping issue.
Well, it will "fix" it for people who want to snipe but get cut out by other snipers. That will also be beneficial for sellers as it allows for more competition. It hurts the snipers might have gotten lucky by being the last ones in.

Since I'm one of the people who bids early and studiously avoids the site on Sundays it doesn't really affect me.
Ripe fruit isn't necessarily a flaw.

User avatar
R_Gilbane
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1158
Joined: November 6th, 2014, 4:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#243 Post by R_Gilbane »

THE OUTRAGE IS REAL.

Image
Bobby

crickey
Posts: 719
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#244 Post by crickey »

Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 9:13 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:33 pm
c fu wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:06 pm overtime bidding - snipe twice. Once to trigger it and another at the final 10th minute of the trigger'd time. Same ol same ol. Nothing's really changed. Facebook alcohol auction groups have been doing "popcorn" time for awhile.
Yep, that will probably have to be the move - snipe twice (although the 2nd snipe will not be as 'snipey' since you'd assume that multiple peeps will potentially be engaged at that point).

The worst part is that now the final snipe will cost more.
It’s even a bit worse than that as I play out the different scenarios in my head. Let’s say you are either an early bidder with a max price or a bidder at T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) with a max price. Say your winning bid as of T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) is $60, but your max bid is $66. Unless the rules are more nuanced than announced tonight, someone can bid $61 at 9:59:59, and the auction extends even though you are still the winning bid at $62. That’s not right. You should win the lot at $62 unless someone bids at least $67. Maybe they will account for that.

And in any case it’s still not clear what happens if there’s a bid in the 3 minute window. So is it snipe twice? Or does the auction keep extending until there’s a three minute steady state price with no further bidding? I.e., no sniping at all.
I agree with you that their summary of the rule could lead to the scenario you describe and that it shouldn't work that way; the extension period should only be triggered by new winning bids. Multiple bottle lots are probably a source of the problem: if at 6:57 different bottles have different winning bids, which often occurs, and someone bids enough to beat the lower bids, but not the higher bids, is the auction extended only for those lower bids (the contested bids) or for all the bottles? If the latter, you end up with the scenario you describe, where someone who had a winning bid at the 7:00 close could lose out in the extension period, and if the former, you could end up with the situation where the contested bottle are sold for more than the 7:00 uncontested winners, rather than driving out the lowest bids like would normally happen.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

User avatar
Rich Brown
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3897
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 3:38 pm
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#245 Post by Rich Brown »

crickey wrote: March 8th, 2021, 6:55 am
Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 9:13 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:33 pm

Yep, that will probably have to be the move - snipe twice (although the 2nd snipe will not be as 'snipey' since you'd assume that multiple peeps will potentially be engaged at that point).

The worst part is that now the final snipe will cost more.
It’s even a bit worse than that as I play out the different scenarios in my head. Let’s say you are either an early bidder with a max price or a bidder at T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) with a max price. Say your winning bid as of T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) is $60, but your max bid is $66. Unless the rules are more nuanced than announced tonight, someone can bid $61 at 9:59:59, and the auction extends even though you are still the winning bid at $62. That’s not right. You should win the lot at $62 unless someone bids at least $67. Maybe they will account for that.

And in any case it’s still not clear what happens if there’s a bid in the 3 minute window. So is it snipe twice? Or does the auction keep extending until there’s a three minute steady state price with no further bidding? I.e., no sniping at all.
I agree with you that their summary of the rule could lead to the scenario you describe and that it shouldn't work that way; the extension period should only be triggered by new winning bids. Multiple bottle lots are probably a source of the problem: if at 6:57 different bottles have different winning bids, which often occurs, and someone bids enough to beat the lower bids, but not the higher bids, is the auction extended only for those lower bids (the contested bids) or for all the bottles? If the latter, you end up with the scenario you describe, where someone who had a winning bid at the 7:00 close could lose out in the extension period, and if the former, you could end up with the situation where the contested bottle are sold for more than the 7:00 uncontested winners, rather than driving out the lowest bids like would normally happen.
Yep. I guess we'll see, but since Winebid is doing this to make money....my guess would be that it's the latter. If you don't have the buyer in mind when making this change anyway.....why not go all out.

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 20989
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#246 Post by Victor Hong »

crickey wrote: March 8th, 2021, 6:55 am
Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 9:13 pm
Rich Brown wrote: March 7th, 2021, 8:33 pm

Yep, that will probably have to be the move - snipe twice (although the 2nd snipe will not be as 'snipey' since you'd assume that multiple peeps will potentially be engaged at that point).

The worst part is that now the final snipe will cost more.
It’s even a bit worse than that as I play out the different scenarios in my head. Let’s say you are either an early bidder with a max price or a bidder at T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) with a max price. Say your winning bid as of T-(3 minutes and 1 seconds) is $60, but your max bid is $66. Unless the rules are more nuanced than announced tonight, someone can bid $61 at 9:59:59, and the auction extends even though you are still the winning bid at $62. That’s not right. You should win the lot at $62 unless someone bids at least $67. Maybe they will account for that.

And in any case it’s still not clear what happens if there’s a bid in the 3 minute window. So is it snipe twice? Or does the auction keep extending until there’s a three minute steady state price with no further bidding? I.e., no sniping at all.
I agree with you that their summary of the rule could lead to the scenario you describe and that it shouldn't work that way; the extension period should only be triggered by new winning bids. Multiple bottle lots are probably a source of the problem: if at 6:57 different bottles have different winning bids, which often occurs, and someone bids enough to beat the lower bids, but not the higher bids, is the auction extended only for those lower bids (the contested bids) or for all the bottles? If the latter, you end up with the scenario you describe, where someone who had a winning bid at the 7:00 close could lose out in the extension period, and if the former, you could end up with the situation where the contested bottle are sold for more than the 7:00 uncontested winners, rather than driving out the lowest bids like would normally happen.
Bottom line: Whoever really wants a particular bottle is more likely now to buy it, all willingly and ably. That seems efficient and fair.
Anybody who really wants it as much but is unwilling to pay for it may be cheap or self-entitled.
WineHunter.

User avatar
Mark Mason
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 954
Joined: January 28th, 2009, 9:23 am
Location: Wisconsin
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#247 Post by Mark Mason »

As a buyer and not a seller of wine, I dislike extending the auction window 10 minutes. This change will affect my use of WineBid.
Hard water fisherman

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 20989
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#248 Post by Victor Hong »

Mark Mason wrote: March 8th, 2021, 7:46 am As a buyer and not a seller of wine, I dislike extending the auction window 10 minutes. This change will affect my use of WineBid.
If you include other market participants as equally legitimate stakeholders, such as the sellers and any more-motivated buyers, the change is quite balanced.

Yes, you have choices besides any one given auction or retail site.
WineHunter.

User avatar
Arv R
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 4571
Joined: January 11th, 2015, 3:53 pm
Has thanked: 163 times
Been thanked: 53 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#249 Post by Arv R »

Jayson Cohen wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:44 pm
Victor Hong wrote: March 7th, 2021, 3:37 pm Somebody topped my bid on one item. I am out for this week.
Low ball at 10? But this one went to 11?
R_@_0

User avatar
R_Gilbane
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1158
Joined: November 6th, 2014, 4:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: For Berserker eyes first- new WineBid feature coming soon

#250 Post by R_Gilbane »

Victor Hong wrote: March 8th, 2021, 8:09 am
Mark Mason wrote: March 8th, 2021, 7:46 am As a buyer and not a seller of wine, I dislike extending the auction window 10 minutes. This change will affect my use of WineBid.
If you include other market participants as equally legitimate stakeholders, such as the sellers and any more-motivated buyers, the change is quite balanced.

Yes, you have choices besides any one given auction or retail site.
All this talk of change, balance and choice is comical. Nothing has changed, there is no such thing as balance and choice is an illusion. Welcome to the new world order.
Bobby

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”