Wine Bid anomaly (?)

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Message
Author
User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#101 Post by Ken Strauss »

Mike Evans wrote: April 25th, 2021, 6:17 pm
Ken Strauss wrote: April 25th, 2021, 4:26 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 25th, 2021, 4:11 pm We already have the explanation, Ken.
/
We have an explanation of how the bidding works.
I would like an explanation for why WineBid has lots that are not bid on in whole. They are the only auction site that operates like this.
They’ve been doing severable lots for 20 years, it has been part of their appeal. If it is a surprise, then maybe you need to pay better attention instead of bleating for an “explanation.”
Just because they have been doing it for 20 years means nothing. If it is appealing please explain why.
Thanks
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Mattstolz
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2838
Joined: June 26th, 2017, 7:46 pm
Location: South Carolina
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#102 Post by Mattstolz »

this thread has done an excellent job of convincing me to not place a max bid above the reserve if ever bidding on multiple bottle lots.

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#103 Post by Ken Strauss »

Mattstolz wrote: April 25th, 2021, 7:22 pm this thread has done an excellent job of convincing me to not place a max bid above the reserve if ever bidding on multiple bottle lots.

Matt,
Same for me. I have learned a lot from this thread.
I only started bidding when WineBid gave a credit and Wineberkers had the direct link to WineBid.
I have purchased multiple bottles some of which I didn’t understand. The $$$ were small so I didn’t investigate.
Anyone know why the direct link is no longer available?
Thanks
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Mattstolz
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2838
Joined: June 26th, 2017, 7:46 pm
Location: South Carolina
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#104 Post by Mattstolz »

Ken Strauss wrote: April 25th, 2021, 7:34 pm
Mattstolz wrote: April 25th, 2021, 7:22 pm this thread has done an excellent job of convincing me to not place a max bid above the reserve if ever bidding on multiple bottle lots.

Matt,
Same for me. I have learned a lot from this thread.
I only started bidding when WineBid gave a credit and Wineberkers had the direct link to WineBid.
I have purchased multiple bottles some of which I didn’t understand. The $$$ were small so I didn’t investigate.
Anyone know why the direct link is no longer available?
Thanks
The way I use winebid is I look through all the new stuff each week to kill some time. If I find some single bottle that’s interesting I bid once and don’t look at it again until after it closes. If I win it at reserve that’s great. If I don’t, I have too much wine already anyways. Lol.

crickey
Posts: 753
Joined: August 3rd, 2009, 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#105 Post by crickey »

I did bid on a multi-bottle lot this past week, but (i) I bid late in the process and (ii) my bid was only for the minimum amount.
Chri$ Ri¢k€y

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#106 Post by Ken Strauss »

Mattstolz wrote: April 26th, 2021, 11:40 am
Ken Strauss wrote: April 25th, 2021, 7:34 pm
Mattstolz wrote: April 25th, 2021, 7:22 pm 1
this thread has done an excellent job of convincing me to not place a max bid above the reserve if ever bidding on multiple bottle lots.

Matt,
Same for me. I have learned a lot from this thread.
I only started bidding when WineBid gave a credit and Wineberkers had the direct link to WineBid.
I have purchased multiple bottles some of which I didn’t understand. The $$$ were small so I didn’t investigate.
Anyone know why the direct link is no longer available?
Thanks
The way I use winebid is I look through all the new stuff each week to kill some time. If I find some single bottle that’s interesting I bid once and don’t look at it again until after it closes. If I win it at reserve that’s great. If I don’t, I have too much wine already anyways. Lol.
I look at producers I love and bid.
Now that I understand the details I will only bid my max bid occasionally.
I agree with you on your strategy. I have way too much wine like you.
Bottom line is WineBid has been a reliable auction site.
My only complaint is what has been revealed in this thread.
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

RaymondStone
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 23
Joined: January 27th, 2020, 10:10 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#107 Post by RaymondStone »

Mattstolz wrote: April 26th, 2021, 11:40 am The way I use winebid is I look through all the new stuff each week to kill some time. If I find some single bottle that’s interesting I bid once and don’t look at it again until after it closes. If I win it at reserve that’s great. If I don’t, I have too much wine already anyways. Lol.
I wish I had your mentality. The way I use it is to look at the remaining balance on my credit card and try to stay just barely under that amount.

User avatar
Mattstolz
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2838
Joined: June 26th, 2017, 7:46 pm
Location: South Carolina
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#108 Post by Mattstolz »

RaymondStone wrote: April 26th, 2021, 7:21 pm
Mattstolz wrote: April 26th, 2021, 11:40 am The way I use winebid is I look through all the new stuff each week to kill some time. If I find some single bottle that’s interesting I bid once and don’t look at it again until after it closes. If I win it at reserve that’s great. If I don’t, I have too much wine already anyways. Lol.
I wish I had your mentality. The way I use it is to look at the remaining balance on my credit card and try to stay just barely under that amount.
the trick is to already be over that amount with student loans and avocado toasts.

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#109 Post by Ken Strauss »

Mattstolz wrote: April 26th, 2021, 7:24 pm
RaymondStone wrote: April 26th, 2021, 7:21 pm
Mattstolz wrote: April 26th, 2021, 11:40 am The way I use winebid is I look through all the new stuff each week to kill some time. If I find some single bottle that’s interesting I bid once and don’t look at it again until after it closes. If I win it at reserve that’s great. If I don’t, I have too much wine already anyways. Lol.
I wish I had your mentality. The way I use it is to look at the remaining balance on my credit card and try to stay just barely under that amount.
the trick is to already be over that amount with student loans and avocado toasts.
LMAO
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
RMann
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 159
Joined: June 3rd, 2019, 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 212 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#110 Post by RMann »

Raymond and Matt, thanks for injecting some humor and levity into this thread!

Thanks to everyone for the very spirited discussion on the multi-bottle/fractional lot bidding feature. While this feature greatly pre-dates my time at WineBid, I appreciate those of you who had questions and brought it to my attention. I and the team at WineBid did an extensive review of the feature based on everyone's feedback, and I now understand where some of your confusion or disagreement lies. A special shout-out and thank you goes to Crickey (who started this thread), Marshall, MarkM, and Dale, who are correct in their explanations on the way this function works, the rationale, and in some of the bidding strategies they suggest. While I've gotten the opportunity now to meet a few of you via zoom, and it's been great to get to know customers and Berserkers better, I wanted to get back to everyone with a full reply.

As a preface, the following explanation is not meant to convince you that the rationale behind this feature is "correct" or "makes sense." This is a feature and benefit we believe is unique to WineBid, and that we believe offers unique benefits to bidders. Thus, the rules and logic of the newly created feature were for us to determine how to apply on our site. The explanation below is provided to clarify how it works, and why it was designed that way. We respect your right to disagree. If you do, we encourage you to change bid strategies, or bid only on whole lots or single bottle lots instead.

Let's first cover the feature’s uniqueness and the benefits it gives buyers:
  • Most auctions don't allow you to bid on and win just one bottle within a lot, which we can call "fractions of a lot." They operate at all or nothing, whole-lot bidding only. In general, most lots of multiple items are packaged in fixed lots- verticals, horizontals, mixed lots, and sold only as a whole lot. WineBid is somewhat unique in allowing fractional bidding of a lot, which may seem as if you are bidding on individual items within the lot. Because bidders have access to a fraction of a lot where you would otherwise have to buy the whole lot or not have access at all, we believe this is a benefit to bidders.
  • Further, on many lots offered, in particular lower priced lots, the bid increment per item in a fixed quantity whole lot would actually be more than double the increment of a fraction offered in this manner (For example, on a fixed whole lot of $200 for 4 items- $50/item, the bid increment is $10- effectively $2.50/item, but in fractional lot bidding, the increment is only $1/item, $4 for the whole lot). Now on a $200 lot of 2 items at $100/item, the whole fixed lot goes up at $10/increment, which is $5/item, and the fractions also go up in $10 increments, just as if it were only available in a whole lot. In many cases, in particular the <$100 bottle range of multi-bottle lots, this is a big benefit for you as a bidder. You get smaller increments per fraction, as opposed to bigger increments per item for the whole lot.
  • For the winners of competitive lots in whole or in part, your max bid competition and price to "defend" has also gone up more slowly, in smaller increments, than on whole lot pricing only.
  • In addition to the above, keep in mind our ultra-low buyer's premium of 17% which is far lower than most other auction houses at 24%+ (and most retailers mark-up of 30%+), thus saving you lots of money on lots of lots (whether single item, fixed multi-item, or fractional multi-item).
Now, to explain how and why this feature works the way it does:
  • First and foremost, as several of you have noted, the rules of multi-bottle/fractional lot bidding are and have been in the FAQs on the site. It explains, in bold, in two different sections "how much do I need to increase my bid" and "why am I only partially winning my bid," that "if you bid on multiple bottles in a lot, your bid amount will increase on all bottles in the lot. You cannot win bottles in the same lot at different amounts." This is also mentioned in the Overtime Bidding FAQs.
  • A multi-bottle Lot is offered as a whole package, comprised of individual items, which are all the same. You are bidding on a fraction of the whole lot at an effective bid and value for the whole lot. You are not bidding on separate or individual items within a lot at separate prices.
  • Any max bid on even a single fraction thus sets the effective max bid to win the WHOLE LOT, and becomes the max bid for all or any of the fractions, including any residual fractions the person did not bid on. By any one person saying any one fraction is worth up to $X, it means that to win the whole lot, one would need to bid all fractions at $X+1 increment. Each next bidder is not bidding against the lowest bid on a fraction, you are bidding on winning a fraction between the lowest (hidden) max bid and the highest (hidden) max bid. To win the WHOLE LOT, you would have to place a bid and pay for ALL the bottles in your bid at one bid increment above the max bid for even a single bottle- because you can't win multiple bottles at different prices. Anything less and you win only your partial bid quantity, at one price- your max bid. As an example, your max bid for 2 fractions lost against another bidder. But instead of losing the whole bid, you actually get to win a fraction away from someone else- at the price you stated that 2 were worth. Anyone else has to top that to win a fraction, because that becomes the new displayed next bid, and anyone wanting to win both has to pay for both bottles at the higher price, to win the other bottle as well. One way to look at it is that you are lucky to be winning fractions of the lot away at less than the effective value of the whole lot, guessing if you can pay a dollar less, or even much less, on all the bottles the lead max bidder doesn't want. In fact the lead max bidder's quantity is displayed, which may provide clues as to good bidding strategies to win some at less than the lead max bidder.
  • It is also very important to remember that your initial bids are a single locked bid on a specific quantity- the whole lot or any fraction thereof, and are "filled" as a single bid, competing against the existing (hidden) max bids of other bidders with max bids lower or higher than yours, for one or more fractions. Because max bids are hidden, you are not placing multiple separate bids on multiple separate bottles against the lowest visible bid increment, which may or may not actually win the lot or even a fraction. While you can win fewer fractions that you bid on at your max bid or lower, you can't win multiple fractions at different prices- all your fractions settle at the same price. And just like on any single item LOT, you can't lower your bid once it's placed- either on the value, or in this case, the number of fractions you want. You can always raise your bid, and you can raise your quantity, but you can't lower your bids and you can't lower your quantities, and when you raise your bid you are raising it on all the fractions you are bidding on. Because again, any bid or max bid on any fraction of the lot has set the effective value of the whole lot. Thus, and to be very explicit- if you bid on 2 or more at a certain max bid and then lose one or more and then decide to chase after them, any fractions you retain will be at your new and higher bid price- even if you don't succeed at winning the ones you are chasing. You have driven the price up for the winner to defend, and essentially re-set your max bid for yourself to retain. In fact, you might still be outbid for the one you are retaining, and then you would need to raise your bid for your pre-selected quantity of 2 at a higher price to try and win at least a fraction again.
So, this is how it was designed and why, and how the rules have been laid out and applied since this feature was launched. We recognize your right to disagree with the logic. As stated above- for those of you who don't agree or appreciate the benefits of this feature, then please adjust your bidding strategies accordingly, or limit your bidding to only fixed quantity whole lots or single bottle lots. Our weekly auctions continue to have thousands of bidders who understand and utilize this feature, and are happy to have the opportunity to win great wines in lots or fractions of lots, at great prices.

We truly and sincerely appreciate everyone's business and participation in the auction. We will continue to strive to bring you great wines and a great experience, with multiple ways to bid and win. I wish you all very happy bidding and/or consigning, winning, tasting and sharing.
Russ Mann, CEO WineBid

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#111 Post by Ken Strauss »

I appreciate the detailed response from Russ. In fact Russ reached out to me and we had a zoom call earlier today.
We agreed to respectfully disagree on how the bidding works. That said we agreed that bidding your maximum bid on a multiple bottle lot is not smart.
My overall opinion is I will happily bid on WineBid.
They are a quality auction site.
Coincidentally I received a case of wine today that was perfect.
Thank you Russ and your company!
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Victor Hong
Posts: 21210
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 1:34 pm
Location: Banana Republic of ‘Merica
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#112 Post by Victor Hong »

Better transparency via this thread has been good.

Anybody with a better system is welcome to compete.
WineHunter.

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#113 Post by Ken Strauss »

Victor Hong wrote: April 28th, 2021, 7:08 pm Better transparency via this thread has been good.

Anybody with a better system is welcome to compete.
You got that right!

Understanding the bidding rules is crucially important!
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19905
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 174 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

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

Don't 4 bottle lots of a given wine tend to sell for less per bottle than do 1 bottle lots of the same? I know there are plenty of exceptions --- but do they really swallow the rule?

Are bidders told -- during bidding -- the quantity (number of "fractions") on which other bidders are bidding?
“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
JDavisRoby
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 1744
Joined: June 19th, 2018, 12:42 pm
Location: Oklahoma
Has thanked: 229 times
Been thanked: 63 times
Contact:

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#115 Post by JDavisRoby »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 1:41 am Don't 4 bottle lots of a given wine tend to sell for less per bottle than do 1 bottle lots of the same? I know there are plenty of exceptions --- but do they really swallow the rule?

Are bidders told -- during bidding -- the quantity (number of "fractions") on which other bidders are bidding?
Yes. If you look at the bids section it will tell you what users are winning and their quantity.

Here is an example. Was the first multi bottle lot I came across.

https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/78 ... yard-Syrah
Joshu@

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19905
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 174 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

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

JDavisRoby wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:46 am
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 1:41 am Don't 4 bottle lots of a given wine tend to sell for less per bottle than do 1 bottle lots of the same? I know there are plenty of exceptions --- but do they really swallow the rule?

Are bidders told -- during bidding -- the quantity (number of "fractions") on which other bidders are bidding?
Yes. If you look at the bids section it will tell you what users are winning and their quantity.

Here is an example. Was the first multi bottle lot I came across.

https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/78 ... yard-Syrah
But you're only told the quantity being bid on by the current high bidder, correct?
“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
JDavisRoby
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 1744
Joined: June 19th, 2018, 12:42 pm
Location: Oklahoma
Has thanked: 229 times
Been thanked: 63 times
Contact:

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#117 Post by JDavisRoby »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 11:39 am
JDavisRoby wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:46 am
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 1:41 am Don't 4 bottle lots of a given wine tend to sell for less per bottle than do 1 bottle lots of the same? I know there are plenty of exceptions --- but do they really swallow the rule?

Are bidders told -- during bidding -- the quantity (number of "fractions") on which other bidders are bidding?
Yes. If you look at the bids section it will tell you what users are winning and their quantity.

Here is an example. Was the first multi bottle lot I came across.

https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/78 ... yard-Syrah
But you're only told the quantity being bid on by the current high bidder, correct?
The current high bidder for their fraction of the lot. In that example as it stands now there are four bidders for five bottles. The bidder that is bidding on two bottles is only bidding $150 each while the others are bidding $160 each. Kind of interesting.
Joshu@

M. Meer
Posts: 756
Joined: December 28th, 2010, 7:48 pm
Location: CA
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#118 Post by M. Meer »

This is what I see:

Everyone who has bid so far on a bottle(s) in that lot and their current bid amount per bottle. The initial bidder likely bid on all 5 at the opening price and now is on the hook for 2 at that price.
Screenshot_20210429-125607.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
With Porter & Mackie; prime rib and kale
Mar.kus

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19905
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 174 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

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

JDavisRoby wrote: April 29th, 2021, 12:23 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 11:39 am
JDavisRoby wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:46 am

Yes. If you look at the bids section it will tell you what users are winning and their quantity.

Here is an example. Was the first multi bottle lot I came across.

https://www.winebid.com/BuyWine/Item/78 ... yard-Syrah
But you're only told the quantity being bid on by the current high bidder, correct?
The current high bidder for their fraction of the lot. In that example as it stands now there are four bidders for five bottles. The bidder that is bidding on two bottles is only bidding $150 each while the others are bidding $160 each. Kind of interesting.
So, in this format, the bidders have less information than they would if the auction were live. I'm just imagining how this "fractional lot" stuff (which is really separate lots, just under a different name) would play-out live:
Hypo:
Bidder #1 comes in on a 4 bottle "Multiple quantity lot" and places a max bid of $40 per bottle on 3 bottles. Bidding starts at $20, with $5 increments.
Bidder #1 is currently winning 3 bottles for $20 apiece.
Then, Bidder #2 comes in and places a max bid of $50 on one bottle.
At this point in time, per WineBid rules, assuming no other bidders, Bidder #2 is winning one bottle at $45 and Bidder #1 is winning three bottles at $40 each. In a Live Auction, when Bidder #2 comes-in and places their bid, and is then winning one bottle at $20, Bidder #1 is NOT going to voluntarily pay $25 more for the three bottles they're already winning; rather, Bidder #1 is just going to stand there and say, "O.K.. Nothing for me to do here because there are 4 bottles in the lot, I want three of them, Bidder #2 has the one bottle they want, and I currently have the 3 bottles I want." Both Bidder #1 and Bidder #2 would be upset when they both have to pay more for the bottles they're winning when there is no competition for the bottles. In a live auction, everyone in the room would know the quantity sought by each bidder; that is not the case here, as WineBid is hiding that information from the bidders. Not saying this is right or wrong: rather, this is just the way it is.

This system allows bids on one lot (a "fraction") to drive-up the price on other lots (the other "fractions") without any additional bids being placed on the other lots (the other "fractions"). WineBid's system allows sellers to achieve single-bottle pricing (which is typically higher) on multiple bottle lots.

*****

Another hypo:
Bidder #1 comes in on a 4 bottle "Multiple quantity lot" and places a max bid of $40 per bottle on 4 bottles. Bidding starts at $20, with $5 increments.
Bidder #1 is currently winning 4 bottles for $20 apiece.
Then, Bidder #2 comes in and places a max bid of $50 on one bottle.
At this point in time, per WineBid rules, assuming no other bidders, Bidder #2 is winning one bottle at $45 and Bidder #1 is winning three bottles at $40 each. Bidder #1 currently stands to spend $120 on 3 bottles.
So, now, if Bidder #1 really wants that 4th bottle then Bidder #1 needs to increase their total bid by $60. Why? Because Bidder #1 is locked-in to bidding on 4 bottles, and Bidder #2's earlier-in-time $50 bid on ONE bottle is going to take precedence over a later-in-time $50 bid by Bidder #1. Therefore, Bidder #1 has to bid $55 on all four bottles to get that fourth bottle. In other words, at this point in time, Bidder #1 can take 3 bottles for $120 or 4 bottles for $220. That's insane, and heavily disincentivizes Bidder #1 from placing any more bids in this auction. Is that 4th bottle really worth $100 to Bidder #1? That feels terribly unfair. Bidder #1 is not on equal footing as Bidder #2 because every bidding increment for Bidder #1 is 4x as expensive as the bidding increment for Bidder #2. In my opinion, bidders should only have to bid against other bidders who are seeking the same number of bottles (i.e.: "fractions"). But, that's just my opinion.

The biggest, and arguably ONLY, problem with the way WineBid currently does this is the fact that they give little notice of this system. It's already a *fact* that many WineBid users do not know this is how bidding works on "Multiple Quantity Lots." Per Russ, the only places this information is divulged is in two separate FAQ sections of the website. FAQ = Frequently Asked Questions. It's reasonable to conclude that folks wouldn't have a reason to visit that part of the page if they don't have questions. I think it's unreasonable to rely on your customers having questions, and then -- on their own -- navigating to the FAQ section of the page in order to receive notice that this is the way "Multiple Quantity Lots" bidding works. What if the customers *don't* have any questions?! Clearly, that is the case with at least some WineBid users currently.

It has been explained very thoroughly that there are other (more) reasonable ways that bidding on "Multiple Quantity Lots" could work. WineBid is now on notice that some (perhaps many? perhaps a majority of?) of their customers are not aware of the manner in which "Multiple Quantity Lots" bidding works. So, now, the ball is in WineBid's court. Do they have an attorneys telling them the "notice" they've given is sufficient? WineBid is now *on notice that the "notice" they give re: bidding on Multiple Quantity Lots" is not good enough to inform all of their users who bid on such lots.* Perhaps their notice is legally-sufficient, but there is ample evidence in this thread that said notice, whether legally-sufficient or not, is *not* practically sufficient. This might be a situation where WineBid is giving the bare minimum legally-sufficient notice, and -- if that's the case -- then WineBid is in the (legal) right; that doesn't mean they're morally right, however.

I would hope, for the sake of bidders who do not realize this is going on, that WineBid would adopt measures designed to ensure that all bidders on "Multiple Quantity Lots" are given practically-sufficient notice of the manner in which "Multiple Lots Bidding" works. A notice on the page of each and every "Multiple Quantity Lot" would suffice, I would think.

The fact that Russ's explanation of how WineBid's system works is an entire single-spaced Word document page long kind of illustrates how convoluted the system is, and provides further evidence that the system is not intuitive, which -- in turn -- calls for proper Notice, assuming WineBid wants to make sure all their customers understand what's going on.

Given all that has transpired in this thread, if WineBid changes nothing that really says a lot, imo.
“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

M. Meer
Posts: 756
Joined: December 28th, 2010, 7:48 pm
Location: CA
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#120 Post by M. Meer »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 1:48 pm

So, in this format, the bidders have less information than they would if the auction were live. I'm just imagining how this "fractional lot" stuff (which is really separate lots, just under a different name) would play-out live:
Hypo:
Bidder #1 comes in on a 4 bottle "Multiple quantity lot" and places a max bid of $40 per bottle on 3 bottles. Bidding starts at $20, with $5 increments.
Bidder #1 is currently winning 3 bottles for $20 apiece.
Then, Bidder #2 comes in and places a max bid of $50 on one bottle.
At this point in time, per WineBid rules, assuming no other bidders, Bidder #2 is winning one bottle at $45 and Bidder #1 is winning three bottles at $40 each. In a Live Auction, when Bidder #2 comes-in and places their bid, and is then winning one bottle at $20, Bidder #1 is NOT going to voluntarily pay $25 more for the three bottles they're already winning; rather, Bidder #1 is just going to stand there and say, "O.K.. Nothing for me to do here because there are 4 bottles in the lot, I want three of them, Bidder #2 has the one bottle they want, and I currently have the 3 bottles I want." Both Bidder #1 and Bidder #2 would be upset when they both have to pay more for the bottles they're winning when there is no competition for the bottles. In a live auction, everyone in the room would know the quantity sought by each bidder; that is not the case here, as WineBid is hiding that information from the bidders. Not saying this is right or wrong: rather, this is just the way it is.
As detailed, I think it would play out as #1 has 3 bottles at $20 and #2 has one bottle at $20 because #1 did not initially claim the whole lot.

Also, increments would be $1, up to $99 to be accurate to the process on WB.
With Porter & Mackie; prime rib and kale
Mar.kus

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19905
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 174 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

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

The different bid increments is a distraction/red herring. Not a chance in hell that WineBid established this "Multiple Quantity Lots" ("MQL") system to benefit buyers. If WineBid truly wanted to benefit buyers they wouldn't have this convoluted-as-all-hell MQL system, and would instead simply have separate lots for each "fraction."

It's very easy to get mired in all the details and twists and turns here and weird terminology ("MQL"; "fractions"; different bid increments), and lose sight of the big picture as a result. I've tried very hard to simplify it in my posts and examples, above --- perhaps successfully, perhaps unsuccessfully.

At the end of the day, WineBid can run their business ever how they see fit, within the bounds of the law. People don't have to like their system (although it would obviously be in WineBid's best interests that folks do like their system). But WineBid legally, and even moreso morally, should be giving their users adequate notice of how they run their show. With proper notice, people can decide for themselves whether they want to play the game.
“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

M. Meer
Posts: 756
Joined: December 28th, 2010, 7:48 pm
Location: CA
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#122 Post by M. Meer »

The feature has been around as long as I've been bidding (2008). I thought it had changed in some way, but I think I was mistaken. I've made a habit of only bidding the minimum on multi-bottle lots, so I never experienced any of the issues people have had -- or maybe I did and forgot, ha.
With Porter & Mackie; prime rib and kale
Mar.kus

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#123 Post by Ken Strauss »

Now that I know the details of bidding I have bid and won multiple bottles at great prices!
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#124 Post by Ken Strauss »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:56 pm The different bid increments is a distraction/red herring. Not a chance in hell that WineBid established this "Multiple Quantity Lots" ("MQL") system to benefit buyers. If WineBid truly wanted to benefit buyers they wouldn't have this convoluted-as-all-hell MQL system, and would instead simply have separate lots for each "fraction."

It's very easy to get mired in all the details and twists and turns here and weird terminology ("MQL"; "fractions"; different bid increments), and lose sight of the big picture as a result. I've tried very hard to simplify it in my posts and examples, above --- perhaps successfully, perhaps unsuccessfully.

At the end of the day, WineBid can run their business ever how they see fit, within the bounds of the law. People don't have to like their system (although it would obviously be in WineBid's best interests that folks do like their system). But WineBid legally, and even moreso morally, should be giving their users adequate notice of how they run their show. With proper notice, people can decide for themselves whether they want to play the game.
Do you actually bid on wines on WineBid?
I am not happy with their system but knowing how it works I can successfully bid and win at a great price.
Additionally every bottle I have purchased has been in excellent condition.
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Mattstolz
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2838
Joined: June 26th, 2017, 7:46 pm
Location: South Carolina
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#125 Post by Mattstolz »

RMann wrote: April 28th, 2021, 4:17 pm
[*] It is also very important to remember that your initial bids are a single locked bid on a specific quantity- the whole lot or any fraction thereof, and are "filled" as a single bid, competing against the existing (hidden) max bids of other bidders with max bids lower or higher than yours, for one or more fractions. Because max bids are hidden, you are not placing multiple separate bids on multiple separate bottles against the lowest visible bid increment, which may or may not actually win the lot or even a fraction. While you can win fewer fractions that you bid on at your max bid or lower, you can't win multiple fractions at different prices- all your fractions settle at the same price. And just like on any single item LOT, you can't lower your bid once it's placed- either on the value, or in this case, the number of fractions you want. You can always raise your bid, and you can raise your quantity, but you can't lower your bids and you can't lower your quantities, and when you raise your bid you are raising it on all the fractions you are bidding on. Because again, any bid or max bid on any fraction of the lot has set the effective value of the whole lot. Thus, and to be very explicit- if you bid on 2 or more at a certain max bid and then lose one or more and then decide to chase after them, any fractions you retain will be at your new and higher bid price- even if you don't succeed at winning the ones you are chasing. You have driven the price up for the winner to defend, and essentially re-set your max bid for yourself to retain. In fact, you might still be outbid for the one you are retaining, and then you would need to raise your bid for your pre-selected quantity of 2 at a higher price to try and win at least a fraction again.[/list]

So, this is how it was designed and why, and how the rules have been laid out and applied since this feature was launched. We recognize your right to disagree with the logic. As stated above- for those of you who don't agree or appreciate the benefits of this feature, then please adjust your bidding strategies accordingly, or limit your bidding to only fixed quantity whole lots or single bottle lots. Our weekly auctions continue to have thousands of bidders who understand and utilize this feature, and are happy to have the opportunity to win great wines in lots or fractions of lots, at great prices.

We truly and sincerely appreciate everyone's business and participation in the auction. We will continue to strive to bring you great wines and a great experience, with multiple ways to bid and win. I wish you all very happy bidding and/or consigning, winning, tasting and sharing.
I have a kind of related question:

if I am winning a single bottle out of a lot of multiple bottles and I enter another bid in, am I bidding on a second bottle, or am I just increasing my max bid on the first bottle? because I have been in situations where I would like to do each, but haven't pulled the trigger either way because I wasnt sure how it worked. For example, this week I was winning a single bottle of Keller Trocken out of a lot of 12 bottles, but my max bid was at the reserve ($30). If I had gone in and entered a new, higher bid, would I have been winning 2 bottles of Keller at that point (say, $35), or would I have a single bottle with a higher max bid?

User avatar
Alan Rath
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 23042
Joined: April 24th, 2009, 12:45 am
Location: Bay Area, CA. Sometimes out to lunch.
Has thanked: 48 times
Been thanked: 99 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#126 Post by Alan Rath »

Matt, the bid amount, and number of bottles are independent (or linked, depending on how you look at it, lol). You specify number of bottles, and max price, which applies to all the bottle. There isn’t a way to bid separately on different numbers of bottles, with different max bids.

In your example, as long as you leave the number of bottles at 1, you’re merely increasing your max bid on one bottle.
Last edited by Alan Rath on May 2nd, 2021, 7:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm just one lost soul, swimming in a fish bowl, year after year

User avatar
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#127 Post by Ken Strauss »

Mattstolz wrote: May 2nd, 2021, 7:24 pm
RMann wrote: April 28th, 2021, 4:17 pm
[*] It is also very important to remember that your initial bids are a single locked bid on a specific quantity- the whole lot or any fraction thereof, and are "filled" as a single bid, competing against the existing (hidden) max bids of other bidders with max bids lower or higher than yours, for one or more fractions. Because max bids are hidden, you are not placing multiple separate bids on multiple separate bottles against the lowest visible bid increment, which may or may not actually win the lot or even a fraction. While you can win fewer fractions that you bid on at your max bid or lower, you can't win multiple fractions at different prices- all your fractions settle at the same price. And just like on any single item LOT, you can't lower your bid once it's placed- either on the value, or in this case, the number of fractions you want. You can always raise your bid, and you can raise your quantity, but you can't lower your bids and you can't lower your quantities, and when you raise your bid you are raising it on all the fractions you are bidding on. Because again, any bid or max bid on any fraction of the lot has set the effective value of the whole lot. Thus, and to be very explicit- if you bid on 2 or more at a certain max bid and then lose one or more and then decide to chase after them, any fractions you retain will be at your new and higher bid price- even if you don't succeed at winning the ones you are chasing. You have driven the price up for the winner to defend, and essentially re-set your max bid for yourself to retain. In fact, you might still be outbid for the one you are retaining, and then you would need to raise your bid for your pre-selected quantity of 2 at a higher price to try and win at least a fraction again.[/list]

So, this is how it was designed and why, and how the rules have been laid out and applied since this feature was launched. We recognize your right to disagree with the logic. As stated above- for those of you who don't agree or appreciate the benefits of this feature, then please adjust your bidding strategies accordingly, or limit your bidding to only fixed quantity whole lots or single bottle lots. Our weekly auctions continue to have thousands of bidders who understand and utilize this feature, and are happy to have the opportunity to win great wines in lots or fractions of lots, at great prices.

We truly and sincerely appreciate everyone's business and participation in the auction. We will continue to strive to bring you great wines and a great experience, with multiple ways to bid and win. I wish you all very happy bidding and/or consigning, winning, tasting and sharing.
I have a kind of related question:

if I am winning a single bottle out of a lot of multiple bottles and I enter another bid in, am I bidding on a second bottle, or am I just increasing my max bid on the first bottle? because I have been in situations where I would like to do each, but haven't pulled the trigger either way because I wasnt sure how it worked. For example, this week I was winning a single bottle of Keller Trocken out of a lot of 12 bottles, but my max bid was at the reserve ($30). If I had gone in and entered a new, higher bid, would I have been winning 2 bottles of Keller at that point (say, $35), or would I have a single bottle with a higher max bid?
I think you are given the option to bid on a new bottle or update on your previous bid.
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

User avatar
Brian G r a f s t r o m
Monopole Crü
Monopole Crü
Posts: 19905
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 12:54 am
Location: westside
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 174 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

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

Ken Strauss wrote: May 2nd, 2021, 7:19 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:56 pm The different bid increments is a distraction/red herring. Not a chance in hell that WineBid established this "Multiple Quantity Lots" ("MQL") system to benefit buyers. If WineBid truly wanted to benefit buyers they wouldn't have this convoluted-as-all-hell MQL system, and would instead simply have separate lots for each "fraction."

It's very easy to get mired in all the details and twists and turns here and weird terminology ("MQL"; "fractions"; different bid increments), and lose sight of the big picture as a result. I've tried very hard to simplify it in my posts and examples, above --- perhaps successfully, perhaps unsuccessfully.

At the end of the day, WineBid can run their business ever how they see fit, within the bounds of the law. People don't have to like their system (although it would obviously be in WineBid's best interests that folks do like their system). But WineBid legally, and even moreso morally, should be giving their users adequate notice of how they run their show. With proper notice, people can decide for themselves whether they want to play the game.
Do you actually bid on wines on WineBid?
No.
I am not happy with their system but knowing how it works I can successfully bid and win at a great price.
And THIS is the key here: making sure everyone "knows how it works."
Additionally every bottle I have purchased has been in excellent condition.
That's great to hear. It's also an entirely different topic.
“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
Ken Strauss
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5428
Joined: November 22nd, 2015, 9:03 am
Location: Sunny South Florida
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Wine Bid anomaly (?)

#129 Post by Ken Strauss »

Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: May 3rd, 2021, 11:42 am
Ken Strauss wrote: May 2nd, 2021, 7:19 pm
Brian G r a f s t r o m wrote: April 29th, 2021, 4:56 pm The different bid increments is a distraction/red herring. Not a chance in hell that WineBid established this "Multiple Quantity Lots" ("MQL") system to benefit buyers. If WineBid truly wanted to benefit buyers they wouldn't have this convoluted-as-all-hell MQL system, and would instead simply have separate lots for each "fraction."

It's very easy to get mired in all the details and twists and turns here and weird terminology ("MQL"; "fractions"; different bid increments), and lose sight of the big picture as a result. I've tried very hard to simplify it in my posts and examples, above --- perhaps successfully, perhaps unsuccessfully.

At the end of the day, WineBid can run their business ever how they see fit, within the bounds of the law. People don't have to like their system (although it would obviously be in WineBid's best interests that folks do like their system). But WineBid legally, and even moreso morally, should be giving their users adequate notice of how they run their show. With proper notice, people can decide for themselves whether they want to play the game.
Do you actually bid on wines on WineBid?
No.
I am not happy with their system but knowing how it works I can successfully bid and win at a great price.
And THIS is the key here: making sure everyone "knows how it works."
Additionally every bottle I have purchased has been in excellent condition.
That's great to hear. It's also an entirely different topic.
I agree that knowing the rules is important.
I also think that most do not understand the bidding details. I certainly didn’t.
That said for most the dollars are small. Bottom line for me is I would recommend bidding on WineBid despite my disagreement with their bidding process. I really wish they would change.
"Explaining is not supporting."

"Independence is a state of mind"

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”