-
Hello MLAers! We've re-enabled auto-approval for accounts. If you are still waiting on account approval, please check this thread for more information.
Daystar 100mhz 601!
- Thread starter Quadraman
- Start date
Yes, you can message others on ebay, you just can't get their email address unless you complete a transaction with them.
Yes, I have received some nasty ones. They usually go something like this:
"Thanks for outbidding me at the last possible second, you expletive expletive. You're the biggest expletive expletive on ebay. Expletive expletive expletive. Go expletive yourself and die."
Yes, I have received some nasty ones. They usually go something like this:
"Thanks for outbidding me at the last possible second, you expletive expletive. You're the biggest expletive expletive on ebay. Expletive expletive expletive. Go expletive yourself and die."
I snipe all the time and have never received a nasty note. I'm disappointed. lol Lets post the best nasty notes! It will be great fun to see your own note posted! lol
Reminds me of something I used to do years ago. In a previous life I used to skydive. On the way to the airport there was a golf course along the highway. As we drove by on our way out to jump, we would honk at the golfers, preferably the ones about to swing, and see how many "fingers" we could get! Great fun! My record is 3 although another guy had the drop zone record at 5.
For those of you in the Detroit area, its the St. Clair Shores Country Club, Eastbound side of I-94 just before 14 mile road. Happy Honking! Bwaa haa haa!
Gary
Reminds me of something I used to do years ago. In a previous life I used to skydive. On the way to the airport there was a golf course along the highway. As we drove by on our way out to jump, we would honk at the golfers, preferably the ones about to swing, and see how many "fingers" we could get! Great fun! My record is 3 although another guy had the drop zone record at 5.
For those of you in the Detroit area, its the St. Clair Shores Country Club, Eastbound side of I-94 just before 14 mile road. Happy Honking! Bwaa haa haa!
Gary
Wow! It's almost as much fun as driving on the freeway at rush hour! Except you get it in writing! (It's even better when they misspell the expletives) [
] ]'>
It's when the item is hard to find or normally sells for a much higher price than the auction closes at when I usually get the nasty messages, especially when it's a long auction and the high bidder got his bid in early and the price didn't change until I put my bid in at the end. Some people get their hearts set on winning an item cheap, so when a snipe comes in it really makes them furious. The last nasty message I got was for a Mac OS 7.6 CD that I outbid the high bidder by 1 cent to win. [
] ]'>
I have had a single instance of winning by one cent, and one in which I won by zero cents, but bid the winning amount two seconds earlier within the last 5sec.
What did £#@% me off was eBay's disallowing my winning bid within the last 10sec on one occasion. The 'reason'? It wasn't their ordained increment above the second-highest. How the hell does one know the second-highest bid under the bums-rush conditions of the last half-minute? That action takes pride of place in eBay's pettifogging. Highest bid is highest bid is highest bid, by any rational standard. That stupidity can only give rise to automated sniping, supposing that software can be written to 'read' pre-existing bids from the selling page.
In a live auction everyone present knows the current highest bid, and a standard increment can be understood as a convention of the auction, but it makes no sense on-line.
de
My point was that a highest bid is a highest bid, regardless of the increment over the second-highest. One unfailing principle of auction is 'highest bidder wins'. Under the 'blind' circumstances of on-line bidding it makes no sense to use a convention of increments that may apply (but not invariably) to live auctions, where everyone present knows the state of bidding. This is certainly not the case in eBay's on-line auctions, because bidders are not 'present' in the sight and hearing of their competitors and the auctioneer.
eBay already acknowledges the difference in circumstances by according precedence to the first bidder of one or more to bid a given amount, right through to 'fall of hammer'. 'Same amount' bids don't happen in 'live' auctions.
de
There is still the minimum increment you have to consider when biddding though. If the price is in a range where 50 cents is the minimum increment over the current bid, and someone gets a bid in before you make yours, then your increment is no longer going to be sufficient.
Example
Price on auction now is $1.00, Minimum bid increment is 50 cents.
You are hanging on until the last second to put in your bid of $1.51, but a split second before you put your bid in, I put in one for $1.50, but you can't refresh fast enough to see it and still put your bid in. Your bid is now rejected because you have to beat mine by 50 cents and $1.51 isn't going to do it, your bid must be at least $2.00. That's the way it always has been, this isn't something new they just started. Live auctions are the same. The auctioneer would start an item at $500 then go to $600 then $700. He doesn't accept bids in less than the minimum increment, he'd be there all day while the bidders nickel and dime each other to death.
Example
Price on auction now is $1.00, Minimum bid increment is 50 cents.
You are hanging on until the last second to put in your bid of $1.51, but a split second before you put your bid in, I put in one for $1.50, but you can't refresh fast enough to see it and still put your bid in. Your bid is now rejected because you have to beat mine by 50 cents and $1.51 isn't going to do it, your bid must be at least $2.00. That's the way it always has been, this isn't something new they just started. Live auctions are the same. The auctioneer would start an item at $500 then go to $600 then $700. He doesn't accept bids in less than the minimum increment, he'd be there all day while the bidders nickel and dime each other to death.
You are re-iterating what I have already suggested is unnecessary in the 'blind' circumstances of on-line bidding. I know how live auctions work, and the circumstance of having all parties together makes that system possible, and, it has to be added, confers no advantage on any party. Even then, auction houses will often accept smaller (but not piffling) increments towards the end. It is, after all, to the auction house's advantage to have as high a price as possible bid at fall of hammer, which happens when no further bid is forthcoming.
On-line auctions have no true 'fall of hammer'. The end is at an arbitrary time. Individual bidders cannot know what bids have been made at every moment unless eBay devises a way to show them second-by-second. If eBay were to do so, it might be rational to insist on a formulaic bid increment, but at the moment it is not rational. The only rational alternative is the simple 'first-past-the-post' approach.
However, as I wrote several posts ago, real-world eBay winners don't deal in minimal increments anyway. They decide their limits, and bid those at the last convenient moment. If they win, they win. If they are outbid, c'est la vie.
de
On-line auctions have no true 'fall of hammer'. The end is at an arbitrary time. Individual bidders cannot know what bids have been made at every moment unless eBay devises a way to show them second-by-second. If eBay were to do so, it might be rational to insist on a formulaic bid increment, but at the moment it is not rational. The only rational alternative is the simple 'first-past-the-post' approach.
However, as I wrote several posts ago, real-world eBay winners don't deal in minimal increments anyway. They decide their limits, and bid those at the last convenient moment. If they win, they win. If they are outbid, c'est la vie.
de
Similar threads
