Options
Anyone see the Clemente rookies PWCC has up for auction tonight??
bobbyw8469
Posts: 7,139 ✭✭✭
Does none of his bidders believe in waiting until the last minute or sniping!?!?!??! I mean, these things are through the roof and they are barely one hour old!!!! These might all be record setters!
0
Comments
<< <i>Does none of his bidders believe in waiting until the last minute or sniping!?!?!??! I mean, these things are through the roof and they are barely one hour old!!!! These might all be record setters! >>
Snipping doesn't save you a penny on a card like this. There are 62 watchers in less then 24 hours. A card like this doesn't just slip through the cracks.
In a bull market snipping is pointless. The fact that so many snipe makes it meaningless at this point anyways.
<< <i>Oh...I didnt realize they were almost 24 hours old......still...a PSA 5 is already a $1,000......I remember not too long ago, $1,000 would be the snipe, and I was sweating bullets to see if someone wanted to give $1,000 for it!
>>
Clemente
Not sure if it comes up with the search entered and if not just put in 1955 Clemente.
The argument for sniping was somewhat rational in a flat market but in a rising market no bidding strategy matters. When you see gaps of several thousand dollars between the third bidder and the under bidder it is proven to be no help in winning an auction for a lower price.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Does none of his bidders believe in waiting until the last minute or sniping!?!?!??! I mean, these things are through the roof and they are barely one hour old!!!! These might all be record setters! >>
Snipping doesn't save you a penny on a card like this. There are 62 watchers in less then 24 hours. A card like this doesn't just slip through the cracks.
In a bull market snipping is pointless. The fact that so many snipe makes it meaningless at this point anyways. >>
I agree with you on a card like this. But many other auctions provide real savings for people who snipe. Mainly because it is often a 2 or a 3 bidder race and if you go in early with a bid that it the top bid, it gets their anxiety ticking and forcing them to bid beyond levels they would have (sometimes significantly). If you just leave it alone and come in with a snipe, I think you often times will walk away with a lower price. >>
I disagree. Any card offers a chance for two people to go head to head. We are in the era of the nuclear snipe because of fear of losing due to rising prices. The snipe is not effective anymore and only is on items that are listed wrong or are sleepers. At least 25% or more of all bids are snipes. The secret is out so it is no longer effective.
Some of the most contested items in the past year have limped to the close with the bids moving it up to the market clearing price prior to the final 8 seconds. A great thing that collectibles have is the ability to only have one item for sale at any given time and this is obviously one of the things that can cause the price to rise so much.
<< <i>Dpeck100,
First off, I think the secret of sniping was basically outed in the 1990s. As for 2 people going head to head, you're presuming there is always a static limit to what each bidder will bid. There isn't. I can't be the ONLY bidder willing to move his limit based on the activity I'm seeing from others. ebay auctions are FULL of listings that had legitimate high first bids by bidders, only to come in higher and higher based on others outbidding them. If they weren't outbid, in many of those cases, another bidder could have patiently waited until the final seconds to make their strongest bid and take the auction, instead of battling beforehand. For whatever reason, even though everyone has been aware of sniping for years, LOTS of people still don't do it. It would be MUCH nicer for everyone to just snipe, then shilling would be a less prevalent problem. >>
Sniping protects no one from shilling. If a seller has an item listed for $0.99 and wants to insure it goes for a certain amount a safety bid will be placed by a friend or another account and they set a reserve quite easily.
Three years ago just about every single person on this board would have argued that sniping was the way to go. You save money and win auctions. They may still.
Baseball cards were in a consolidating market so this logic was somewhat believable.
Well many cards have moved up several hundred percent since then.
Someone please explain to me how a snipe works in a rising market. You can't. My argument from day one.
<< <i>Concerning sniping, no one is suggesting that it protects from shilling, but that it would make it a less of a problem. You throw out a large bid from the get go and you give the opportunity for the shiller to place a lot of bids giving the fake appearance of a lot of activity and you allow the shiller to run you up to the max and then retract the last bid leaving you completely exposed to pay your max bid. If it was only sniped, neither of these things could happen. No one is suggesting that people still wouldn't shill.
As for sniping, I'm not sure what difference it makes whether the market is rising or not? The point is that you give others less time to react. That in an of itself is big advantage that will play out in the numbers. Let's say Bidder A bids $80 (and that was his mental max) on a nice example of a card that goes for $90 usually. If I wait it out and snipe at $85, the card is mine at $81 or whatever the increment is as I'm not sure. However, if I bid that $85 early, Bidder A may decide to bid $90, or $95 or whatever and the card winds up selling for maybe 10-20% more than it might have. >>
Price gaps kill the theory. It is that simple.
In theory if every bid came in at a single increment it might work but when bids can be 100% or more higher then the next bid behind them it completely nullifies the concept.
This is the poster child for why snipes don't save you a penny on so many auctions.
There is a $2,700 gap between the third bidder and the second bidder.
I remember when this card was a Pop 2 and sold for less. $5,600 if a recall. It dropped down in the low 3's and then this auction hit.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Concerning sniping, no one is suggesting that it protects from shilling, but that it would make it a less of a problem. You throw out a large bid from the get go and you give the opportunity for the shiller to place a lot of bids giving the fake appearance of a lot of activity and you allow the shiller to run you up to the max and then retract the last bid leaving you completely exposed to pay your max bid. If it was only sniped, neither of these things could happen. No one is suggesting that people still wouldn't shill.
As for sniping, I'm not sure what difference it makes whether the market is rising or not? The point is that you give others less time to react. That in an of itself is big advantage that will play out in the numbers. Let's say Bidder A bids $80 (and that was his mental max) on a nice example of a card that goes for $90 usually. If I wait it out and snipe at $85, the card is mine at $81 or whatever the increment is as I'm not sure. However, if I bid that $85 early, Bidder A may decide to bid $90, or $95 or whatever and the card winds up selling for maybe 10-20% more than it might have. >>
Price gaps kill the theory. It is that simple.
In theory if every bid came in at a single increment it might work but when bids can be 100% or more higher then the next bid behind them it completely nullifies the concept. >>
Once again, that position only holds true if you assume that EVERY bidder has only one max and that is the one serious bid they will place (apart from placement bids). I don't buy that for one second. >>
Okay. Think what you like. The numbers don't lie.
It is a very liquid card.
<< <i>What numbers are you referring to? I have plenty of personal experience just in the auctions I've been involved in or may follow that leaves me convinced that in many cases, sniping can lead to lower hammer prices on ebay. If you spend most your time watching high grade HOF rookie cards by one of the most heralded and followed auctioneers on ebay, I can see how one might come to the conclusion that you draw. But they are a ton of auctions that take place apart from that stratosphere where the number of bidders is either 1, 2 or 3 and the final price of the item can definitely be influenced by the timing of the bids and not allowing others to think about if they want to bid more. >>
Just for fun. Do your best to dissect this one. You could have asked a few very well informed unopened collectors what to bid for this box a year ago.
1979 Topps
They would have given you a price that they felt was accurate at that time.
The price for this item moved further then any of them could have predicted and more buyers entered the market further complicating matters.
<< <i>Is this auction live? Or is it a past auction? >>
PSA 8
PSA 7
GAI 8
The watchers continue to climb on all of them.
<< <i>You're only referring to the "hot" products and auctions that PLENTY of people are bidding and watching. I agreed with you from the get go that those auctions will rarely provide any sniping benefit. >>
There are quite a few cards that have busted out of their trading ranges or set new records that are not "hot".
You have seen record prices all around the hobby and even in areas where no one thought it was possible.
We will just agree to disagree. I don't see any evidence in anything other then a sideways market where the concept could save you money. If so it won't be a wide margin either.
The number of market participants has gone up quite a bit in the past five years. As more bidders emerge auctions get more competitive and I just don't see it.
I can't tell you how many times I've lost auctions because I wasn't going to be in front of a computer at the end. Say I need to go out an hour before the auction ends so I put in my best bid. One of two things happens - either I'm lower than the leader's max bid or I take the lead. If I'm lower, I typically accept defeat and move on. If I'm high bid, I just left an hour for someone to think about how much they want the card - the vast majority of the time I lose those. Probably I've won a few and once I think I was shilled up, but most of the time I think my revealing my max early results in the item selling for more than it would have had I not put that info out.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Does none of his bidders believe in waiting until the last minute or sniping!?!?!??! I mean, these things are through the roof and they are barely one hour old!!!! These might all be record setters! >>
Snipping doesn't save you a penny on a card like this. There are 62 watchers in less then 24 hours. A card like this doesn't just slip through the cracks.
In a bull market snipping is pointless. The fact that so many snipe makes it meaningless at this point anyways. >>
I agree with you on a card like this. But many other auctions provide real savings for people who snipe. Mainly because it is often a 2 or a 3 bidder race and if you go in early with a bid that it the top bid, it gets their anxiety ticking and forcing them to bid beyond levels they would have (sometimes significantly). If you just leave it alone and come in with a snipe, I think you often times will walk away with a lower price. >>
Absolutely true. In my 15 years on ebay, sniping has both saved me money and enabled me to win more auctions than I otherwise would have--put your bids in early and you expose yourself to chip bidding or competitive bidders who keep bidding just to outbid you or drive the price up and quit when they reach your max. Even worse, since ebay does NOTHING about bid retractions, there are those who will just keep bidding till they outbid you and then retract their bid. I've seen it happen, in either scenario, many times.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Dpeck100,
The point is very simple. Take a look at this random auction:
Text
The underbidder ruins the example to some extent but s/he places the bid after the 2nd runner up. Let's assume for a moment the actual underbidder at $200 does not bid for whatever reason. You have the winning bidder placing the bid days before it ends. The substitute underbidder (with feedback of 1223), first places a bid at $185, then $190, then caps out at $195. If the winning bidder had sniped this (assuming again that the underbidder wasn't there), the substitute underbidder would have thought he might comfortably win with an auction that was just over $160 going into the final seconds, with a "comfortable" max at $185. The winning bidder would snipe and win at $187.50. But because the winning bidder didn't snipe, the guy placed two more bids at $190, then $195. Thereby (once again assuming the actual underbidder wasn't there, winning the auction at $197.50 instead of $187.50. This happens ALL the time on ebay. >>
You just made my point. You can't predict who will bid. There are 9 bidders in this auction with three unique bidders within $7.50 of each other. For all we know the bidder who won might have had a max bid of $300 and if one more bid came in you could see it jump a big percentage.
It is so odd to me that every time someone tries to explain the massive savings association with sniping every argument suggests that if this other person didn't bid. They did bid! There are also many bids that don't even go off according to many as the other snipes blow by there bid.
There are plenty of bidders who already plan to snipe from the get go. If the current price passes their snipe they must raise it regardless to factor in the auction. I could search EBAY and find countless examples where the final three bids are snipes and determine the outcome. The early bids in so many cases aren't even relevant to the auction when it is all said and done.
Kahn's Clemente
I came across this gem.
Clemente
You have three last minute bidders. 613 bumps it up on 477 and he is sitting on top and then bam the two snipes move the card 53.37% above the third bidder. All of the early bids don't even factor into the outcome.
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
<< <i>Dpeck, I enjoy your posts, but think you are wrong when it comes to sniping. In an auction format like eBay, a last second snipe is the best way to bid on an item. I just don't see the logic or benefit of placing bid anytime before the closing seconds - you only run the risk of having the price driven up higher by bidding sooner. >>
If you have ever participated in an auction where a seller lists a number of cards from one set you will see the hammer prices get higher and higher if the auctions are staggered within a minute of each other.
Why? Becuase once a patern has been established that a certain bidder is sniping and winning the under bidder's high bids rise. If you want to hammer someone you can easily do so in a case like this.
If I were to ever be a shill bidder, every bid would be a snipe bid.
If the number of snipe bids were much lower I think it might work but with it being so called common knowledge not to bid until the end it isn't useful.
Additionally by not sniping you are much more likely to engage in competitive bidding that you would otherwise not. The competitive instinct to win is very strong and placing a bid only to see someone else beat it causes many people to re-bid so they can "win". This re-bidding causes folks to spend/bid more than they had originally planned for an item. This is a very real and well documented phenomenon.
You are also at the mercy of chip bidders. I have seen no argument on your side indicating how bidding early protects you from chip bidding. Just some hypothetical that basically boils down to the shillers will figure you out eventually.
There are very few situations where placing a strong bid early is the right move. For some hot items how you bid is functionally irrelevant but that is the exception not the rule and does not in anyway invalidate snipe bidding.
There is a danger to snipe shilling, ie accidentally winning the auction because the strong bidder never materializes, that just doesn't exist if someone is kind enough to bid strong and early especially if that person has a well documented history for how they bid and what items they bid on.
Your point that sniping is pointless because "everyone does it" is not accurate. There are distinct benefits to sniping, some of which are detailed above, none of which go away because others choose to snipe also.
Robb
<< <i>Giving away information is rarely a recipe for success. By bidding early and strongly you are placing yourself at a disadvantage.
Additionally by not sniping you are much more likely to engage in competitive bidding that you would otherwise not. The competitive instinct to win is very strong and placing a bid only to see someone else beat it causes many people to re-bid so they can "win". This re-bidding causes folks to spend/bid more than they had originally planned for an item. This is a very real and well documented phenomenon.
You are also at the mercy of chip bidders. I have seen no argument on your side indicating how bidding early protects you from chip bidding. Just some hypothetical that basically boils down to the shillers will figure you out eventually.
There are very few situations where placing a strong bid early is the right move. For some hot items how you bid is functionally irrelevant but that is the exception not the rule and does not in anyway invalidate snipe bidding.
There is a danger to snipe shilling, ie accidentally winning the auction because the strong bidder never materializes, that just doesn't exist if someone is kind enough to bid strong and early especially if that person has a well documented history for how they bid and what items they bid on.
Your point that sniping is pointless because "everyone does it" is not accurate. There are distinct benefits to sniping, some of which are detailed above, none of which go away because others choose to snipe also.
Robb >>
Different opinions is what makes a market.
Fergie said it best. Giving away information is never an advantage.
Ask yourself this:
1) If the goal is getting the lowest possible price, is sniping ever a disadvantage?
2) Assuming the answer is no, do you think I could find one auction in the last million where sniping led to a lower price than an early max bid. I think we can all agree that at least one case must exist.
If the answer to 1) is no and 2) is yes, then sniping provides an advantage, even if miniscule. Again, nobody is saying that sniping always, or even commonly leads to a lower price. The point is that it doesn't hurt and it may sometimes help. I'm open to flaws in my logic and I'm sure there is someone smarter than me that can pick it apart, but this is where my thinking is at the moment.
jbox
i set my snipes, and move on with real life.
i see no reason not to snipe.
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
The only advantage I can think of for an early bid in an auction is if there is a BIN option as well with the BIN being reasonable. This removes the BIN option and may provide you with an information advantage over others interested in the item. In this case, I usually place an early min bid and set a snipe in the range of the BIN. Many times you can get a good % off the BIN, sometimes you pay pretty much what you would have if initially hitting the BIN, and in some cases you lose and it sells for higher than it was available for via BIN. Overall, it's a method that has worked well for me.
For the truly rare or condition rare, I agree with Dpeck, there is no advantage to any method. Nuclear early bids and snipes will both be placed, shilling will happen either way, and the seller will be quite pleased with the results.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck, I enjoy your posts, but think you are wrong when it comes to sniping. In an auction format like eBay, a last second snipe is the best way to bid on an item. I just don't see the logic or benefit of placing bid anytime before the closing seconds - you only run the risk of having the price driven up higher by bidding sooner. >>
If you have ever participated in an auction where a seller lists a number of cards from one set you will see the hammer prices get higher and higher if the auctions are staggered within a minute of each other.
Why? Becuase once a patern has been established that a certain bidder is sniping and winning the under bidder's high bids rise. If you want to hammer someone you can easily do so in a case like this.
If I were to ever be a shill bidder, every bid would be a snipe bid.
If the number of snipe bids were much lower I think it might work but with it being so called common knowledge not to bid until the end it isn't useful. >>
Dpeck, I don't agree with your logic here. First, for "set break" type auctions, I hardly ever see the hammer prices steadily increase (they surely don't with my auctions
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
<< <i>Dpeck100,
I didn't bother spending much time digging up a clean example, but there are easily thousands to be found every single day. Here is but one that illustrates my point. The winning bidder did not snipe and paid almost 20% more than s/he probably would have had to:
Text >>
Bidders:3Bids:5Time Ended:Apr-29-14 06:50:40 PDTDuration:7 days
This item has ended.
Only actual bids (not automatic bids generated up to a bidder's maximum) are shown. Automatic bids may be placed days or hours before a listing ends. Learn more about bidding - opens in a new window or tab.
Show automatic bids
Bidder Bid Amount Bid Time
Member Id: a***n( 433) US $107.50 Apr-26-14 03:21:47 PDT
Member Id: n***n( 2012) US $105.00 Apr-28-14 21:47:31 PDT
Member Id: n***n( 2012) US $99.00 Apr-28-14 21:47:17 PDT
Member Id: n***n( 2012) US $90.00 Apr-28-14 21:47:10 PDT
Member Id: d***s( 5380) US $86.00 Apr-22-14 21:39:44 PDT
Starting Price US $85.99 Apr-22-14 06:50:40 PDT
So the assumption is made that bidder 2012 will only bid once assuming that 433 bids at the very end. In this example in theory he would have saved $16.50. That being said there is no telling. He might have come with a higher bid had he only seen one bidder. We just don't know. The other issue is in theory the bid was already higher and this discouraged other bids from coming in.
There are two other examples in the past week or so that went for $106 and $114.
I need a better one.
1. Sniping = no downside
2. Sniping = possible benefit, even if rarely and only a for small amounts.
3. Sniping for the win.
4. Easy game
Looking for a bidding history that shows unequivocally that sniping saved money is a fools errand. There are too many unknowable variables. (What would bidder 1 have done if xyz, etc.) Do you agree that if my max bid is $1000 that I can't hurt myself by sniping $1000? Do you agree that there is at least a theoretical scenario where a sniper could save $.01? If the answer to both questions is yes, then game over. It is not necessary to actually show a real-life example. Even if you believe there has never and will never be a case where sniping saved money, then the two methods are at least equal. In that case, sniping still wins because one can set the snipe and forget about it.
Lastly, to be clear again, I love DPeck and enjoy these types of discussions and agree that sniping has decreased in value over the years.
jbox
<< <i>Giving away information is rarely a recipe for success. >>
Haven't read this entire thread, but upon giving it a cursory glance I extracted this 9-word sentence.
If you allow the competition to assimilate information, you will lose over the long haul, period. Either the item in question or dinero that should have remained in your wallet. Sure, you might run across an individual listing that proves conducive to success even with a premature bid, but I assure you a healthy sample size will prove otherwise.
Go play in a poker tournament sometime and try it out. Prior to the commencement of each hand, reveal your cards to the table and then ride it out to the river. Heck, reveal just one card and see what happens. Sure, you'll stumble across random hands in which variance saves your behind, but the likelihood of you departing sooner rather than later is heightened when you give your adversaries even the slightest inkling.
Sniping doesn't guarantee a win, but it guarantees that no one else knows what's coming other than yourself. The moment you conspicuously enter the fray, you afford an interested party the opportunity to stop on a dime and adjust if need be. Once that happens, the pocket aces you are holding just transformed themselves into jacks.
<< <i>
<< <i>Giving away information is rarely a recipe for success. >>
Haven't read this entire thread, but upon giving it a cursory glance I extracted this 9-word sentence.
If you allow the competition to assimilate information, you will lose over the long haul, period. Either the item in question or dinero that should have remained in your wallet. Sure, you might run across an individual listing that proves conducive to success even with a premature bid, but I assure you a healthy sample size will prove otherwise.
Go play in a poker tournament sometime and try it out. Prior to the commencement of each hand, reveal your cards to the table and then ride it out to the river. Heck, reveal just one card and see what happens. Sure, you'll stumble across random hands in which variance saves your behind, but the likelihood of you departing sooner rather than later is heightened when you give your adversaries even the slightest inkling.
Sniping doesn't guarantee a win, but it guarantees that no one else knows what's coming other than yourself. The moment you conspicuously enter the fray, you afford an interested party the opportunity to stop on a dime and adjust if need be. Once that happens, the pocket aces you are holding just transformed themselves into jacks. >>
Extremely well said.
<< <i>When you win an auction with a snipe the underbidder is kicking himself thinking he could have won the auction if he bid one more time. With a snipe he never had a chance to bid again. If your bid was placed early on he would have chipped away bid by bid until he was the high bidder. Sniping ensures that if you win, you will win at the lowest price. Bidding early just puts out the number for everyone to beat. >>
I think there is something to that. I've had cases where I set my snipe higher if I really wanted a card and the current bid was over VCP. Had the bid not been that high, I would have based my bid off VCP history. So let's say a card has a VCP range of $25-$35 and a high bid is placed at $40 with 2 days to go. That bid would likely chase away many potential bidders who don't want to pay the high end of the market price for the card while it may attract a bidder or two that are willing to go stronger in order to pry the card away from the current high bidder. This may be less a case for power cards like the high grade Clemente RC. I also think the opposite can be the case for catalog auction houses that have preset bid increments. Sometimes, especially on high dollar items, it's better to hold the high bidder position before you get to the last day or so of the auction. The bid increments can sometimes be several hundred to even a thousand or more dollars. So if you let someone else get the pole position entering the final phase of the auction, it can become very expensive to outbid them when you take that large incremental bid and then add the juice to it.
<< <i>Dpeck100,
There is no disagreeing that irrefutable proof will never exist in this or most things in life. There is no way to disapprove what we can speculate "might" have happened. Your open ended speculation of all the bids that may have occurred otherwise is not by any means logically invalid. However, I for one am VERY comfortable in reasoning that as many times as this goes on, I can't logically fathom that every one of those instances would have led to the behavior that you want to speculate would or could have occurred.
Quite honestly, I would think your theory on this matter is in stark conflict with your repeated postings on the lack of strong/wide support for many prices as you constantly point out (which I could not agree more with) that if this one bidder or that one bidder didn't participate, that the hammer price would have been significantly lower. But now you want to presume that if that person didn't participate, there was a bevy of non-participants who otherwise would have. >>
The person did participate. Your assumption is they only bid once. For the item to go lower we have to assume no one else came in. I am just suggesting we don't know if someone else will. In reality there were other bids in this auction and it is impossible for us to know their motivation.
In the end we probably agree on a number of things and perhaps disagree on others.
I just think the collectibles world is far to complex to accurately be able to predict the perfect way to bid. Markets have a way of finding their price is my belief.
<< <i>Dpeck, show me how this is wrong.
1. Sniping = no downside
2. Sniping = possible benefit, even if rarely and only a for small amounts.
3. Sniping for the win.
4. Easy game
Looking for a bidding history that shows unequivocally that sniping saved money is a fools errand. There are too many unknowable variables. (What would bidder 1 have done if xyz, etc.) Do you agree that if my max bid is $1000 that I can't hurt myself by sniping $1000? Do you agree that there is at least a theoretical scenario where a sniper could save $.01? If the answer to both questions is yes, then game over. It is not necessary to actually show a real-life example. Even if you believe there has never and will never be a case where sniping saved money, then the two methods are at least equal. In that case, sniping still wins because one can set the snipe and forget about it.
Lastly, to be clear again, I love DPeck and enjoy these types of discussions and agree that sniping has decreased in value over the years.
jbox >>
A sniper could save $0.01 on some auctions. I certainly can't dispute that. They could also get hosed for big money by a shill bidder as their bids are far away in many cases from the current price on EBAY with 15 seconds to go.
I would put a cost savings of the amount you asked in the statistically insignificant category.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Dpeck, you are the only person in this thread who doesn't comprehend that sniping both saves you money (at least potentially) and/or increase your odds of wining the item at the lowest possible price. You keep beating your dead horse, but you are wrong on both counts, simply put. If you want to spend more and/or lose more auctions without setting early nuclear bids, then by all means, don't snipe. >>
LOL
<< <i>Dpeck, you are the only person in this thread who doesn't comprehend that sniping both saves you money (at least potentially) and/or increase your odds of wining the item at the lowest possible price. You keep beating your dead horse, but you are wrong on both counts, simply put. If you want to spend more and/or lose more auctions without setting early nuclear bids, then by all means, don't snipe. >>
By the way I have tried every type of bidding strategy. Early strong bids, middle strong bids, last second strong bids, appearance of shilling and any other type of strategy you can think of. Guess what. The card sold for what it was going to sell for. Whether it doubled on the close, inched up a few bucks, jumped 20% or I lost it being the under bidder or multiple under bidder the pattern of bidding in the end made no difference.
You guys are really fooling yourselves if you think it is that simple.
<< <i>Dpeck, you are the only person in this thread who doesn't comprehend that sniping both saves you money (at least potentially) and/or increase your odds of wining the item at the lowest possible price. You keep beating your dead horse, but you are wrong on both counts, simply put. If you want to spend more and/or lose more auctions without setting early nuclear bids, then by all means, don't snipe. >>
+10000. I typically can see both sides of an argument, but not on this one.
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
Typically, my snipe will be my only bidding on the item. In some instances, perchance there is a BIN that I think is unreasonable to me, but that I fear someone may actually execute, I will bid to break the seal and eliminate the BIN alternative and then set my snipe. If someone had been willing to execute the BIN, they do not know that one existed and if they did, and were willing to pay it, they'll outbid or out-snipe me at the end. Regardless, I will either win the auction for what I'm willing to spend (or usually less) or someone else will outbid me. I would have no interest in placing a higher bid had I set my ceiling and watched the auction to the end.
Only two bids in the end mattered.
This is a perfect example of someone who had his strongest bid in with several hours to go and someone placed a final bid that was even higher. None of the action leading up to the final 20 seconds even mattered.
There was no bidding strategy that would have changed this outcome. The market found its price. When you have cards nearly tripling in price in the final minute there is nothing you can do to predict this and in the end the snipe bidder won the card at the highest price.
<< <i>I guess I don't see the point as to why the $1,000 bid on the Clemente PSA 5 with 5 days to go. In my opinion, the card has already reached the max. The consignor is lucky to be at the $1,000 level, and the buyer is not getting a deal. With the card at it's max already, with nowhere to go but up, I don't see any alternative but the bidder 'losing' in this instance. Just not sure of the strategy of 'maxing' a card out with so much time left on the clock. This phenomenon MUST be exclusive to PWCC only.... >>
That card presents great. This looks like a perfect card for someone on a budget who wants to own a Clemente rookie.