<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here.
<< <i>How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
This x1000
If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be shilled?
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
I don't think all snipers want to win. I think a good number of them realize how easy it is to throw out a big number and drive up the final price.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
That is true, but doesn't really mean anything. Not all snipes go off because they are below the next minimum bid when the time comes. Why don't these count in our discussion?
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
Many snipes never go off due to chip bidders driving up the price, or the sniper just doesn't want to go above a certain amount.
If you keep reusing catch phrases like "record selling prices" every other post, it doesn't make your erroneous contention any more salient, btw..
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 can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
Many snipes never go off due to chip bidders driving up the price, or the sniper just doesn't want to go above a certain amount.
If you keep reusing catch phrases like "record selling prices" every other post, it doesn't make your erroneous contention any more salient, btw.. >>
I am getting the feeling you are realizing that your final snipe on an auction that only two people bid much higher then the pack wasn't coming from someone who wanted to win.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Dpeck, I think I have figured out why you are not understanding this... Your definition of a snipe is completely different than everyone else's here on the board. In your mind, a snipe is a win-at-all-cost bid that potentially leaves you exposed. If you want to formulate your own definition of a snipe, then yes you are correct with logic. However, you're speaking a completely different language than the rest of us.
I'm not sure what your thought process is when you bid on something, but I'm guessing for most of us it is something like this:
1. See a card on ebay that you want 2. Research value of the card (VCP, historical sales, etc.) 3. Determine a number you are willing to bid on the card (typically within +-15% of market average depending on the qualities of the card) 4. Set snipe amount determined by step #3
Here is the straw man that you keep setting up for sniping
1. See a card on ebay that you want 2. Place a $100,000 snipe 3. Cross fingers and hope you're able to get the card for a bargain
If you use the first method described, you are NOT at risk for the items you mentioned above, in fact it will help mitigate them.
[I am getting the feeling you are realizing that your final snipe on an auction that only two people bid much higher then the pack wasn't coming from someone who wanted to win.
Please elaborate on this. I have no idea what this sentence even means.
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>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
Here is the clean, clear, concise and (in my opinion) completely irrefutable logic on which my points are based. If there were two parallel universes in which the same auction could be happening at the same time with all of the same circumstances leading up to the placement of a bid, the snipe would almost always end in the same price or a lower price as compared to a squat auction. There are no downsides to sniping if the amount you are willing to bid is constant across bidding strategies.
<< <i>[I am getting the feeling you are realizing that your final snipe on an auction that only two people bid much higher then the pack wasn't coming from someone who wanted to win.
Please elaborate on this. I have no idea what this sentence even means. >>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
You don't need to predict others. If you bid the amount you want to pay, you'll either win/lose and be exposed/not independent of the bidding strategy. And in the case of the snipe, there is a possibility of you not exciting other bidders along the way, saving money.
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Dpeck, I think I have figured out why you are not understanding this... Your definition of a snipe is completely different than everyone else's here on the board. In your mind, a snipe is a win-at-all-cost bid that potentially leaves you exposed. If you want to formulate your own definition of a snipe, then yes you are correct with logic. However, you're speaking a completely different language than the rest of us.
I'm not sure what your thought process is when you bid on something, but I'm guessing for most of us it is something like this:
1. See a card on ebay that you want 2. Research value of the card (VCP, historical sales, etc.) 3. Determine a number you are willing to bid on the card (typically within +-15% of market average depending on the qualities of the card) 4. Set snipe amount determined by step #3
Here is the straw man that you keep setting up for sniping
1. See a card on ebay that you want 2. Place a $100,000 snipe 3. Cross fingers and hope you're able to get the card for a bargain
If you use the first method described, you are NOT at risk for the items you mentioned above, in fact it will help mitigate them. >>
Any card that more then one person wants to own has competition. The vast majority of competitive bids are placed in the final seconds.
I have tried it myself. I have given some serious thought to this topic and have literally tried every bidding strategy.
There was a moment where I thought maybe there is something to this laying in the weeds and then bam bidding strategy. Only to have a snipe come in and jack the price 40%.
The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
So you agree its impossible to predict than a snipe is more likely to be shilled?
You now have no more negatives to stand against sniping.
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
So you agree its impossible to predict than a snipe is more likely to be shilled?
You now have no more negatives to stand against sniping. >>
I don't think any bid is truly safe from a shill bid.
Dpeck in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how?
The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet."
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 in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price.
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on.
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 in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price. >>
You literally just made the argument for sniping!
Your first statement agrees that sniping/squatting didn't matter in these cases but didn't hurt.
Your second statement agrees that in limited cases it might work.
This is exactly what everyone is trying to tell you!!!
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on. >>
Which one? The one that said you might have been nailed by a snipe bid that was only there to make you pay more.
You can't possibly think that this hasn't happened to quite a few people can you? >>
So you are saying then, if I understand you correctly, that said snipe bid was set by a shill bidder, correct? I mean, that's what you are directly implying in that sentence. Either that, or someone just wants to drive up the price for whatever reason.
In that case, I'm sure it has happened to me, just as I'm sure I've been shilled by manual shill bidders, too. I cannot control or prevent that. But once again, that has no relevance as to why sniping is beneficial or not. If the deck is stacked, and an auction is being shilled or manipulated by someone who is determined not to let the item go for less than XX.XX amount, than no bidding strategy, sniping or manual bidding, is going to change that.
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 in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price. >>
You literally just made the argument for sniping!
Your first statement agrees that sniping/squatting didn't matter in these cases but didn't hurt.
Your second statement agrees that in limited cases it might work.
This is exactly what everyone is trying to tell you!!!
END THREAD!!! >>
The argument is it saves money. It doesn't. Markets find their price.
Can it hurt you. Of course it can.
If you want to win an auction at any price a snipe is your best bet. Just throw in a price that is higher then anyone else can imagine paying and you almost always win. If you lose someone else got hung out to dry.
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on. >>
Which one? The one that said you might have been nailed by a snipe bid that was only there to make you pay more.
You can't possibly think that this hasn't happened to quite a few people can you? >>
So you are saying then, if I understand you correctly, that said snipe bid was set by a shill bidder, correct? I mean, that's what you are directly implying in that sentence. Either that, or someone just wants to drive up the price for whatever reason.
In that case, I'm sure it has happened to me, just as I'm sure I've been shilled my manual shill bidders, too. I cannot control or prevent that. But once again, that has no relevance as to why sniping is beneficial or not. If the deck is stacked, and an auction is being shilled or manipulated by someone who is determined not to let the item go for less than XX.XX amount, than no bidding strategy, sniping or manual bidding, is going to change that. >>
There are so many reasons why people bid on items.
The final hammer prices are reached by humans bidding on trading cards. We are all subject to the risks of the market. That is my point.
Bid when you want. If someone wants the card to sell for a certain price they can protect that level in any form.
It is naive to think that snipe bidding protects you from anything other then yourself.
Four years ago when I was bidding on cards no one wanted my thought process could have easily been refuted. Once other people get interested in a genre or set the rules change.
I am heading to bed. I will never convince you guys that auctions are random and bidding strategies in the end mean nothing. Good night and we will talk about something else tomorrow.
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.
Honestly Dpeck, I really like you as a member but logic is not your strong suit. You have not made a logical argument nor used logic to refute the other position. I mean logic as a field of study. My avatar perfectly reflects how I feel trying to debate this. I quit. But I still love dpeck.
DPeck, I think I am beginning to understand why people do not engage you in an argument regarding your contrarian positions. You have not actually proven your argument which boils down to bid strategy is irrelevant in the current market. The myriad of examples you provided don't actually prove anything. It would be the equivalent of me posting an example or three with one squatter and one sniper where the sniper won and then saying QED.
Yes there are shill snipes (perhaps even the majority of shilling occurs via sniping at this point), however the shill sniper is taking a risk that does not exist when someone places their max bid early. You state The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid. We may not know the motivation of that bidder but as a shiller you know they have bid and can take action. That action, shilling, will actually allow you to determine the motivation of the squat bidder as well as subject the squat bidder to other bidding strategies, chip bidding, that do not affect snipe bidders.
You said: The argument is it saves money. It doesn't. Markets find their price. This is simply not 100% correct because markets (especially ebay) are not perfectly efficient. While markets do find their price on average there are always outliers. Sniping prevents competitive/shill bidding which can drive up the price of an individual auction. By preventing an underbidder from making an additional bid you are A) saving yourself money and ensuring you win that specific auction for the lowest price possible. Now would an underbidder always increase their previously final bid? Of course not but prior to sniping I can say that the majority of us, in the heat of the moment, had at one time or another convinced ourselves to bid one or two increments more when our final bid was exceeded. For the most part sniping prevents this phenomenon from occurring. Contrary to your position not every snipe is a nuclear snipe intended to win an auction at any cost.
You have not actually provided a single argument why sniping is in fact bad. Your squat bidding is subject to every single one of the negatives you have mentioned for sniping. In fact a squat bidder is at greater risk of being shilled and is not protected from a snipe shill at all.
Robb, You're arguing with someone that correctly predicted every match in the 2007 Survivor Series. I hardly think you're in any position to tell him how markets operate. The track record speaks for itself.
There are some wild papers written about second price internet auctions.
Any cost savings was found to be statistically insignificant suggesting the equilibrium price was found.
What is also interesting is the item in question plays a major role in the probability of snipe bids. The data suggests also that an early bid on an item that only attracts one bid wins it cheaper.
There are loads of theories we see play out on a daily basis. For example the bidding early to fend of competition. The data suggests this can work.
OK, I will actually partially agree with Dpeck on this narrow point.
For auctions with a high starting price that closely approximates mid-high VCP, I think there is some merit in bidding early as opposed to only sniping:
a) with a high starting price, the item may sell with only 1 bid. Bidding early means you get it and the next bidder has to bid one increment higher- which may be a dealbreaker for them
b) bidding early indicates to other buyers that "you can't get this for the starting price" / "there will be competition for this item" which isn't necessarily a given. It may deter people from watching an item or considering buying it because they will believe that the price will go higher. Without a bid, they may think they can get it at the opening price.
In these situations, I have sometimes bid the minimum/opening bid early, and then set a snipe with my actual max bid, to try to get the benefits of both.
<< <i>Robb, You're arguing with someone that correctly predicted every match in the 2007 Survivor Series. I hardly think you're in any position to tell him how markets operate. The track record speaks for itself. >>
My favorite quote of yours.
- We're talking about sports cards. Who gives a crap. The one person in the world who has the most invested in this set will probably make around $2,000. That's not putting anybody's kids through college.
If South Korean physicists say I should snipe, then sniping I will do.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/2006-06-25-physics-of-ebay_x.htm To test whether sniping is a smart way to do things or just truncates normal bidding, the South Korean team at Seoul National University produced a "master equation" for how bidding proceeds (it's nk(t+1) — nk(t) = w(k-1)(t)*n(k-1)(t) — wk(t)*nk(t) + sigma(k,1)*u(t), if you really want to know), and then tested it against a massive number of auction records, some 264,073 items sold in one day on eBay and another 287,018 items sold in one year by eBay's Korean partner.
Plugging all those data into the model and testing the outcome in terms of how the auctions turned out, the team found that the probability of submitting a winning bid on an item indeed drops with each bid. "Our analysis explicitly shows that the winning strategy is to bid at the last moment as the first attempt rather than incremental bidding from the start." The study appears in the current Physical Review E journal.
The finding is no surprise to Harvard economist Alvin Roth, who has studied sniping from an economics viewpoint since 2002 with colleague Axel Ockenfels of Germany's University of Cologne. They came to similar conclusions. "I think you might do the most good if you advise bidders to form an opinion of how much they are willing to pay for an item, so that they don't get caught up in a bidding war and pay more than they will be happy with," says Roth, by e-mail. "But, that being said, if they know what proxy bid they want to submit, it won't hurt them to submit it very near the end (but neither will it help them much, or often ...) So, sniping is a good strategy, for those with the time to do it," he adds.
We're talking about sports cards. Who gives a crap. The one person in the world who has the most invested in this set will probably make around $2,000. That's not putting anybody's kids through college.
What set did I say that about? It's probably something that's worth like $25k now.
The best part about not caring about being wrong is that you get to say anything you want and shrug it off when you're proven wrong. And then you get to say more inaccurate stuff just for the sake of saying it. Life is great fun.
<< <i>We're talking about sports cards. Who gives a crap. The one person in the world who has the most invested in this set will probably make around $2,000. That's not putting anybody's kids through college.
What set did I say that about? It's probably something that's worth like $25k now.
The best part about not caring about being wrong is that you get to say anything you want and shrug it off when you're proven wrong. And then you get to say more inaccurate stuff just for the sake of saying it. Life is great fun. >>
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here.
<< <i>How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
This x1000
If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be shilled?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed.
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
I don't think all snipers want to win. I think a good number of them realize how easy it is to throw out a big number and drive up the final price.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
That is true, but doesn't really mean anything. Not all snipes go off because they are below the next minimum bid when the time comes. Why don't these count in our discussion?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
Many snipes never go off due to chip bidders driving up the price, or the sniper just doesn't want to go above a certain amount.
If you keep reusing catch phrases like "record selling prices" every other post, it doesn't make your erroneous contention any more salient, btw..
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>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Are you saying sniping exposes you to shills more than other methods? If so, how? Sorry if I missed an earlier explanation.
What do you mean by #2? Exposed to what?
#3 is not a negative to sniping. There are certainly more examples of no inspires winning at record prices than steals as well and is not relevant. >>
The easiest way to get shilled is through a snipe bid. Plain and simple.
Most think that the inching up method that some shills use is the most damaging but the real one is the silent snipe at much higher prices that nails another snipe bidder. >>
How? If you squat bid at the same top price, that snipe is still coming. BOOM! >>
I learned a long time ago that you can't predict the finish on cards you want to own. You place your bid and see what the snipes do to it or the auction was already exhausted and you will find out when the seconds go to zero.
If you want to lay someone out the easiest way is a snipe. The vast majority of final bids are placed to win. Not to support the market. >>
How would this be any different for a squat bidder though? Wouldn't the shill snipe still be placed in either case and result in the same end price for both methods? I'm attempting to close a point here. >>
The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid.
The trading card market is very unpredictable. There are guys that want to own 121 Randy Myers 1993 Topps Finest Refractors. Who in their right mind would try this? On one hand you can limit the availability and artificially drive up the price but you will never be able to sell. Yes you can say you own half or more of the run but you will lose money when it is all said and done if you try and sell. That being said someone does it. It is their prerogative and I don't try and rationalize why it happens.
Record selling prices happen on the final bid and not the opening bid. If you want to nail someone you can very easily on the close. It has happened to all of us. >>
You are determining that the motivation of all snipers is to win at every cost to support your line of reasoning. All snipes are not nuclear in nature. >>
If a snipe goes off it is in contention to win. The other bids may go much higher but it is higher then the current bid when it is placed. >>
Many snipes never go off due to chip bidders driving up the price, or the sniper just doesn't want to go above a certain amount.
If you keep reusing catch phrases like "record selling prices" every other post, it doesn't make your erroneous contention any more salient, btw.. >>
I am getting the feeling you are realizing that your final snipe on an auction that only two people bid much higher then the pack wasn't coming from someone who wanted to win.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Dpeck, I think I have figured out why you are not understanding this... Your definition of a snipe is completely different than everyone else's here on the board. In your mind, a snipe is a win-at-all-cost bid that potentially leaves you exposed. If you want to formulate your own definition of a snipe, then yes you are correct with logic. However, you're speaking a completely different language than the rest of us.
I'm not sure what your thought process is when you bid on something, but I'm guessing for most of us it is something like this:
1. See a card on ebay that you want
2. Research value of the card (VCP, historical sales, etc.)
3. Determine a number you are willing to bid on the card (typically within +-15% of market average depending on the qualities of the card)
4. Set snipe amount determined by step #3
Here is the straw man that you keep setting up for sniping
1. See a card on ebay that you want
2. Place a $100,000 snipe
3. Cross fingers and hope you're able to get the card for a bargain
If you use the first method described, you are NOT at risk for the items you mentioned above, in fact it will help mitigate them.
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
Please elaborate on this. I have no idea what this sentence even means.
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>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way.
<< <i>[I am getting the feeling you are realizing that your final snipe on an auction that only two people bid much higher then the pack wasn't coming from someone who wanted to win.
Please elaborate on this. I have no idea what this sentence even means. >>
Sure Grote.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
You don't need to predict others. If you bid the amount you want to pay, you'll either win/lose and be exposed/not independent of the bidding strategy. And in the case of the snipe, there is a possibility of you not exciting other bidders along the way, saving money.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck can you state exactly what the negatives are to sniping? >>
Getting hung out to dry by shill bidders.
The vast majority of snipes are far away from the current price and leave you exposed.
There are more examples of snipe bidders winning at record prices then steals. >>
Dpeck, I think I have figured out why you are not understanding this... Your definition of a snipe is completely different than everyone else's here on the board. In your mind, a snipe is a win-at-all-cost bid that potentially leaves you exposed. If you want to formulate your own definition of a snipe, then yes you are correct with logic. However, you're speaking a completely different language than the rest of us.
I'm not sure what your thought process is when you bid on something, but I'm guessing for most of us it is something like this:
1. See a card on ebay that you want
2. Research value of the card (VCP, historical sales, etc.)
3. Determine a number you are willing to bid on the card (typically within +-15% of market average depending on the qualities of the card)
4. Set snipe amount determined by step #3
Here is the straw man that you keep setting up for sniping
1. See a card on ebay that you want
2. Place a $100,000 snipe
3. Cross fingers and hope you're able to get the card for a bargain
If you use the first method described, you are NOT at risk for the items you mentioned above, in fact it will help mitigate them. >>
Any card that more then one person wants to own has competition. The vast majority of competitive bids are placed in the final seconds.
I have tried it myself. I have given some serious thought to this topic and have literally tried every bidding strategy.
There was a moment where I thought maybe there is something to this laying in the weeds and then bam bidding strategy. Only to have a snipe come in and jack the price 40%.
The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
So you agree its impossible to predict than a snipe is more likely to be shilled?
You now have no more negatives to stand against sniping.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If my max bid is $100 either way is sniping more likely to be successfully shilled? >>
Please answer this dpeck
If yes, why? >>
I didn't see this. Is there more to the original post? >>
The question can stand alone. Btw $100 is arbitrary. Change it to $x >>
It is impossible to predict.
We don't know who is bidding and why they are bidding. Shill bidders have figured out that 25% or more of all bids come on the close. Since many auctions are re listed from non paying bidders it doesn't really matter because so many sellers have no shame in their game.
10 years ago I would have said yes. Today no way. >>
So you agree its impossible to predict than a snipe is more likely to be shilled?
You now have no more negatives to stand against sniping. >>
I don't think any bid is truly safe from a shill bid.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet."
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 in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price.
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write?
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on.
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>
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on. >>
Which one? The one that said you might have been nailed by a snipe bid that was only there to make you pay more.
You can't possibly think that this hasn't happened to quite a few people can you?
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price. >>
You literally just made the argument for sniping!
Your first statement agrees that sniping/squatting didn't matter in these cases but didn't hurt.
Your second statement agrees that in limited cases it might work.
This is exactly what everyone is trying to tell you!!!
END THREAD!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on. >>
Which one? The one that said you might have been nailed by a snipe bid that was only there to make you pay more.
You can't possibly think that this hasn't happened to quite a few people can you? >>
So you are saying then, if I understand you correctly, that said snipe bid was set by a shill bidder, correct? I mean, that's what you are directly implying in that sentence. Either that, or someone just wants to drive up the price for whatever reason.
In that case, I'm sure it has happened to me, just as I'm sure I've been shilled by manual shill bidders, too. I cannot control or prevent that. But once again, that has no relevance as to why sniping is beneficial or not. If the deck is stacked, and an auction is being shilled or manipulated by someone who is determined not to let the item go for less than XX.XX amount, than no bidding strategy, sniping or manual bidding, is going to change that.
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>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck in your many experiments and pondering strategies, have you ever been hurt by sniping more than you would have if you'd just placed your max bid early? If yes, how? >>
For the past year I have placed final bids on cards I wanted to win in the final 15 seconds. Guess what? A few seconds later the other bids came in and jacked the card up as expected. I could have bid the same amount with a day or so to go and it would have not mattered.
I said this a few years ago in another thread. If you are bidding on stale cards that there is no current interest in perhaps it will work. Otherwise you must realize that competitive forces determine the final price. >>
You literally just made the argument for sniping!
Your first statement agrees that sniping/squatting didn't matter in these cases but didn't hurt.
Your second statement agrees that in limited cases it might work.
This is exactly what everyone is trying to tell you!!!
END THREAD!!! >>
The argument is it saves money. It doesn't. Markets find their price.
Can it hurt you. Of course it can.
If you want to win an auction at any price a snipe is your best bet. Just throw in a price that is higher then anyone else can imagine paying and you almost always win. If you lose someone else got hung out to dry.
I tap
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The bottom line is that if one other person wants the card you are at the mercy of the market.
Once again, the "bottom line" has absolutely no relevance to the advantages or disadvantages of sniping.
Your bottom line is the forecasting equivalent of, "If it rains, you are bound to get wet." >>
Do you really believe the stuff you write? >>
Absolutely. I still don't understand that previous sentence of yours though that I asked you to elaborate on. >>
Which one? The one that said you might have been nailed by a snipe bid that was only there to make you pay more.
You can't possibly think that this hasn't happened to quite a few people can you? >>
So you are saying then, if I understand you correctly, that said snipe bid was set by a shill bidder, correct? I mean, that's what you are directly implying in that sentence. Either that, or someone just wants to drive up the price for whatever reason.
In that case, I'm sure it has happened to me, just as I'm sure I've been shilled my manual shill bidders, too. I cannot control or prevent that. But once again, that has no relevance as to why sniping is beneficial or not. If the deck is stacked, and an auction is being shilled or manipulated by someone who is determined not to let the item go for less than XX.XX amount, than no bidding strategy, sniping or manual bidding, is going to change that. >>
There are so many reasons why people bid on items.
The final hammer prices are reached by humans bidding on trading cards. We are all subject to the risks of the market. That is my point.
Bid when you want. If someone wants the card to sell for a certain price they can protect that level in any form.
It is naive to think that snipe bidding protects you from anything other then yourself.
Four years ago when I was bidding on cards no one wanted my thought process could have easily been refuted. Once other people get interested in a genre or set the rules change.
I am heading to bed. I will never convince you guys that auctions are random and bidding strategies in the end mean nothing. Good night and we will talk about something else tomorrow.
<< <i><banging head on the wall>
I tap >>
I concur, LOL!
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.
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
I think I am beginning to understand why people do not engage you in an argument regarding your contrarian positions. You have not actually proven your argument which boils down to bid strategy is irrelevant in the current market. The myriad of examples you provided don't actually prove anything. It would be the equivalent of me posting an example or three with one squatter and one sniper where the sniper won and then saying QED.
Yes there are shill snipes (perhaps even the majority of shilling occurs via sniping at this point), however the shill sniper is taking a risk that does not exist when someone places their max bid early. You state The squat bidder in the article was an early bidder. You can't determine the motivation of the bid. We may not know the motivation of that bidder but as a shiller you know they have bid and can take action. That action, shilling, will actually allow you to determine the motivation of the squat bidder as well as subject the squat bidder to other bidding strategies, chip bidding, that do not affect snipe bidders.
You said: The argument is it saves money. It doesn't. Markets find their price. This is simply not 100% correct because markets (especially ebay) are not perfectly efficient. While markets do find their price on average there are always outliers. Sniping prevents competitive/shill bidding which can drive up the price of an individual auction. By preventing an underbidder from making an additional bid you are A) saving yourself money and
You have not actually provided a single argument why sniping is in fact bad. Your squat bidding is subject to every single one of the negatives you have mentioned for sniping. In fact a squat bidder is at greater risk of being shilled and is not protected from a snipe shill at all.
Robb
You're arguing with someone that correctly predicted every match in the 2007 Survivor Series. I hardly think you're in any position to tell him how markets operate. The track record speaks for itself.
go away shill posters.
Any cost savings was found to be statistically insignificant suggesting the equilibrium price was found.
What is also interesting is the item in question plays a major role in the probability of snipe bids. The data suggests also that an early bid on an item that only attracts one bid wins it cheaper.
There are loads of theories we see play out on a daily basis. For example the bidding early to fend of competition. The data suggests this can work.
For auctions with a high starting price that closely approximates mid-high VCP, I think there is some merit in bidding early as opposed to only sniping:
a) with a high starting price, the item may sell with only 1 bid. Bidding early means you get it and the next bidder has to bid one increment higher- which may be a dealbreaker for them
b) bidding early indicates to other buyers that "you can't get this for the starting price" / "there will be competition for this item" which isn't necessarily a given. It may deter people from watching an item or considering buying it because they will believe that the price will go higher. Without a bid, they may think they can get it at the opening price.
In these situations, I have sometimes bid the minimum/opening bid early, and then set a snipe with my actual max bid, to try to get the benefits of both.
<< <i>Robb,
You're arguing with someone that correctly predicted every match in the 2007 Survivor Series. I hardly think you're in any position to tell him how markets operate. The track record speaks for itself. >>
My favorite quote of yours.
- We're talking about sports cards. Who gives a crap. The one person in the world who has the most invested in this set will probably make around $2,000. That's not putting anybody's kids through college.
THERE IS NO MEASURABLE COST SAVINGS ASSOCIATED WITH SNIPING.
Read the papers. If mathematical models have been created and tested trying to find it and can't. I rest my case.
<< <i><banging head on the wall> >>
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/2006-06-25-physics-of-ebay_x.htm
To test whether sniping is a smart way to do things or just truncates normal bidding, the South Korean team at Seoul National University produced a "master equation" for how bidding proceeds (it's nk(t+1) — nk(t) = w(k-1)(t)*n(k-1)(t) — wk(t)*nk(t) + sigma(k,1)*u(t), if you really want to know), and then tested it against a massive number of auction records, some 264,073 items sold in one day on eBay and another 287,018 items sold in one year by eBay's Korean partner.
Plugging all those data into the model and testing the outcome in terms of how the auctions turned out, the team found that the probability of submitting a winning bid on an item indeed drops with each bid. "Our analysis explicitly shows that the winning strategy is to bid at the last moment as the first attempt rather than incremental bidding from the start." The study appears in the current Physical Review E journal.
The finding is no surprise to Harvard economist Alvin Roth, who has studied sniping from an economics viewpoint since 2002 with colleague Axel Ockenfels of Germany's University of Cologne. They came to similar conclusions. "I think you might do the most good if you advise bidders to form an opinion of how much they are willing to pay for an item, so that they don't get caught up in a bidding war and pay more than they will be happy with," says Roth, by e-mail. "But, that being said, if they know what proxy bid they want to submit, it won't hurt them to submit it very near the end (but neither will it help them much, or often ...) So, sniping is a good strategy, for those with the time to do it," he adds.
What set did I say that about? It's probably something that's worth like $25k now.
The best part about not caring about being wrong is that you get to say anything you want and shrug it off when you're proven wrong. And then you get to say more inaccurate stuff just for the sake of saying it. Life is great fun.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-the-Gathering-Return-to-Ravnica-Holiday-Gift-Box-New-Sealed-NR-/301167379344?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=7KeWdx8siPw65X8w4UH3LfpSYEg%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
my snipe allowed me to win it for $20.50
How is this bad?
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
<< <i>We're talking about sports cards. Who gives a crap. The one person in the world who has the most invested in this set will probably make around $2,000. That's not putting anybody's kids through college.
What set did I say that about? It's probably something that's worth like $25k now.
The best part about not caring about being wrong is that you get to say anything you want and shrug it off when you're proven wrong. And then you get to say more inaccurate stuff just for the sake of saying it. Life is great fun. >>
From the original Hogan thread.
That was definitely an interesting one.