<< <i>There is no point in arguing with DPeck over this. He simply points to hot cards getting records prices and says "see sniping is pointless". People have gotten tired of arguing with him about it. The fact that he calls it the VCP snipe belief shows that he still doesn't seem to understand the point behind sniping. I would posit that more people snipe now than 5 years ago.
For the points you mentioned there is no debate that #2 and #4 are benefits of the sniping strategy.
I think sniping works best on cards that are commonly found such as PSA 8 and even some PSA 9 commons. If I bid my max on day one and leave it sit there, chances are if someone wants it, they can keep bumping their bids until they top mine. If I hide my bid until the last few seconds, they don't have the opportunity to top mine. The exception would be when the starting price is just under market price. Then it's good to get in at the lowest price point before someone else does. This is particularly important for auctions that have larger bid increments.
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
Dpeck, you're a smart guy, but at this point, I think you're just trying to convince yourself. I know you like to fall back on outlier examples, but it baffles me how you don't see the potential benefits of sniping.
<< <i>PWCC auctioned off a PSA 9 George Brett rookie that would have sold for $2,500.00 with that "high end" sticker/card, but another guy entered the bidding and pushed the price up to 4,220.00
This price must have set a new record for a PSA 9 Topps Brett rookie. >>
Nice price for this card. All those with the VCP snipe bidding theories lose once again. I just have to laugh as the bull market rages on. Years ago members would go on and on about how snipe bidding saves you money. Sure. When the bull is running it is running and once again no bidding strategy matters. >>
Um.... Just because a few high end rookies are selling for stupid money, simply doesn't mean that sniping won't save you money on 95% of auctions. The fact that a low snipe would not have won these high end cards doesn't prove sniping doesn't save money, it only proves that buyers are being influenced by a sticker. If your argument is that certain high end HOF rookies have been exceeding VCP, then you are correct. But this phenomena has nothing to do with effectiveness of snipes. If that Brett sells for $5k and my snipe was $3k, my not winning doesn't prove that sniping is ineffective. I still have a max bid I'm willing to pay and if the price soars past my max, I don't want it anymore. This doesn't prove my snipe "didn't work", because in order for my snipe to work in the first place, I would have needed to be willing to pay $2k more than my estimated value, which I'm not. >>
IMO sniping does many good things, such as:
1. Hides a bidders interest until the last few seconds. When people see more interest they can tend to think they need to bid stronger to win an item. 2. Hides a bidders max bid until the last few seconds. This protects a bidder from others seeing what they will bid as well as from those who shill auctions by bumping a bid incrementally and the retracting their bid if they overshoot the legitimate bidder. 3. Allows a bidder the convenience of setting and forgetting. This is especially important when bidding on a lot of lots at once. 4. Protects a bidder from emotional bidding. Sometimes, if a bidder bids early and sees their bid get bumped or passed, for any reason good or bad, they will bid more than they otherwise would have because of an emotional response. 5. Makes auctions more fun as there is less stress and its automated so you can kick back and watch the fireworks.
Now I think Dpeck has a point if people snipe based solely off of VCP. There are many different ways to come up with a bid and VCP should be just one source of info to be considered.
That said I do feel that sniping will generally save you more money than not sniping, and it will be more fun. >>
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
The bolded are the key points these days, in my opinion.
sniping does save money most of the time. yet, on rare items/highlighted auctions, the bottom line on who wins is simply the number that's entered (which are usually snipes, as w/ the brett).
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
Dpeck, you're a smart guy, but at this point, I think you're just trying to convince yourself. I know you like to fall back on outlier examples, but it baffles me how you don't see the potential benefits of sniping. >>
I honestly feel this way. After reading through a large portion of the research report that was trying to prove that sniping saved money and couldn't draw that conclusion I see no reason to not go with my opinion.
I have tried every type of bidding strategy. Early high bid, lay and wait and bid in the final seconds, bump constantly and appear to be a shill, and any other kind that someone can think of. The outcomes are the same. I do believe that there are some advantages to sniping but I don't believe it saves money.
In the past year I have been trying the snipe bidding and losing auctions consistently. For only one reason. My bids were not high enough. In many of these auctions the two final bids were 50% to 100% higher then the pack.
Sniping will not help you win auctions if your max bid is lower than the winning bid. Neither will manually bidding the same amount, unless you change your mind and decide to increase the maximum amount you were previously willing to spend/bid.
So, I suppose manually bidding has one advtange~for those who aren't sure how much their maximum bid amount should be for the item they are bidding 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.
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not.
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not. >>
So why do you still call it VCP sniping? If someone is sniping based on all things considered shouldn't it be called "informed sniping" perhaps?
As for nuclear snipes, the same logic you speak of holds true for nuclear regular bids except in their case they can be bumped or shilled up whereas snipes can't.
I think the point about snipes is that they protect the bidder from a certain form of attack and also hides important info of theirs until the point that no one can use it.
Auctions can go crazy half way through their duration and then have no more bids, just like an auction can go crazy at the end via snipe. The only difference at the end is that a snipe offers protection and anonymity that a regular bid does not.
What's the point of bidding in the middle of the auction so someone can run you up? That happens all the time. People consign something to Probstein or PWCC, then perhaps notice your eBay feedback number bidding on something they know you need for one of your sets, then they use an alt account to bid you up. If that was your max bid then why not make it at the end where you can't be shilled?
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not. >>
So why do you still call it VCP sniping? If someone is sniping based on all things considered shouldn't it be called "informed sniping" perhaps?
As for nuclear snipes, the same logic you speak of holds true for nuclear regular bids except in their case they can be bumped or shilled up whereas snipes can't.
I think the point about snipes is that they protect the bidder from a certain form of attack and also hides important info of theirs until the point that no one can use it.
Auctions can go crazy half way through their duration and then have no more bids, just like an auction can go crazy at the end via snipe. The only difference at the end is that a snipe offers protection and anonymity that a regular bid does not.
What's the point of bidding in the middle of the auction so someone can run you up? That happens all the time. People consign something to Probstein or PWCC, then perhaps notice your eBay feedback number bidding on something they know you need for one of your sets, then they use an alt account to bid you up. If that was your max bid then why not make it at the end where you can't be shilled? >>
I just called it that. Sniping is sniping.
Earlier I went through the 75 Topps cards that just went off and every single one that I looked at was decided on the closing bell.
Like I have said. I have tried all bidding strategies and the price you enter is what matters. If someone wants to snipe obviously it is a strategy that works for many and has some distinct advantages but at the end of the day the research has proven that it doesn't alter the final price in a manner that saves the bidders money. People can discount things in life all they want but high level economists have proven the fact so that is good enough evidence for me to support my belief. They were hoping to prove you could but because of the complexities of bidders motivations and desire for the items they couldn't.
The primary fact they found was the most well informed bidders placed their bids at the end and because of this it becomes a battle of the snipes. It is pretty logical when you think about it. There are many well informed collectors on various message boards who only bid that way and in the end they compete with each other at the close. Even if a bid can be bumped up during the duration of an auction the high bid in many cases is never exposed and then the competition heats up in the closing moments.
If the same report I read had said it proves to be a money saving strategy I would have taken my ball and just chalked it up to being wrong. It didn't and economists spending time and money on a detailed analysis caries more weight than any of our opinions to me.
but high level economists have proven the fact so that is good enough evidence for me to support my belief.
How would these "high level economists" know the difference between a bid that was placed via snipe vs one that wasn't? Were these high level economists actively bidding using ebay test accounts on sports cards over an extended period of time via manual bidding methods vs snipe bids? And why would any high level economist even bother to conduct such a study?
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.
Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation.
<< <i>but high level economists have proven the fact so that is good enough evidence for me to support my belief.
How would these "high level economists" know the difference between a bid that was placed via snipe vs one that wasn't? Were these high level economists actively bidding using ebay test accounts on sports cards over an extended period of time via manual bidding methods vs snipe bids? And why would any high level economist even bother to conduct such a study? Seems more fitting of a task for lower level economists to me. >>
Anyone doing lengthy research reports using mathematical models is high level. Try taking an econometric's class. That stuff is nuts and had it not been for group tests I could have never passed the class.
Tim I am surprised you would ask that first question. Your bid is time stamped.
If you search Google there are many studies related to humans approaches to auctions. It is a fairly popular study topic.
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless.
The bid is time stamped, yes, but a person can simply manually bid late on an auction vs utilizing a snipe bidding program. Whatever the method of bidding, using a free sniping service has no disadvantages while bidding early potentially does, more so for more thinly traded items.
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>The nid is time stamped, yes, but a person can simply manually bid late on an auction vs utilizing a snipe bidding program. Whatever the method of bidding, using a free sniping service has no disadvantages whole bidding early potentially does. >>
A snipe is a bid that is referred to as one placed with 15 seconds to go or less.
I have never once pointed out any disadvantages other then potentially being shilled and that is a disadvantage all bids face.
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result.
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions.
<< <i>The nid is time stamped, yes, but a person can simply manually bid late on an auction vs utilizing a snipe bidding program. Whatever the method of bidding, using a free sniping service has no disadvantages whole bidding early potentially does. >>
A snipe is a bid that is referred to as one placed with 15 seconds to go or less.
I have never once pointed out any disadvantages other then potentially being shilled and that is a disadvantage all bids face. >>
The latter part of your post is most certainly true which illustrates very effectively why sniping is a more effective way of bidding.
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 the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions. >>
Dpeck I think the issue here is that shill bids are placed in order to make the real bidders feel, exactly like you say, that their bids aren't "serious enough" if they don't bid higher.
So let's say someone would have won a card if they bid $5,000 at the last second and the underbidder was at $4,900 at the last second. Well if the $5K bidder bid early at that amount and someone shilled him up then others would know what the max is and that they'll have to bid higher to win. Perhaps then the $4,900 bidder would then bid $5,500 or so on and so forth.
This is all free information that a competitor can use that if denied would make it harder for them to "win". Now if eBay didn't allow bid retractions I don't think this would be nearly such an issue, though even so winners can just not pay, get an eBay slap on the wrist, and continue with their activities. Worse case is they have to make a new account.
So while sniping is, in no way perfect, at least it keeps some info hidden until the end so a competitor can't use it to their advantage. Surely you can see how at least that is a good thing for a bidder regardless of whether they win or lose the auction right?
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions. >>
Dpeck I think the issue here is that shill bids are placed in order to make the real bidders feel, exactly like you say, that their bids aren't "serious enough" if they don't bid higher.
So let's say someone would have won a card if they bid $5,000 at the last second and the underbidder was at $4,900 at the last second. Well if the $5K bidder bid early at that amount and someone shilled him up then others would know what the max is and that they'll have to bid higher to win. Perhaps then the $4,900 bidder would then bid $5,500 or so on and so forth.
This is all free information that a competitor can use that if denied would make it harder for them to "win". Now if eBay didn't allow bid retractions I don't think this would be nearly such an issue, though even so winners can just not pay, get an eBay slap on the wrist, and continue with their activities. Worse case is they have to make a new account.
So while sniping is, in no way perfect, at least it keeps some info hidden until the end so a competitor can't use it to their advantage. Surely you can see how at least that is a good thing for a bidder regardless of whether they win or lose the auction right? >>
Yes I can. I have never disputed this information. That said the assumption is the early bids or for that matter any bid placed prior to the close is assumed as a tip off. In reality much of the bidding on tons of cards is dictated by who has what and the cards availability.
In the case of a Pop 1 like this it is assumed that anyone other then the seller if it is set break or all parties if it is someone who popped it and is selling needs the card. Those collectors will come out of the woodwork and drive the price higher. There were 20 bidders on this auction. It would be naive to think that none of the major players will come out guns a blazing and hence my belief that the final price will be determined at the end by the most serious bidders.
This means if one of these serious bidders places their bid prior to the close it will take the most serious bidders to discover it. To win you have to place a winning bid.
Keeping your cards close to the chest can help but in many listings it doesn't simply because of the Populataion report.
At least in my experience (and I bid on over a hundred auctions per week and sometimes more), the amount of the final bid is really what matters. In most instances, when that bid is placed is not particularly meaningful and that's what these studies have found as well. I've read a few of them over the years and, excluding one of a kind types of items, sniping or not didn't really impact win percentage and was even less meaningful in terms of the final price compared to a reasonable range of outcomes. Because of that, there's really no correlation that can be drawn in relation to the timing of the bid and winning - the only strong correlation with winning is the amount of the bid in relation to a reasonable outcome range. The higher the bid in that range, the higher the probability of winning regardless of when it was placed. This partially explains why this sort of analysis may not do so well when looking at high end/rare items since that value range can often be much wider and frequently "violated" in bull market type scenarios such as what we seem to be experiencing.
I think that ultimately a lot of the sniping support is driven by the belief that there is a whole lot more schilling going on out there than there really is - that's a perception and not a distinct reality.
I do concede that there are times when bidding early could be "taken advantage of" in some way, but then again if the ultimate bids are all within the range of outcomes that would make some kind of sense then I don't know how you'd ever conclude by sniping you really saved anything. You paid a fair price, end of story.
I can however see the perceived advantage of using a sniping tactic on rare or really high quality items where the price discovery just isn't as good or historic prices aren't as reliable, but across the broader spectrum of most auctions there's really no reason to do it other than your personal psychology of bidding. If you think sniping helps you, you should do it. If it helps you be disciplined in the amounts you bid, that's a great thing as well and you should do it. If you're genuinely afraid that you are or are going to get schilled, you should keep sniping if for nothing more than you're own sanity.
One thing I do know over almost 20 years of bidding now is this - the only real strategy that works is the one that YOU think works for you. If you're getting results you're happy with, keep doing what you're doing. If not, consider a tweak and see what happens.
Comments
<< <i>There is no point in arguing with DPeck over this. He simply points to hot cards getting records prices and says "see sniping is pointless". People have gotten tired of arguing with him about it. The fact that he calls it the VCP snipe belief shows that he still doesn't seem to understand the point behind sniping. I would posit that more people snipe now than 5 years ago.
For the points you mentioned there is no debate that #2 and #4 are benefits of the sniping strategy.
Robb >>
I knew it wouldn't be long until you chimed in.
Robb
<< <i>I couldn't resist. Now if only we could get someone to bring up monopoly power...
Robb >>
That was a great thread. I have never gotten more PM's from various people then I did during those few days.
<< <i>
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
Dpeck, you're a smart guy, but at this point, I think you're just trying to convince yourself. I know you like to fall back on outlier examples, but it baffles me how you don't see the potential benefits of sniping.
"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>PWCC auctioned off a PSA 9 George Brett rookie that would have sold for $2,500.00 with that "high end" sticker/card, but another guy entered the bidding and pushed the
price up to 4,220.00
This price must have set a new record for a PSA 9 Topps Brett rookie. >>
Nice price for this card. All those with the VCP snipe bidding theories lose once again. I just have to laugh as the bull market rages on. Years ago members would go on and on about how snipe bidding saves you money. Sure. When the bull is running it is running and once again no bidding strategy matters. >>
Um.... Just because a few high end rookies are selling for stupid money, simply doesn't mean that sniping won't save you money on 95% of auctions. The fact that a low snipe would not have won these high end cards doesn't prove sniping doesn't save money, it only proves that buyers are being influenced by a sticker. If your argument is that certain high end HOF rookies have been exceeding VCP, then you are correct. But this phenomena has nothing to do with effectiveness of snipes. If that Brett sells for $5k and my snipe was $3k, my not winning doesn't prove that sniping is ineffective. I still have a max bid I'm willing to pay and if the price soars past my max, I don't want it anymore. This doesn't prove my snipe "didn't work", because in order for my snipe to work in the first place, I would have needed to be willing to pay $2k more than my estimated value, which I'm not. >>
IMO sniping does many good things, such as:
1. Hides a bidders interest until the last few seconds. When people see more interest they can tend to think they need to bid stronger to win an item.
2. Hides a bidders max bid until the last few seconds. This protects a bidder from others seeing what they will bid as well as from those who shill auctions by bumping a bid incrementally and the retracting their bid if they overshoot the legitimate bidder.
3. Allows a bidder the convenience of setting and forgetting. This is especially important when bidding on a lot of lots at once.
4. Protects a bidder from emotional bidding. Sometimes, if a bidder bids early and sees their bid get bumped or passed, for any reason good or bad, they will bid more than they otherwise would have because of an emotional response.
5. Makes auctions more fun as there is less stress and its automated so you can kick back and watch the fireworks.
Now I think Dpeck has a point if people snipe based solely off of VCP. There are many different ways to come up with a bid and VCP should be just one source of info to be considered.
That said I do feel that sniping will generally save you more money than not sniping, and it will be more fun. >>
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
The bolded are the key points these days, in my opinion.
sniping does save money most of the time.
yet, on rare items/highlighted auctions, the bottom line on who wins is simply the number that's entered (which are usually snipes, as w/ the brett).
<< <i>
<< <i>
I do not believe sniping saves money at all. Quite frankly many auctions with heavy sniping have been the one's shattering records because of the concept of a nuclear snipe. Take this George Brett. The final two bids took the card up $1,722. This in my view was clearly two bids that were placed at much higher levels just in case that collided.
For the first few years I was a member of CU the VCP Snipe belief was pervasive here. Probably not so much any longer with card prices blowing those numbers out of the water the past few years.
There was a Clemente thread where it was debated at length so I decided to see if there were any research reports on the topic. There was and the finding was no measurable cost savings associated with it.
With many of the most serious bids coming at the end and so many bidders adopting the strategy its effectiveness continues to decline.
The timing of the bid is irrelevant. What matters is the number entered. You could have bid a record setting $3,500 on the Brett the second it was listed. That bid would have been in the lead the entire time and still played no role in the final outcome.
Markets are far to complex for one strategy to be the be end all. >>
Dpeck, you're a smart guy, but at this point, I think you're just trying to convince yourself. I know you like to fall back on outlier examples, but it baffles me how you don't see the potential benefits of sniping. >>
I honestly feel this way. After reading through a large portion of the research report that was trying to prove that sniping saved money and couldn't draw that conclusion I see no reason to not go with my opinion.
I have tried every type of bidding strategy. Early high bid, lay and wait and bid in the final seconds, bump constantly and appear to be a shill, and any other kind that someone can think of. The outcomes are the same. I do believe that there are some advantages to sniping but I don't believe it saves money.
In the past year I have been trying the snipe bidding and losing auctions consistently. For only one reason. My bids were not high enough. In many of these auctions the two final bids were 50% to 100% higher then the pack.
So, I suppose manually bidding has one advtange~for those who aren't sure how much their maximum bid amount should be for the item they are bidding 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, why do you call it VCP sniping? >>
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not.
<< <i>There is no point in arguing with DPeck over this. >>
Haha Good call.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck, why do you call it VCP sniping? >>
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not. >>
So why do you still call it VCP sniping? If someone is sniping based on all things considered shouldn't it be called "informed sniping" perhaps?
As for nuclear snipes, the same logic you speak of holds true for nuclear regular bids except in their case they can be bumped or shilled up whereas snipes can't.
I think the point about snipes is that they protect the bidder from a certain form of attack and also hides important info of theirs until the point that no one can use it.
Auctions can go crazy half way through their duration and then have no more bids, just like an auction can go crazy at the end via snipe. The only difference at the end is that a snipe offers protection and anonymity that a regular bid does not.
What's the point of bidding in the middle of the auction so someone can run you up? That happens all the time. People consign something to Probstein or PWCC, then perhaps notice your eBay feedback number bidding on something they know you need for one of your sets, then they use an alt account to bid you up. If that was your max bid then why not make it at the end where you can't be shilled?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck, why do you call it VCP sniping? >>
When I first joined the board most cards were in trading ranges and just about every person on the board had the same strategy of using VCP like a Bible and sniping at the end based on those figures.
Sniping is sniping and now that VCP has been relegated as useless in most cases it really doesn't apply any longer.
The reason I bid the way I did on the wrestling cards at the time was I had no prior sales data to go by and had to probe the market to come up with some level I felt confident could hold. Seeing other bids was some level of validation that others felt the cards were worth X and I could form my opinion of value from there. Quite frankly I am thrilled I bid the way I did and even if there were a few I got shilled on like the first 1982 Wrestling All Stars PSA 10 Ric Flair I bought it worked out in the end.
Once a card or set becomes collected the same people search daily on EBAY or have saved searches and items very rarely fall through the cracks and therefore the bids are coming whether you like it or not. >>
So why do you still call it VCP sniping? If someone is sniping based on all things considered shouldn't it be called "informed sniping" perhaps?
As for nuclear snipes, the same logic you speak of holds true for nuclear regular bids except in their case they can be bumped or shilled up whereas snipes can't.
I think the point about snipes is that they protect the bidder from a certain form of attack and also hides important info of theirs until the point that no one can use it.
Auctions can go crazy half way through their duration and then have no more bids, just like an auction can go crazy at the end via snipe. The only difference at the end is that a snipe offers protection and anonymity that a regular bid does not.
What's the point of bidding in the middle of the auction so someone can run you up? That happens all the time. People consign something to Probstein or PWCC, then perhaps notice your eBay feedback number bidding on something they know you need for one of your sets, then they use an alt account to bid you up. If that was your max bid then why not make it at the end where you can't be shilled? >>
I just called it that. Sniping is sniping.
Earlier I went through the 75 Topps cards that just went off and every single one that I looked at was decided on the closing bell.
Like I have said. I have tried all bidding strategies and the price you enter is what matters. If someone wants to snipe obviously it is a strategy that works for many and has some distinct advantages but at the end of the day the research has proven that it doesn't alter the final price in a manner that saves the bidders money. People can discount things in life all they want but high level economists have proven the fact so that is good enough evidence for me to support my belief. They were hoping to prove you could but because of the complexities of bidders motivations and desire for the items they couldn't.
The primary fact they found was the most well informed bidders placed their bids at the end and because of this it becomes a battle of the snipes. It is pretty logical when you think about it. There are many well informed collectors on various message boards who only bid that way and in the end they compete with each other at the close. Even if a bid can be bumped up during the duration of an auction the high bid in many cases is never exposed and then the competition heats up in the closing moments.
If the same report I read had said it proves to be a money saving strategy I would have taken my ball and just chalked it up to being wrong. It didn't and economists spending time and money on a detailed analysis caries more weight than any of our opinions to me.
How would these "high level economists" know the difference between a bid that was placed via snipe vs one that wasn't? Were these high level economists actively bidding using ebay test accounts on sports cards over an extended period of time via manual bidding methods vs snipe bids? And why would any high level economist even bother to conduct such a study?
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.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation.
<< <i>but high level economists have proven the fact so that is good enough evidence for me to support my belief.
How would these "high level economists" know the difference between a bid that was placed via snipe vs one that wasn't? Were these high level economists actively bidding using ebay test accounts on sports cards over an extended period of time via manual bidding methods vs snipe bids? And why would any high level economist even bother to conduct such a study? Seems more fitting of a task for lower level economists to me. >>
Anyone doing lengthy research reports using mathematical models is high level. Try taking an econometric's class. That stuff is nuts and had it not been for group tests I could have never passed the class.
Tim I am surprised you would ask that first question. Your bid is time stamped.
If you search Google there are many studies related to humans approaches to auctions. It is a fairly popular study topic.
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless.
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>The nid is time stamped, yes, but a person can simply manually bid late on an auction vs utilizing a snipe bidding program. Whatever the method of bidding, using a free sniping service has no disadvantages whole bidding early potentially does. >>
A snipe is a bid that is referred to as one placed with 15 seconds to go or less.
I have never once pointed out any disadvantages other then potentially being shilled and that is a disadvantage all bids face.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Bob Gibson
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions.
<< <i>
<< <i>The nid is time stamped, yes, but a person can simply manually bid late on an auction vs utilizing a snipe bidding program. Whatever the method of bidding, using a free sniping service has no disadvantages whole bidding early potentially does. >>
A snipe is a bid that is referred to as one placed with 15 seconds to go or less.
I have never once pointed out any disadvantages other then potentially being shilled and that is a disadvantage all bids face. >>
The latter part of your post is most certainly true which illustrates very effectively why sniping is a more effective way of bidding.
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>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Bob Gibson
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions. >>
Dpeck I think the issue here is that shill bids are placed in order to make the real bidders feel, exactly like you say, that their bids aren't "serious enough" if they don't bid higher.
So let's say someone would have won a card if they bid $5,000 at the last second and the underbidder was at $4,900 at the last second. Well if the $5K bidder bid early at that amount and someone shilled him up then others would know what the max is and that they'll have to bid higher to win. Perhaps then the $4,900 bidder would then bid $5,500 or so on and so forth.
This is all free information that a competitor can use that if denied would make it harder for them to "win". Now if eBay didn't allow bid retractions I don't think this would be nearly such an issue, though even so winners can just not pay, get an eBay slap on the wrist, and continue with their activities. Worse case is they have to make a new account.
So while sniping is, in no way perfect, at least it keeps some info hidden until the end so a competitor can't use it to their advantage. Surely you can see how at least that is a good thing for a bidder regardless of whether they win or lose the auction right?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dpeck the high bid is many time exposed by incremental bidding. And because of eBay's allowance of bid retractions a bidder can use an alt account to simply mess with you in many many ways.
Why give them the opportunity to do this?
Even if there were no bid retractions why let another bidder know more information? By bidding before the end you give other bidders free information they can only use to hurt you. If you can't see that or are unwilling to consider it that's fine but blindly listening to "economists" or certain "experts" is what got this country in trouble many many times, and not much has changed in that department.
Reducing the amount of time and information a competitor has to make a decision is always to your advantage, in any situation. >>
I have bid on thousands of items in the past six years. They just confirmed my beliefs.
I completely understand the logic you are referring to and if it makes someone more comfortable I get it. I have been trying it myself and once again the only thing that has altered the outcomes of the auctions is what the participants bid.
Look at the bids on the 1975 Topps cards. Some very heated auctions. All decided in the final seconds relegating early bids to be meaningless. >>
Early bids after the perception of an auction. That's why people shill auctions, to make others (novices usually) fee that an item is worth more than it is thus they raise their bid. So if a bunch of bidders were going to snipe $10,000 on a card if it's been shilled up to $7,500 in the first day of bidding some will now bid higher as a result. >>
Bob Gibson
Here is an interesting auction. Obviously a highly desired card. The top four bidders all placed their only bids in the last hour and the top three on the close. I find it hard to believe that that bids in the mid $1,000 range altered what the top players were willing to pay. They had a different value in mind and while I have no proof I wouldn't be surprised if the winning bidders max bid was substantially higher then the final hammer price. All early bids were not even in the range of the winning cluster.
Had an initial bid been placed at much higher levels the other bidders were essentially not serious enough about winning the card to push their bids high enough to matter. This type of pattern is showing up constantly in auctions. >>
Dpeck I think the issue here is that shill bids are placed in order to make the real bidders feel, exactly like you say, that their bids aren't "serious enough" if they don't bid higher.
So let's say someone would have won a card if they bid $5,000 at the last second and the underbidder was at $4,900 at the last second. Well if the $5K bidder bid early at that amount and someone shilled him up then others would know what the max is and that they'll have to bid higher to win. Perhaps then the $4,900 bidder would then bid $5,500 or so on and so forth.
This is all free information that a competitor can use that if denied would make it harder for them to "win". Now if eBay didn't allow bid retractions I don't think this would be nearly such an issue, though even so winners can just not pay, get an eBay slap on the wrist, and continue with their activities. Worse case is they have to make a new account.
So while sniping is, in no way perfect, at least it keeps some info hidden until the end so a competitor can't use it to their advantage. Surely you can see how at least that is a good thing for a bidder regardless of whether they win or lose the auction right? >>
Yes I can. I have never disputed this information. That said the assumption is the early bids or for that matter any bid placed prior to the close is assumed as a tip off. In reality much of the bidding on tons of cards is dictated by who has what and the cards availability.
In the case of a Pop 1 like this it is assumed that anyone other then the seller if it is set break or all parties if it is someone who popped it and is selling needs the card. Those collectors will come out of the woodwork and drive the price higher. There were 20 bidders on this auction. It would be naive to think that none of the major players will come out guns a blazing and hence my belief that the final price will be determined at the end by the most serious bidders.
This means if one of these serious bidders places their bid prior to the close it will take the most serious bidders to discover it. To win you have to place a winning bid.
Keeping your cards close to the chest can help but in many listings it doesn't simply because of the Populataion report.
I think that ultimately a lot of the sniping support is driven by the belief that there is a whole lot more schilling going on out there than there really is - that's a perception and not a distinct reality.
I do concede that there are times when bidding early could be "taken advantage of" in some way, but then again if the ultimate bids are all within the range of outcomes that would make some kind of sense then I don't know how you'd ever conclude by sniping you really saved anything. You paid a fair price, end of story.
I can however see the perceived advantage of using a sniping tactic on rare or really high quality items where the price discovery just isn't as good or historic prices aren't as reliable, but across the broader spectrum of most auctions there's really no reason to do it other than your personal psychology of bidding. If you think sniping helps you, you should do it. If it helps you be disciplined in the amounts you bid, that's a great thing as well and you should do it. If you're genuinely afraid that you are or are going to get schilled, you should keep sniping if for nothing more than you're own sanity.
One thing I do know over almost 20 years of bidding now is this - the only real strategy that works is the one that YOU think works for you. If you're getting results you're happy with, keep doing what you're doing. If not, consider a tweak and see what happens.