Bidding on an item
Dnice
Posts: 848
Can someone please explain to me why you would bid on an item that you really wanted when there are 6 days out till it ends. Heck, even a few hours out. I see it as your are basically inviting some to outbid you and then you are basically outbidding yourself every time you bid early.
For people who do this, what is your reason.
For people who do this, what is your reason.
0
Comments
James
Snipping programs are a matter of cultural history for a many, many people. I think they're pretty well known.
Another reason would be if the item had a buy-it-now option, and the bidder was interested in the item below that price but was also concerned that a competitor may be willing to pay the buy-it-now price. Placing a low opening bid removes the buy-it-now option.
But I agree, it almost always only makes sense to snipe at the last few seconds rather than place an early bid.
Sniping takes emotion out of the equation, plain and simple. I set it, forget it, and either win or lose. I never get caught up in watching the last hour, minutes, seconds and raising my predetermined value for a card. If nothing else, sniping has saved me tons of money in this way alone. This is one reason I don't use any of the AHs, they thrive on emotion, not rational bidding.
+1
Sniping takes emotion out of the equation, plain and simple. I set it, forget it, and either win or lose. I never get caught up in watching the last hour, minutes, seconds and raising my predetermined value for a card. If nothing else, sniping has saved me tons of money in this way alone. This is one reason I don't use any of the AHs, they thrive on emotion, not rational bidding.
+1
+2
I think it boils down to the fact that sniping may not save you money but it certainly won't lose you any money, either. I have seen many auctions where winning bidders are "chip bidded" up to a higher amount, unnecessarily. For the white hot items, it probably doesn't matter if you snipe or not in terms of hammer price, but sniping is free, so why not utilize it?
One reason for placing an early or manual bid, however, is to lock in the rebate via Ebates or other on line rebate accounts.
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.
Sniping takes emotion out of the equation, plain and simple. I set it, forget it, and either win or lose. I never get caught up in watching the last hour, minutes, seconds and raising my predetermined value for a card. If nothing else, sniping has saved me tons of money in this way alone. This is one reason I don't use any of the AHs, they thrive on emotion, not rational bidding.
I agree with Kyle on this one...saved tons of money
I have been trying the snipe bidding and all that is happening is I keep paying record prices for cards.
See, it works. You're willing to pay $X, and you keep winning auctions. That is a bad thing?
And they'll also collide if they both bid early.
It's not magic, but when you snipe, other people can't see your bid and then bid again. That is something.
As more and more people bid at the end the effectiveness of sniping continues to decline.
Of course. Would you rather play poker against experienced players, or newbies?
I would be curious in this rising market how many have placed snipes that never even go off as the card gets to a higher price then their snipe prior to the final seconds.
Millions. And millions of early bids are beaten by later bids.
Why don't you just bid how you want to bid? No one is forcing you to snipe, right?
I have been trying the snipe bidding and all that is happening is I keep paying record prices for cards.
See, it works. You're willing to pay $X, and you keep winning auctions. That is a bad thing?
And they'll also collide if they both bid early.
It's not magic, but when you snipe, other people can't see your bid and then bid again. That is something.
As more and more people bid at the end the effectiveness of sniping continues to decline.
Of course. Would you rather play poker against experienced players, or newbies?
I would be curious in this rising market how many have placed snipes that never even go off as the card gets to a higher price then their snipe prior to the final seconds.
Millions. And millions of early bids are beaten by later bids.
Why don't you just bid how you want to bid? No one is forcing you to snipe, right?
I bid all different ways. That said for like five years this debate has raged on and the simple fact is the market finds its price. My argument from the beginning. Just to test it out I started bidding hard in the final moments on the cards I really want and because there are others that want them too they launch. I could have placed the same bid in the opening minutes of the auction and it would have never mattered because the buyers who plan to contend are bidding at the end. With what has taken place in many segments of the market most of us have had to readjust what we are willing to pay to actually try and win. I do agree that the concept of sniping to avoid an additional bid to be placed by the buyer is good for utilizing self control but sometimes you just have to say the heck with it and go for it. Using the same final bidding strategy has also resulted in many lost cards and for one reason. Someone else was willing to pay more.
Sniping takes emotion out of the equation, plain and simple. I set it, forget it, and either win or lose. I never get caught up in watching the last hour, minutes, seconds and raising my predetermined value for a card. If nothing else, sniping has saved me tons of money in this way alone. This is one reason I don't use any of the AHs, they thrive on emotion, not rational bidding.
Exactly. But what about snipping?
Quite emotional.
I bid all different ways. That said for like five years this debate has raged on and the simple fact is the market finds its price. My argument from the beginning.
No one is saying that sniping is better than bidding early 100% of the time. It's just probably going to be better in the long run, for the average person.
If sniping makes a person pay more than bidding early, then you could say that sniping is worse. However, that's really the fault of the person, not the method.
Just to test it out I started bidding hard in the final moments on the cards I really want and because there are others that want them too they launch. I could have placed the same bid in the opening minutes of the auction and it would have never mattered because the buyers who plan to contend are bidding at the end.
It's not possible to know what would have happened if you had bid earlier, bid later, or hadn't bid at all.
This is the very heart of the disagreement, I think self control is essential in this hobby and there are very few items I've 'lost' that haven't come available later at a price I was willing to pay. Sometimes it has taken years for prices to either adjust to my level or stumble across a mislabeled BIN/auction, but I don't just bid whatever it takes to win at all costs. With all the recent examples of price manipulation in the hobby, this seems like a fools strategy and not just 'the market finding it's price'. If it never adjusts to a level I'm willing to pay, I'm just fine with never owning a copy. It's the emotional 'I must have one and I must have it now!' vs. enjoying the collecting journey wherever it takes you.
I bid all different ways. That said for like five years this debate has raged on and the simple fact is the market finds its price. My argument from the beginning.
No one is saying that sniping is better than bidding early 100% of the time. It's just probably going to be better in the long run, for the average person.
If sniping makes a person pay more than bidding early, then you could say that sniping is worse. However, that's really the fault of the person, not the method.
Just to test it out I started bidding hard in the final moments on the cards I really want and because there are others that want them too they launch. I could have placed the same bid in the opening minutes of the auction and it would have never mattered because the buyers who plan to contend are bidding at the end.
It's not possible to know what would have happened if you had bid earlier, bid later, or hadn't bid at all.
When the final price is 150% higher then the third bidder you can rest assured that it wouldn't have mattered.
This is the very heart of the disagreement, I think self control is essential in this hobby and there are very few items I've 'lost' that haven't come available later at a price I was willing to pay. Sometimes it has taken years for prices to either adjust to my level or stumble across a mislabeled BIN/auction, but I don't just bid whatever it takes to win at all costs. With all the recent examples of price manipulation in the hobby, this seems like a fools strategy and not just 'the market finding it's price'. If it never adjusts to a level I'm willing to pay, I'm just fine with never owning a copy. It's the emotional 'I must have one and I must have it now!' vs. enjoying the collecting journey wherever it takes you.
I understand your position. When you are collecting low pop sets like I do unfortunately sometimes there isn't another chance. I only use disposable income to fund my hobby so there are certainly times when I have chosen not to bid to win as the timing wasn't right for me. For me funding retirement accounts and paying down my mortgage come first and sometimes it stinks knowing you missed out on a card but such is life.
When the final price is 150% higher then the third bidder you can rest assured that it wouldn't have mattered.
That's incorrect because it will matter some of the time. Whether it's 1% of the time, 20% of the time, or .0001% of the time, it really doesn't matter. It's definitely not 0%.
When the final price is 150% higher then the third bidder you can rest assured that it wouldn't have mattered.
That's incorrect because it will matter some of the time. Whether it's 1% of the time, 20% of the time, or .0001% of the time, it really doesn't matter. It's definitely not 0%.
So you are suggesting that when the bids are $1,800 apart that somehow it will matter? Yeah okay.
David, if you're sniping and winning cards at record prices, it's because you entered a record price as your snipe. If you don't want to pay record prices, or aren't willing to, then set lower snipes. As somebody said, that's fault in the user, not the method. And if it's a win at all costs scenario, well, that's on the buyer. Just my .02 . As many have said, sniping isn't foolproof, but I'm guessing if you ran 100 auctions with sniping and ran the same hundred with early bidding, sniping would have saved you something. Maybe not a fortune, but a penny saved is a penny earned. With all that being said, I sometimes place a low early bid just to help my chances that a seller's conscience won't allow them to end it early.
The argument has now shifted away from winning cards at lower prices. For five years it was you could have won this card for so much cheaper had you sniped. The reality is if two people are willing to pay X that trumps all bidding styles. As long as the bids are placed the hammer price will reflect it.
is it a debate if one side only has 1 person and everyone else is on the other?
It appears it is a much different debate today than in the past.
I have found that usually if something is a high demand/popular item, there will be more than a few bidders at the end who snipe and their prices will do what they will and as more continue to snipe, it isnt going to matter as much
BUT
As ebay is the money cow that it is.....mark my words, in the upcoming years, you will soon have an option (probably for an extra 10 cents) to have your auction extended for 15 minutes every time there is a higher bid until no bid is placed. This will effectively end sniping on these items and as ebay sees the bonus in doing so, will slowly transition most auctions to this format
is it a debate if one side only has 1 person and everyone else is on the other?
It appears it is a much different debate today than in the past.
You're wrong.
The argument has now shifted away from winning cards at lower prices. For five years it was you could have won this card for so much cheaper had you sniped. The reality is if two people are willing to pay X that trumps all bidding styles. As long as the bids are placed the hammer price will reflect it.
But your logic is faulty.
bid early - others get plenty of time and chances to top your bid
snipe - other bidders can't bid again...there's no time left
I encourage you to keep bidding early though. The more people that bid early, the better it is for snipers.
So you are suggesting that when the bids are $1,800 apart that somehow it will matter? Yeah okay.
Yes. Of course, when you pick a large amount like $1,800, it probably doesn't happen all that often on ebay. Pick an amount like $20 and it happens every day.
As ebay is the money cow that it is.....mark my words, in the upcoming years, you will soon have an option (probably for an extra 10 cents) to have your auction extended for 15 minutes every time there is a higher bid until no bid is placed. This will effectively end sniping on these items and as ebay sees the bonus in doing so, will slowly transition most auctions to this format
I remember people saying that back in the mid/late 90s.
Technically, we are still currently in "the upcoming years," so they could be right.
is it a debate if one side only has 1 person and everyone else is on the other?
It appears it is a much different debate today than in the past.
You're wrong.
There was a lengthy thread several years ago where I posted several lengthy research reports that were done on SNIPE bidding practices on EBAY and it was proven there was no material difference in price. Not my opinion but mathematical models that looked at thousands of outcomes. At that time the vast majority were and probably still will contend that sniping saves you money and enables you to win items cheaper. It doesn't and research proves it.
As I recall, the data behind those "studies" was deeply flawed and proved absolutely nothing.
"Bid early and often." What every seller loves to hear!
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.
There was a lengthy thread several years ago where I posted several lengthy research reports that were done on SNIPE bidding practices on EBAY and it was proven there was no material difference in price. Not my opinion but mathematical models that looked at thousands of outcomes. At that time the vast majority were and probably still will contend that sniping saves you money and enables you to win items cheaper. It doesn't and research proves it.
Post the link to the thread. I'm pretty sure there were also research reports in that thread that showed that sniping is a good strategy.
You know, like this one...
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...-25-ebay-physics_x.htm
"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."
Exactly. But what about snipping?
Not 100% foolproof, or so I've heard.
There was a lengthy thread several years ago where I posted several lengthy research reports that were done on SNIPE bidding practices on EBAY and it was proven there was no material difference in price. Not my opinion but mathematical models that looked at thousands of outcomes. At that time the vast majority were and probably still will contend that sniping saves you money and enables you to win items cheaper. It doesn't and research proves it.
Post the link to the thread. I'm pretty sure there were also research reports in that thread that showed that sniping is a good strategy.
You know, like this one...
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...-25-ebay-physics_x.htm
"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 study did find that using a snipe bid had a higher winning percentage as the final bids generally are made by the most serious bidders. Winning and price are two entirely different issues. If I had the money I could throw in a 10 million dollar snipe on every EBAY item and win. That said the final selling prices had no material change based on when the bid was placed. If you watch most auctions you will see a large number of bids come in as the bell gets closer. Roughly 30% or more of bids are placed in the final minute and that number is probably rising. What I find ironic is that all of you for the most part snipe. That alone takes away so much of the potential advantage as it is no longer an out of the clear blue bid but a practice used by so many on every item they are actually going after. I have seen cards in numerous cases launch 700% in the final seconds because of two snipe bids. No one else was anywhere near as interested in winning the item so obviously one of these two could have bid their max the second the auction started and since there were no other serious bidders who valued the item remotely close to what these two did it had no bearing on the outcome when the bids were placed. When you throw in a rising market it makes it even less effective as nuclear bids are being placed and colliding at massive gaps above the under bidders. There has been so much activity the past few years with outcomes that are so unpredictable that it really boggles my mind that anyone can think a certain bidding strategy is the end all be all. One person pointed out earlier that bidding very hard early can scare people away. I used to use this argument and naturally it was suggested I was wrong but it does indeed work in some cases. Not all. Nothing works in all cases and that is what is so stupid about the debate. Market forces are far too powerful and unpredictable and it is just that simple.
The study did find that using a snipe bid had a higher winning percentage as the final bids generally are made by the most serious bidders. Winning and price are two entirely different issues. If I had the money I could throw in a 10 million dollar snipe on every EBAY item and win. That said the final selling prices had no material change based on when the bid was placed. If you watch most auctions you will see a large number of bids come in as the bell gets closer. Roughly 30% or more of bids are placed in the final minute and that number is probably rising. What I find ironic is that all of you for the most part snipe. That alone takes away so much of the potential advantage as it is no longer an out of the clear blue bid but a practice used by so many on every item they are actually going after. I have seen cards in numerous cases launch 700% in the final seconds because of two snipe bids. No one else was anywhere near as interested in winning the item so obviously one of these two could have bid their max the second the auction started and since there were no other serious bidders who valued the item remotely close to what these two did it had no bearing on the outcome when the bids were placed. When you throw in a rising market it makes it even less effective as nuclear bids are being placed and colliding at massive gaps above the under bidders. There has been so much activity the past few years with outcomes that are so unpredictable that it really boggles my mind that anyone can think a certain bidding strategy is the end all be all. One person pointed out earlier that bidding very hard early can scare people away. I used to use this argument and naturally it was suggested I was wrong but it does indeed work in some cases. Not all. Nothing works in all cases and that is what is so stupid about the debate. Market forces are far too powerful and unpredictable and it is just that simple.
I'm all about the long run. Hitting on 19 in Blackjack could possibly pay off (or make no difference) in the short run. But, I wouldn't do it. In the long run, it's a really bad idea.
On a certain percentage of auctions, it will make no difference if you bid early, or snipe. The end result will be the same. But, even if sniping only makes a difference a tiny percentage of the time, it's still worth doing, IMO.
But then, a couple days before the auction is to end, you see a different ebay auction or BIN for the same card, same grade, but much better presenting let's say, and a better match for your collection. You then can cancel the original snipe bid and forget about the original auction (or adjust your bid lower such that just in case you won it at that level, you'd consider it a stupid good bargain) and set a snipe for the new, more desirable card (or whatever it may be.) This has always worked well for me.
Greed is not always good.