The thought process of EBAY bidders has been proven to be virtually impossible to predict. I have participated in thousands of auctions over the years and watched thousands more. My ability to predict closing prices isn't very good nor is anyone else's. We have seen that play out countless times with numerous auctions outed on this forum and guesses ranging within hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars. My argument the entire time has simply been the time of the bid has no impact on the final price. All that matters is the desire to win and who bids the highest. All of these studies show that the most serious bidders tend to bid at the end but understand that isn't always the case. I have read a number of the pages and they walk through lots of scenarios.
Years ago I said I would bid very strong out of the gate to scare off potential bidders. There is some evidence in these studies that suggests that actually works. That said if someone wants it more it doesn't. I have also said that because sniping is no secret anymore and so many bidders are using it as their only strategy it has mitigated some of its potential benefits. You will read in one of these reports they point to this as a snipe bid in the early days would elicit surprise from other bidders and now it is simply expected. Just think about how many times an auction you are following or participating in comes down to the wire and you say to yourself here come the snipes and three or four new bidders emerge with seconds to go. There is no surprise element left. Many of this forum use VCP so lets walk through an example. If a card has a VCP of $100 and lets say the second it goes live you bid $120. Over the course of the next seven days it moves up to $57. In the final seconds three bids come in at $87, $92, and $101. You win for $102. None of the other competitors challenged your bid until the end and you won below your proxy bid. This happens all of the time.
When I make reference to how one would come up with their formula to bid on a low pop card generally we all use prior sales to base our opinions on what to bid. In a case of a Pop 1 generally you look at other examples and perhaps put a premium or discount based on other factors such as star power etc. The basis for my initial comment in this thread is the card went for much more than any would predict and that was proven by muffins poll. Once a card moves past your max it is no longer able to be bid on with a snipe relegating it worthless. I have bid on cards in my genre such as this and bid up some to see where others are at and came in with the hammer at the end. In every case myself and one or two other people were much higher than the pack and so in reality I could have put in that same bid within minutes of the auction starting with no one willing to challenge it until the end. All that mattered was the amount I bid.
There are also plenty of examples where early bids appear to be getting run up but once more the more serious bidders come in and move it even higher in the final seconds. I too have won many auctions with putting in a large bid a day or so early and the card moving up to a solid level but still a deal with no one bidding. The papers refer to this as squatting and the theory is that others see that the high bid is very serious and they realize to win it will take a real effort and give up. I think there is some merit to this logic but once again if a bid comes in as the auction is ending it only matters what that bid is. I think there is a misconception that all bidders want to win. They don't. I have put out tons of proxy bids just to follow a card or to put a floor underneath one. Here is a real time example.
I have seven copies of this card in a PSA 9. I put out a $50 opening bid. The last copy I paid $75. I am willing at all times to take this card off the sellers hands at $50. I don't need the card but I feel confident that the price is fair. The selling price has been volatile due to the pop rising, BIN vs. auction and just general volatility in prices based on who bids. I am done bidding on this card. Had I put in a $500 bid no one would ever challenge it. Could the card sell for $77, yes. Could it sell for $102, yes. But all that mattered was how much I bid and who else wanted it. The only thing that we as bidders can predict is what we will pay. It is impossible to know with any real confidence who else is out there in the universe who wants something. It is too random. What will most likely occur in this auction is the card in the final hour will move up further and pop a little at the end with a few final snipes.
The reason I have spoken about the nuclear snipe being the most dangerous bid of all is you are actually exposed for that amount and if one other nuclear snipe comes in they collide. If your intent is to win you must bid the most so the logic is obvious that you throw in a stupid high bid but so does someone else and bam you have a price that is dramatically higher than the pack. Well guess what you could have thrown in a nuclear bid that was immensely higher than most would think the card would sell for with no issue until the end.
What I do find funny is the study that suggest sniping saves money barely in the range of statistical significance saves close to $1. Just $1. So in a case of a $38,000 card it is laughable to suggest a snipe vs. manual bid matters. In my view if a buck is the deciding factor you shouldn't be buying trading cards anyway. In no way am I saying sniping is a bad idea. I just don't think it is anywhere near as effective in saving money like so many do. A few years ago after beating this topic to a pulp I went and tried to research it to see if there were any papers analyzing it. It turned out there was and the one I found indeed confirmed my belief using very advanced mathematical modeling. The assumption like most here was that it would indeed save money but in the final analysis it didn't due to the random nature of auctions and hard to predict bidder patterns. If one chooses to believe it great, if one doesn't that's fine too. I choose to as in my experience after trying every bidding pattern possible the outcomes have been so similar with the deciding factor being how high I bid. In the times I have snipped I have actually lost more auctions than won and once more the only reason was I didn't bid high enough. Someone else wanted it more.
Agree or disagree with me. This is my take away and it has never changed.
David, that's a very thoughtful post. Thank you. I've been reading some of the back and forth for years on this topic and quickly get turned off when it devolves into personal attacks. So I appreciate the effort behind this post.
Also, full disclosure I have not read any of the articles linked to. I probably will at some point because I love reading about theory and better understanding the math behind it. As with any research, there are always flaws, but I think most could agree with that and hopefully still agree that research can be very valid even if it isn't perfect.
My opinion, based on thinking through a few scenarios below, is that in some cases sniping can absolutely save you money. In other cases, it might cost you more money. And that answer also depends on the price level, rarity of the item, and who the seller is (i.e. is the seller honest or does he allow chicanery to occur). But there is no universal "sniping always saves you more money than early bidding." There are too many variables for that to always be true.
I'll outline some scenarios below. Some key variables that cause me to believe that sniping (despite the nuclear risk) on average achieves a lower winning price are threefold: first, string bidding (PWCC's term), second is shilling, third is price retracting. I do not know if either is considered in the research papers that have been referenced previously, but it's a big reason why I prefer sniping. With retractions, it makes string bidding and manipulation very easy to where your max price/willingness to pay is easily exposed early on in the process and there is a good chance you will get bid up to that amount without seller intervention (which never happens).
Let's stick with your example above where max bid is $120, but let's think about it x 10 (because string bidding and shilling are more likely to happen at this level due to much more $$$ at stake). So my max willingness to pay (WTP) for a card is $12,000. Card's VCP is $10,000.
Scenario 1: You bid $12,000 in the beginning and let the auction run. IF the auction has chicanery (string bidding or shilling or price retracting), there is a very likely chance you will be bid up to your max. Assuming a snipe of $12,000, there is a much higher chance you'll pay more for the item by placing a bid early vs. sniping at the end. This is because the person doing the shilling/string bidding has no idea as to your willingness to pay, and has no time to react to it so as to bid you up if you snipe for $12,000.
In Scenario 1, I would argue you are much more likely to pay a lower price sniping (i.e. closer to the average--call it VCP) vs. early bid.
Scenario 2: You do NOT bid early and decide to snipe at the very end for $12,000. 1 other person also bids close to that level at $11,900. You win for your full max at $12,000. Now let's assume there was shilling or string bidding in this auction. If you placed the full $12,000 bid as an early bid, you're going to pay the full amount. HOWEVER, if you established an early bid and bid it up from time to clime as time closed, you very likely would win this card closer to VCP, which was $10,000. I call this scenario the nuclear sniping risk. So advantage goes to early bidding here imo.
From these two scenarios, you can see how it could play out to where early bidding gets lower price OR sniping gets the lower price. It depends on a variety of factors. Some factors not even considered above which also factor in include: Auction Houses (i.e. the advantage of early bidding simply to get in the door so you can bid more towards the end). Or, if you want to earn ebates cashback, you have to establish a session id and place a winning bid without sniping software. Some people factor in the cash value there and bid early
Left to choose one method, and considering the average price of the cards I bid on (and the $ of potential fraudulent gains possible) as well as the rampant fraud on ebay (shilling, retractions, string bidding), I think sniping is a much better way to go and has almost certainly saved me thousands of dollars (even taking into account scenarios like scenario 2 above where I was part of a nuclear snipe where I likely overpaid).
Everyone obviously needs to do what they feel best, but I at least wanted to share my thought process on the matter fwiw.
Nice chatting the other day, David, and hope to see you at National.
I absolutely fall into the pro snipe camp. The monkey wrench was more aimed at the papers written about bidding techniques.
IMHO when it comes to cards (see the last paragraph) placing a very high initial bid (at the level that you believe an item will sell) all but guarantees you will pay more than you initially think. Why? Because there is only one thing that can go right, you win the auction for at or below your squat bid. But there are a whole host of other things that can conspire to make you pay more.
Shilling
Emotional bidders who become pig headed that they too are going to win.
Someone who gets in over their head and retracts there by exposing your value assessment.
Giving another bidder time to rationalize in their mind why they could / should pay more than they would if they had to make a snap decision.
Bidding at the last second (LITERALLY the last second) removes as many variables as possible. The only obstacle is the possibility of a nuclear squat. I have only once lost out on an item that I attempted to nuclear snipe. I posted about it before but a card was at $10. With one second left I bid $110 which should have been more than enough to get the job done. Well not that time. So while I don't know my exact numbers if I had to guess I lost one auction out of maybe 100 plus nuclear snipes.
I guess what I'm getting at is, while both techniques may work on items like DVDs, iPhones and other items with hundreds or thousands of listings you can't apply that same logic to collectibles and specifically cards. People's emotions & desire to win one of a thousand dvds that are essentially the same isn't the same as a high grade low pop item. IMO it comes down to desire to own and the deepest pockets. It's more of a game of chicken. How much more than you think it's worth to another collect are you willing to bid.
If a card has a VCP of $100 and lets say the second it goes live you bid $120. Over the course of the next seven days it moves up to $57. In the final seconds three bids come in at $87, $92, and $101. You win for $102. None of the other competitors challenged your bid until the end and you won below your proxy bid. This happens all of the time.
Your bid was $120, so it's only natural that a bid that is $20 over VCP is going to win.
When I make reference to how one would come up with their formula to bid on a low pop card generally we all use prior sales to base our opinions on what to bid. In a case of a Pop 1 generally you look at other examples and perhaps put a premium or discount based on other factors such as star power etc. The basis for my initial comment in this thread is the card went for much more than any would predict and that was proven by muffins poll. Once a card moves past your max it is no longer able to be bid on with a snipe relegating it worthless. I have bid on cards in my genre such as this and bid up some to see where others are at and came in with the hammer at the end. In every case myself and one or two other people were much higher than the pack and so in reality I could have put in that same bid within minutes of the auction starting with no one willing to challenge it until the end. All that mattered was the amount I bid.
Coming up with scenarios where sniping/early bidding wouldn't make a difference is easy.
No one has suggested that sniping pays off on every auction.
The reason I have spoken about the nuclear snipe being the most dangerous bid of all is you are actually exposed for that amount and if one other nuclear snipe comes in they collide.
It's not as dangerous as a nuclear early bid, due to shilling.
What I do find funny is the study that suggest sniping saves money barely in the range of statistical significance saves close to $1.
It's a long study - what page is it on that shows the $1 figure?
It turned out there was and the one I found indeed confirmed my belief using very advanced mathematical modeling.
And two studies that didn't. And now there's three.
neither side has presented 100% factual evidence that supports their theory.
and the funny thing is...you wont be able to.
these arent iphone or ounces of gold auctions.
each card, graded or not, has independent features which ultimately determines its final hammer price.
previous vcp history is not the gospel.
and w/ shilling so prevelant, whether you snipe or drop an atomic bid outta the gate, there is always the chance the consignor will place a win all bid just to set "value precedence" for another future sale for the idiots that do believe vcp is gospel or that all previous sales are 100% legit.
but keep arguing. it was fun to watch until the posts got to be 8 pages long each.
but still havent figured out that no matter what you post over some internet forum will rarely sway what another human being firmly believes. and probably never will once the name-calling is broken out.
im not on either of your sides, but i do know that if you continue to cram your beliefs down another's throat it will certainly not lead to more allies.
and i dont have any published papers proving such!
but still havent figured out that no matter what you post over some internet forum will rarely sway what another human being firmly believes. and probably never will once the name-calling is broken out.
I don't mind the heat that clowns like you bring but don't delete your derogatory posts. You know what you said.
Oh the ego. Honestly bro I am nice to everyone in the real world. I don't have heat with anyone and only online. That's why I laugh at cats like you. Work on your own stock and quit worrying about mine.
I don't mind the heat that clowns like you bring but don't delete your derogatory posts. You know what you said.
Oh the ego. Honestly bro I am nice to everyone in the real world. I don't have heat with anyone and only online. That's why I laugh at cats like you. Work on your own stock and quit worrying about mine.
Like I said, we're all millionaires here, W2. And everyone likes us in the real world too. Honestly bro.
And, yes, it takes a big ego to post a pic of yourself flexing. Who does that?
Comments
David, that's a very thoughtful post. Thank you. I've been reading some of the back and forth for years on this topic and quickly get turned off when it devolves into personal attacks. So I appreciate the effort behind this post.
Also, full disclosure I have not read any of the articles linked to. I probably will at some point because I love reading about theory and better understanding the math behind it. As with any research, there are always flaws, but I think most could agree with that and hopefully still agree that research can be very valid even if it isn't perfect.
My opinion, based on thinking through a few scenarios below, is that in some cases sniping can absolutely save you money. In other cases, it might cost you more money. And that answer also depends on the price level, rarity of the item, and who the seller is (i.e. is the seller honest or does he allow chicanery to occur). But there is no universal "sniping always saves you more money than early bidding." There are too many variables for that to always be true.
I'll outline some scenarios below. Some key variables that cause me to believe that sniping (despite the nuclear risk) on average achieves a lower winning price are threefold: first, string bidding (PWCC's term), second is shilling, third is price retracting. I do not know if either is considered in the research papers that have been referenced previously, but it's a big reason why I prefer sniping. With retractions, it makes string bidding and manipulation very easy to where your max price/willingness to pay is easily exposed early on in the process and there is a good chance you will get bid up to that amount without seller intervention (which never happens).
Let's stick with your example above where max bid is $120, but let's think about it x 10 (because string bidding and shilling are more likely to happen at this level due to much more $$$ at stake). So my max willingness to pay (WTP) for a card is $12,000. Card's VCP is $10,000.
Scenario 1: You bid $12,000 in the beginning and let the auction run. IF the auction has chicanery (string bidding or shilling or price retracting), there is a very likely chance you will be bid up to your max. Assuming a snipe of $12,000, there is a much higher chance you'll pay more for the item by placing a bid early vs. sniping at the end. This is because the person doing the shilling/string bidding has no idea as to your willingness to pay, and has no time to react to it so as to bid you up if you snipe for $12,000.
In Scenario 1, I would argue you are much more likely to pay a lower price sniping (i.e. closer to the average--call it VCP) vs. early bid.
Scenario 2: You do NOT bid early and decide to snipe at the very end for $12,000. 1 other person also bids close to that level at $11,900. You win for your full max at $12,000. Now let's assume there was shilling or string bidding in this auction. If you placed the full $12,000 bid as an early bid, you're going to pay the full amount. HOWEVER, if you established an early bid and bid it up from time to clime as time closed, you very likely would win this card closer to VCP, which was $10,000. I call this scenario the nuclear sniping risk. So advantage goes to early bidding here imo.
From these two scenarios, you can see how it could play out to where early bidding gets lower price OR sniping gets the lower price. It depends on a variety of factors. Some factors not even considered above which also factor in include: Auction Houses (i.e. the advantage of early bidding simply to get in the door so you can bid more towards the end). Or, if you want to earn ebates cashback, you have to establish a session id and place a winning bid without sniping software. Some people factor in the cash value there and bid early
Left to choose one method, and considering the average price of the cards I bid on (and the $ of potential fraudulent gains possible) as well as the rampant fraud on ebay (shilling, retractions, string bidding), I think sniping is a much better way to go and has almost certainly saved me thousands of dollars (even taking into account scenarios like scenario 2 above where I was part of a nuclear snipe where I likely overpaid).
Everyone obviously needs to do what they feel best, but I at least wanted to share my thought process on the matter fwiw.
Nice chatting the other day, David, and hope to see you at National.
I absolutely fall into the pro snipe camp. The monkey wrench was more aimed at the papers written about bidding techniques.
IMHO when it comes to cards (see the last paragraph) placing a very high initial bid (at the level that you believe an item will sell) all but guarantees you will pay more than you initially think. Why? Because there is only one thing that can go right, you win the auction for at or below your squat bid. But there are a whole host of other things that can conspire to make you pay more.
Bidding at the last second (LITERALLY the last second) removes as many variables as possible. The only obstacle is the possibility of a nuclear squat. I have only once lost out on an item that I attempted to nuclear snipe. I posted about it before but a card was at $10. With one second left I bid $110 which should have been more than enough to get the job done. Well not that time. So while I don't know my exact numbers if I had to guess I lost one auction out of maybe 100 plus nuclear snipes.
I guess what I'm getting at is, while both techniques may work on items like DVDs, iPhones and other items with hundreds or thousands of listings you can't apply that same logic to collectibles and specifically cards. People's emotions & desire to win one of a thousand dvds that are essentially the same isn't the same as a high grade low pop item. IMO it comes down to desire to own and the deepest pockets. It's more of a game of chicken. How much more than you think it's worth to another collect are you willing to bid.
Kevin
Kevin
Your bid was $120, so it's only natural that a bid that is $20 over VCP is going to win.
Coming up with scenarios where sniping/early bidding wouldn't make a difference is easy.
No one has suggested that sniping pays off on every auction.
It's not as dangerous as a nuclear early bid, due to shilling.
It's a long study - what page is it on that shows the $1 figure?
And two studies that didn't. And now there's three.
neither side has presented 100% factual evidence that supports their theory.
and the funny thing is...you wont be able to.
these arent iphone or ounces of gold auctions.
each card, graded or not, has independent features which ultimately determines its final hammer price.
previous vcp history is not the gospel.
and w/ shilling so prevelant, whether you snipe or drop an atomic bid outta the gate, there is always the chance the consignor will place a win all bid just to set "value precedence" for another future sale for the idiots that do believe vcp is gospel or that all previous sales are 100% legit.
but keep arguing. it was fun to watch until the posts got to be 8 pages long each.
and besides, i use a bid strategy that sorta involves all the above!
a decent bid at first, a final snipe + a few other scare off tactics to make it appear as if it is intentionally being shilled...
which i can NOT say is more effective than the mundane arguement going on above...but it works for me.
Dpeck may be talking about cards, but I'm not. I have always been talking about ebay sniping in general. Any kind of item.
doesnt matter.
niether one of you has presented facts that conclusively and ultimately proved your "theory" to be correct.
and again...you wont be able to.
but keep going at it, by all means.
Sniping works well enough that a number of people think it is unfair. I wonder if there is a single person that thinks early bidding is unfair?
Theory? I just have studies that show that sniping is beneficial.
studies, huh?
but still havent figured out that no matter what you post over some internet forum will rarely sway what another human being firmly believes. and probably never will once the name-calling is broken out.
im not on either of your sides, but i do know that if you continue to cram your beliefs down another's throat it will certainly not lead to more allies.
and i dont have any published papers proving such!
but keep arguing your point...
it's only letting others know what buttons to push w you.
Who says I'm trying to sway him?
then what exactly are you doing w all these posts, screen shots, arguements and hours of wasted time devoted to this thread?
oh thats right...giving potential trollers plenty of ammunition!
I don't mind the heat that clowns like you bring but don't delete your derogatory posts. You know what you said.
Oh the ego. Honestly bro I am nice to everyone in the real world. I don't have heat with anyone and only online. That's why I laugh at cats like you. Work on your own stock and quit worrying about mine.
You don't know? You seem to know everything else.
Like I said, we're all millionaires here, W2. And everyone likes us in the real world too. Honestly bro.
And, yes, it takes a big ego to post a pic of yourself flexing. Who does that?
good one.
Five pages and nobody has spelled nucular correctly. I can't take any of you seriously.
citric acid hurts!
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Huh?
"Nucular", I believe, is meant to be a light hearted reference to the malapropism tendencies of George W. Bush...
What!
Spelling counts?
Is there gonna be a test?
I knew I shudah finished my hi skool edgeekation.