Jump to content

Background Image

Stamping

Started by dss@pw , Oct 08 2010 02:51 PM

  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41

candy
  • candy
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 2,195 posts

Here it is in a nutshell folks: PA's are not equal opportunity regardless of your income. Never will be. bulb

Example: There is a TV on this PA & I really want it. But wait, there is one of those "Whales" on it. That means I will have to buy a LOT of bids & battle to win it. :S "That's not fair," cries the Whiner! The "Whales" always win the expensive stuff! I am going to look at other PA's to see if I can win something expensive for a few cents!

You HAVE to learn how to work around people that have MORE green stuff than you! It is possible, if you do your homework. Use Your Brain More & Your Whiner Less. I am not a Whale, but since I have been playing on PA's, I have won some very nice items, including TV's, netbooks, PS3, Wii, iPod's, IPad, etc etc etc. You have to watch for that golden opportunity & snatch it.

Perhaps PA's could base bid prices on our income level? woot Doubt you will ever see that happen. :P

IMHO, Win Limits are very important & they should be the same for everyone. One a day, if it helps the situation. Owners need to run more auctions & more high end items to allow everyone a chance to win, but they don't because they do not want high end items selling for the same price as a small gift card. So I guess it's down to realizing you do have a budget & think about what would be realistic to win & be happy winning a $25 or $50 gift card. Be 100% tickled pink when you find that golden opportunity & win something really big for next to nothing. woot If I go shopping in real stores, I have to look for items in my price range & I don't complain to the store manager that it's not fair I can't have the 46" 3D TV for the same price as a 19" TV.

Ok let me have it.

#42

rs9090
  • rs9090
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

The only way to truly stop stamping would be not to take bids till 1 minuite before the auction.But then everyone would leave the site because deep down you want to know far in advance who you are up against.

#43

jets5000
  • jets5000
  • Member
  • Members
  • 758 posts

[quote name='dss@pw']Hello All:

To make things worse, these few bidders have a side agreement to not bid against one another. QUOTE]

dss@pw

How do you know they have a side agreement? And if you have proof that they have a side agreement, then this would be collusion and against most sites T&Cs.

[quote name='candy']Here it is in a nutshell folks: PA's are not equal opportunity regardless of your income. Never will be. bulb

Example: There is a TV on this PA & I really want it. But wait, there is one of those "Whales" on it. That means I will have to buy a LOT of bids & battle to win it. :S "That's not fair," cries the Whiner! The "Whales" always win the expensive stuff! I am going to look at other PA's to see if I can win something expensive for a few cents!

You HAVE to learn how to work around people that have MORE green stuff than you! It is possible, if you do your homework. Use Your Brain More & Your Whiner Less. I am not a Whale, but since I have been playing on PA's, I have won some very nice items, including TV's, netbooks, PS3, Wii, iPod's, IPad, etc etc etc. You have to watch for that golden opportunity & snatch it.

Perhaps PA's could base bid prices on our income level? woot Doubt you will ever see that happen. :P

IMHO, Win Limits are very important & they should be the same for everyone. One a day, if it helps the situation. Owners need to run more auctions & more high end items to allow everyone a chance to win, but they don't because they do not want high end items selling for the same price as a small gift card. So I guess it's down to realizing you do have a budget & think about what would be realistic to win & be happy winning a $25 or $50 gift card. Be 100% tickled pink when you find that golden opportunity & win something really big for next to nothing. woot If I go shopping in real stores, I have to look for items in my price range & I don't complain to the store manager that it's not fair I can't have the 46" 3D TV for the same price as a 19" TV.

Ok let me have it.[/QUOTE]

Candy,

I totally agree with you.

I can not imagine walking into a brick and mortar store and complaining that the store is being unfair because my budget does not allow me to purchase the same items as someone with 10x my budget.

Jets

#44

nixnutz7897
  • nixnutz7897
  • Member
  • Members
  • 627 posts

I don't think BittyBidz's downfall was due to exchanging wins for bids. If a PA offers an exchange of bids for win, EVERY member would have that option, not just Whales, so if anything, wouldn't it drive UP the price of an auction?


From the BittyBidz thread here on PAW:

Dear Bittybidz customers/PAW users

As I previously stated on here I am doing this all by myself with no help from anyone. It may not be as fast as some would like but I am doing the best I can after losing thousands of dollars from certain people who took it upon themselves to lie, cheat and steal from me as well as the users on PAW. I am currently doing my best to try to atleast get back some of what I feel was stolen from me by false pretenses, manipulation and cheating.

As I have stated before I do promise to make sure that all real legit users who bought, bid, and won fairly will get their wins.


Thank you

Latina


BittyBidz had a "mark and defend" issue for a long time and it caught up to them. Coupled with a late effort to impose win limits, a won items for bids exchange, and an unfortunate financial issue with her partners, the site was doomed. She actually had a clearly stated exchange policy in the beginning, but eliminated it when she realized the damage it was doing. (read it here: BittyBidz)

The very same bidders who were "doing her a favor" by taking bids instead of won items, ended up being owed thousands of dollars of items with a very small investment. It can be done, especially when you've got explicit, known and communicated agreements with other bidders (see below poker example).

I know Latina is busy working hard to get items shipped out to people who are still owed them, but maybe she can offer her experience on what went wrong for her, after the dust settles. It sure could shed some light on things...maybe save some of the "good guys/gals" out there from making the same mistakes. (If you read this Latina, forgive me if I assume too much....)

Here's a post from another user. I concede that this user is now banned from here, but that was for a completely seperate issue and shouldn't take away from the wisdom of an experienced bidder in this post:

Good move BittyBidz, it's nice to see that you are taking the steps necessary to complete the transactions, and to avoid a larger pile-up of overdue items. You are doing the right thing.

I think part of the reason that you didn't generate much income, is that you offered the option of switching out items for bids, meaning that the items that were actually won and kept were selling for NOTHING but an initial investment of bids, IF that. You might as well have just let people sign up for free merchandise.

Secondly, you did not implement win limits until very late in the game, which allowed your site to be dominated by a few powerful bidders who probably ran alot of other people off since they wouldn't stand a chance of winning. It's better now, but could still use some tweaking, as the site is still dominated. This is the very reason that I have not been back to your site to spend any money there. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

Thirdly, you ran far too many auctions each day for a site that was not generating enough income to cover the costs.

Fourth - you do not show your items available for bidding until the last few minutes. Maybe you do this to avoid 'stamping' and non-competition due to that stamping - but the longer an item is up prior to the start of an auction, the more people will see it and place bids, raising the final price. People are going to 'stamp' anyway, no matter when you make the item available for bidding - you will have those people who think they are ENTITLED to it just because they 'stamped' it to let everyone know it's supposed to be THEIRS (smh @ that).

Just a few comments. I know you have worked to change some of those things, and I'm looking forward to you coming back because I do believe that you will improve with each lesson learned.

Furthermore - I do hope that you go through your list of items still owed, and ship based on the date the item was paid for or won, and don't go by who screams the loudest.

Best of luck.



I concede that stamping is not the end-all, be-all of a site's failure, but it sure can foreshadow the beginning of the end. IMHO, dss is spot on recognizing that the stamping (aka "mark and defend") is, at the least, a sign of a problem and, at the very worst, collusion.

rs9090 is correct:

The only way to truly stop stamping would be not to take bids till 1 minute before the auction. But then everyone would leave the site because deep down you want to know far in advance who you are up against.



Absolutely!

Lastly, comparing retail stores to penny sites is absurd and a horrible analogy. The dynamic is completely different, so it's apples to oranges. Retail stores set their prices and you either pay them or you don't. If paople want to pay retail, they'll go to the retail stores. ALL of us bid on PA's because the chance exists for a huge bargain. Sure, there are the types who feel they're entitled to that huge bargain, but to lump everyone into a category as "whiners", when evidence clearly exists that there may be collusion amongst some these bidders, is over the top and unecessary.

If anything, PA's are more like a poker game (sorry for the gambling analogy, but it's true). Now there will be some players who are capable of buying the pot everytime. A good poker player avoids them, because they know who they are AND they recognize that they're out of their league financially...fair enough. The vast majority of us do this with PB's and I don't think the true PB's are the issue here. It's been my experience that the PB's stick to the tings they want and self-regulate because they know they need the small-fry and the mid-level bidders to keep the sites going, so, IMHO any further debate on PB's is :beatdeadhorse5:

Back to poker analogy...You sit down at a table, where you know "that" (PB) player isn't sitting. Suddenly you start to recognize a pattern. Three of the players at the table NEVER bet against each other. Everytime you open, one of them raises you and the other two fold. You've got a good hand, so you call. Next round of betting, that better puts up a huge bet...wtf??? You call, but you're starting to worry. Next round of bidding, another huge bet...you fold.

New hand, a different player, from the player who raised you in the previous hand, raises you on the flop and his buddies fold. Same thing, huge bet on the turn and you fold. This continues hand after hand. You leave the table and now you won't ever sit at a table where these three players, or any one of them for that matter, are playing.

Now, you might argue that if you don't have the funds to be playing poker, you should "find another hobby", but consider this...you weren't betting against one person's financial means...you were betting against the pooled resources of three conspiring players. This is not about power bidders, it's about cheaters. bulb

There are users on PW who are proven colluders. Those known colluders are "marking and defending" just like they intended to do on the site that caught them and just like they continue to do on another active site, where they started their little collusion group....

We can argue over minutia, over-simplify things and make false analogies all we want, but collusion is bad for all of us and people who are colluding AND greedy, will be the downfall of the penny auction model, not PB's and certainly not mid-level bidders.

EDIT: sorry...I meant to include a link to the BittyBidz thread, so users can read the whole thing and judge for themselves...here it is:

http://www.pennyauct...tybidz-net.html

#45

candy
  • candy
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 2,195 posts

From the BittyBidz thread here on PAW:



BittyBidz had a "mark and defend" issue for a long time and it caught up to them. Coupled with a late effort to impose win limits, a won items for bids exchange, and an unfortunate financial issue with her partners, the site was doomed. She actually had a clearly stated exchange policy in the beginning, but eliminated it when she realized the damage it was doing. (read it here: BittyBidz)

The very same bidders who were "doing her a favor" by taking bids instead of won items, ended up being owed thousands of dollars of items with a very small investment. It can be done, especially when you've got explicit, known and communicated agreements with other bidders (see below poker example).

I know Latina is busy working hard to get items shipped out to people who are still owed them, but maybe she can offer her experience on what went wrong for her, after the dust settles. It sure could shed some light on things...maybe save some of the "good guys/gals" out there from making the same mistakes. (If you read this Latina, forgive me if I assume too much....)

Here's a post from another user. I concede that this user is now banned from here, but that was for a completely seperate issue and shouldn't take away from the wisdom of an experienced bidder in this post:




I concede that stamping is not the end-all, be-all of a site's failure, but it sure can foreshadow the beginning of the end. IMHO, dss is spot on recognizing that the stamping (aka "mark and defend") is, at the least, a sign of a problem and, at the very worst, collusion.

rs9090 is correct:



Absolutely!

Lastly, comparing retail stores to penny sites is absurd and a horrible analogy. The dynamic is completely different, so it's apples to oranges. Retail stores set their prices and you either pay them or you don't. If paople want to pay retail, they'll go to the retail stores. ALL of us bid on PA's because the chance exists for a huge bargain. Sure, there are the types who feel they're entitled to that huge bargain, but to lump everyone into a category as "whiners", when evidence clearly exists that there may be collusion amongst some these bidders, is over the top and unecessary.

If anything, PA's are more like a poker game (sorry for the gambling analogy, but it's true). Now there will be some players who are capable of buying the pot everytime. A good poker player avoids them, because they know who they are AND they recognize that they're out of their league financially...fair enough. The vast majority of us do this with PB's and I don't think the true PB's are the issue here. It's been my experience that the PB's stick to the tings they want and self-regulate because they know they need the small-fry and the mid-level bidders to keep the sites going, so, IMHO any further debate on PB's is :beatdeadhorse5:

Back to poker analogy...You sit down at a table, where you know "that" (PB) player isn't sitting. Suddenly you start to recognize a pattern. Three of the players at the table NEVER bet against each other. Everytime you open, one of them raises you and the other two fold. You've got a good hand, so you call. Next round of betting, that better puts up a huge bet...wtf??? You call, but you're starting to worry. Next round of bidding, another huge bet...you fold.

New hand, a different player, from the player who raised you in the previous hand, raises you on the flop and his buddies fold. Same thing, huge bet on the turn and you fold. This continues hand after hand. You leave the table and now you won't ever sit at a table where these three players, or any one of them for that matter, are playing.

Now, you might argue that if you don't have the funds to be playing poker, you should "find another hobby", but consider this...you weren't betting against one person's financial means...you were betting against the pooled resources of three conspiring players. This is not about power bidders, it's about cheaters. bulb

There are users on PW who are proven colluders. Those known colluders are "marking and defending" just like they intended to do on the site that caught them and just like they continue to do on another active site, where they started their little collusion group....

We can argue over minutia, over-simplify things and make false analogies all we want, but collusion is bad for all of us and people who are colluding AND greedy, will be the downfall of the penny auction model, not PB's and certainly not mid-level bidders.

EDIT: sorry...I meant to include a link to the BittyBidz thread, so users can read the whole thing and judge for themselves...here it is:

http://www.pennyauct...tybidz-net.html


First of all, I did not clump EVERYONE together as whiners. How you concluded that is beyond me.

BittyBidz made several errors in judgement, as you have elaborated on here. It was not simply a matter of exchanging wins for bids that created the problem. That was a poor example to illustrate how exchanging a win for bids will destroy a PA.

As far as your poker comparison....The person learned not sit at the table with those 3 players. Same goes for PA's. If you don't have a money tree, you don't plant yourself on an auction where the bidder is known to bid until they win. Did the person who learned this costly lesson, whine to the casino that it wasn't fair? Did he request the casino lay down new rules so he could win next time at that table? People gamble at casinos for a chance to win BIG. MANY walk away broke. So what's your point? IMHO, that is a poor example & only shows what I am trying to say.... Know your limits, financially, and play accordingly. If you don't like a PA that exchanges a win for bids, pick another one to play on. If there are too many extreme bidders on a particular PA, don't bid there. Work around it.

#46

nixnutz7897
  • nixnutz7897
  • Member
  • Members
  • 627 posts

First of all, I did not clump EVERYONE together as whiners. How you concluded that is beyond me..


From this:

You HAVE to learn how to work around people that have MORE green stuff than you! It is possible, if you do your homework. Use Your Brain More & Your Whiner Less..



and this:

"That's not fair," cries the Whiner!


Statements such as these assume that anyone who complained is just complaining b/c people "have more green stuff". It completely dismisses the possibility that at least some of those people might have a legitimate complaint. If I've mis-interpreted your intent, forgive me.

BittyBidz made several errors in judgement, as you have elaborated on here. It was not simply a matter of exchanging wins for bids that created the problem. That was a poor example to illustrate how exchanging a win for bids will destroy a PA.


I NEVER said that exchanging wins for bids was the downfall of BittyBidz. The example was to show that exchanging bids for wins is a symptom. I thought I was very clear about that. Furthermore, I highlighted the cheating part to emphasize that this about cheating and that "stamping" could be a clue to that cheating:

I concede that stamping is not the end-all, be-all of a site's failure, but it sure can foreshadow the beginning of the end. IMHO, dss is spot on recognizing that the stamping (aka "mark and defend") is, at the least, a sign of a problem and, at the very worst, collusion..


As far as your poker comparison....The person learned not sit at the table with those 3 players. Same goes for PA's. If you don't have a money tree, you don't plant yourself on an auction where the bidder is known to bid until they win. Did the person who learned this costly lesson, whine to the casino that it wasn't fair? Did he request the casino lay down new rules so he could win next time at that table? People gamble at casinos for a chance to win BIG. MANY walk away broke. So what's your point? IMHO, that is a poor example & only shows what I am trying to say.... Know your limits, financially, and play accordingly. If you don't like a PA that exchanges a win for bids, pick another one to play on. If there are too many extreme bidders on a particular PA, don't bid there. Work around it.


Again, this is not about power bidders ("bidder is known to bid until they win"). This is about collusion. I can't see how it's possible that all you got out of that part was that people are complaining about not winning??? I'm saying that there are cheaters amongst us and that they will be the downfall of PA's, not PB's or the rest of us who bid within our limits...a symptom/sign of that cheating could be stamping:

Now, you might argue that if you don't have the funds to be playing poker, you should "find another hobby", but consider this...you weren't betting against one person's financial means...you were betting against the pooled resources of three conspiring players. This is not about power bidders, it's about cheaters. bulb


If I were that poker player, you're darn right I would go to Casino security and tell them that I think those three are cheating! Is that whining? If it is, then I'm a whiner...there's a massive difference between simply "losing" and being cheated. I'm certain the Casino would not stand for it either, not unlike dss is trying to do. I stand by my analogy...

Are you saying that you approve of players pooling their resources and colluding?

I am trying to have an exchange here, not point fingers or fight. We all benefit from getting to the bottom of this, so I'm at a loss for where all the resitance comes from? I wonder if you read the whole post or just reacted to the parts you perceived not to like?

I agree with you--if you can't afford to play the game and you don't do your research, then you have no basis for complaining. If you're only complaint is that you didn't win, then you have no grounds to complain. I just think this goes beyond merely "not winning"...there's cheating going on.

I don't want to fight with you. I'm hoping we can exchange opposing thoughts and come to a conclusion based on those thoughts. Perhaps that conclusion is to agree to disagree, which I am fine with. I don't understand why, as a fellow bidder with a vested interest in not being cheated, you're so resistant to giving this exchange a reasonable, open-minded thought?

#47

AKQJforme
  • AKQJforme
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

The tagging issue you have exist on all sites, however successful sites combat this by driving new customers to their site to bid who do not know who is who, in reality the fact that you have so many PAW bidders on your site is your real problem because many PAW bidders will not bid against each other simple as that. You seem to think there is a conspiracy going on amongst these bidders that tag, frankly it is no different then any other bidder choosing not to bid against someone. Regardless whether a auction is tagged or not once certain names appear it will influence the auction regardless of being 2 days in advance or 2 minutes it does not change the outcome.

It is almost laughable when I hear a auctions site say they want their site to be fair, last time I checked an "AUCTON" winner is typically the highest and or last bidder, and because some bidders have more to spend does not mean that it is unfair. I am sick of hearing that and it is rediculas. In fact you discuss possibly imposing seperate rules for a small group of bidders because they are sucessfull, yeh that sounds like you want a fair and balanced auction??? You are right these bidders you are referring to can scare away other bidders, but the reality is becasue they have shown they are willing to pay more to win, last time I checked that was not against the rules but is seems now that it is potentially terms for supension.

Regardless of what you thnk of these bidders they are residual and if they are not profitable to you that is your fault by not creating competition for them. The fact is it is only a small percentage of your new bidders will become return customer and that is consitant with all sites, lets face it there are only a few auctions per day to be won between a much larger number of bidders and only a small % of bidders will be satisfied regardless of who wins.

There are many bidder that are cheering you on of which some of these bidders would never consider paying retail for an auction item infact they complain about the PB's that will. What gets me is the site owners fire back restricting the sucessful bidders and try to cater to the complainers who frankly only bid if they think they can steal the item. Sorry but that is not the sucessful PA business model.

No matter what you do bidders who lose will always complain, and blame you for letting the winning bidders play, don't you see what is happening this has been going on forever and especially from PAW members, they complain about the bidders that win in an effort to get the site owner to restrict them so it is eaier for them almost colusive between the PA owner and the these bidders. The funny part is many of these nomadic bidders that complain often join new sites like this and then when a site gets rolling and somewhat sucessful they soon bail only to jump to the next new site and start the cycle again, frankly it works for them and is a winning strategy but in the long run the site owner gets screwed as they end up losing both segments of bidders.

Ok I let the cat out of the bag, and likely many of the bidders I referred too will now go ballistic, but these are the facts and very proven cycles.

Let the Games Begin.

By the way DSS I am not trying to bust your chops but simply putting this to reality, you may dissagree now but history of countless sites (both gone and still alive) supports my findings.


VERY true! driving new bidders every day is the only way to eliminate this problem. Even better...drive new peeps that are new to the industry as well! You gotta keep a good mix!

#48

candy
  • candy
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 2,195 posts

Statements such as these assume that anyone who complained is just complaining b/c people "have more green stuff". It completely dismisses the possibility that at least some of those people might have a legitimate complaint. If I've mis-interpreted your intent, forgive me.


Yes you did mis-interpret my intent & you are forgiven, this time. :smilielol5:

Again, this is not about power bidders ("bidder is known to bid until they win"). This is about collusion. I can't see how it's possible that all you got out of that part was that people are complaining about not winning??? I'm saying that there are cheaters amongst us and that they will be the downfall of PA's, not PB's or the rest of us who bid within our limits...a symptom/sign of that cheating could be stamping:


I do understand what you are saying here, but I do not see how stamping an auction decides the outcome of that auction. To me, Collusion means manipulating the outcome of an auction. People can group together, as you have stated & stamp auctions, as their intent to take that auction, but it does not decide the outcome. What that does is tell others in their "group" this one is mine. What about all the other members of the PA? Those not in the "group" can bid to their hearts content. PLEASE do not assume I think "groups" are ok!!! All I am saying is that auction would still be open for anyone to bid. If a PA is riddled with PB's stamping & winning most all the auctions, then Serious WIN LIMITS should be put in place. This can be done with daily or weekly limits, but the PA owner must also run enough auctions to accommodate the number of members, to really fix the problem. If you have 10 auctions running a day and have a 2 per day limit, but you have 10 powerbidders on that site... the problem is not solved. That is why this issue is not beating a dead horse.

I am concerned about another type of collusion.... When bidders who know each other, enter an auction together, to manipulate the outcome. This discourages the other bidder from continuing & then it drops to one of them. This IS blatant cheating & is taking a back seat to the stamping issue. I have been in auctions where a group of bidders (friends) rotated turns bidding against me, and it most certainly did decide the outcome of that auction.

I don't want to fight with you. I'm hoping we can exchange opposing thoughts and come to a conclusion based on those thoughts. Perhaps that conclusion is to agree to disagree, which I am fine with. I don't understand why, as a fellow bidder with a vested interest in not being cheated, you're so resistant to giving this exchange a reasonable, open-minded thought?


If ya don't want to "fight", please refrain from comments like: "absurd and a horrible analogy." That is not what I consider exchanging thoughts or being open-minded. :wink:

Edited by candy, 13 October 2010 - 05:56 PM.


#49

Nancy
  • Nancy
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts

If there are "proven" colluders over at PW, can't you say who they are? I want to bid over there but I have no idea who they are and who they are on "another site". Being somewhat new to PA it would be nice if the people were named instead of innuendos' of who they might be.

I understand not naming people if they were only suspected but if it is "proven" help us newbies out?

Nancy

#50

dss@pw
  • dss@pw
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Hi all:

I didn't realize what I started when I began this thread. Since we at pennywarrios.com reduced the win limits to 2 per day, we have changed the entire complexion of our home page. We have names of bidders I have never seen before and a lot of them.Our registered bidders have increased by 55%. Stamping is really no longer as huge an issue as it previously was. It still exists however but not as prevalent as it once was. We're working hard to keep the playing field level. That's all that can be asked of a PA owner. Were kind of like hall monitors trying to keep the kids from smoking in the bathroom. Some days you get the bear and some days the bear gets you. It's all about balance. And that's all I have to say on this subject.

#51

rs9090
  • rs9090
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Let the games begin

#52

candy
  • candy
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 2,195 posts

Hi all:

I didn't realize what I started when I began this thread. Since we at pennywarrios.com reduced the win limits to 2 per day, we have changed the entire complexion of our home page. We have names of bidders I have never seen before and a lot of them.Our registered bidders have increased by 55%. Stamping is really no longer as huge an issue as it previously was. It still exists however but not as prevalent as it once was. We're working hard to keep the playing field level. That's all that can be asked of a PA owner. Were kind of like hall monitors trying to keep the kids from smoking in the bathroom. Some days you get the bear and some days the bear gets you. It's all about balance. And that's all I have to say on this subject.


I agree 100%! Win Limits do a wonder of good. Problem Solved woot

#53

rotaryguy
  • rotaryguy
  • Member
  • Members
  • 1,368 posts

Let the games begin


:lurk5: when do they start? :)

#54

rs9090
  • rs9090
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts

We are waiting for you

#55

rotaryguy
  • rotaryguy
  • Member
  • Members
  • 1,368 posts

We are waiting for you


dont wait on me too long! :smilielol5: i got mid terms going on, not much time to bid lately :mad: stupid education....:smilielol5:

#56

IceDragon
  • IceDragon
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts

I will chime in as I know some of these answers. The colluders (in my opinion) are the same ones who were named here previously in the emails they got caught in. If you look at the ended auction history you will see, none of these same people bid on the same items. That was where the problem started. DSS has gone to great lengths to control the issue and with the arrival of new users I am sure PennyWarriors will do much better.
Does it matter who I am?

#57

neverwalks
  • neverwalks
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 1,571 posts

Just my 2 cents...

I really don't see why some here in this thread view stamping as a problem? Is it not best to know who you are likely to be up against in advance? Just because someone has "stamped" an auction it does not stop any single one of you from bidding on that auction does it? The notion that stamping does harm is quite ridiculous in my opinion. If an item has already taken some bids and I am genuinely interested in winning that item then the fact that someone has "stamped" it has no bearing on whether I will bid on it or not.

As for trading wins for bids, again, I really do not see why some see this as a problem? what difference does it make? e.g If I win a $50 Walmart gift card and I swap it for 100 bids it's actually beneficial for the site is it not?, as the money has remained within the site and has not been taken away to be spent at Walmart. I really DO NOT see what difference it makes, the site hasn't just given away 100 "FREE" bids has it? No. The site has actually just sold another 100 bids... if anyone sees this any differently then in a nutshell you are just plain wrong in my opinion.

Good luck with your bidding everyone :)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] :12: Bid Long and Prosper :12:

#58

ProtoProtoss
  • ProtoProtoss
  • Member
  • Members
  • 743 posts

Just my 2 cents...

I really don't see why some here in this thread view stamping as a problem? Is it not best to know who you are likely to be up against in advance? Just because someone has "stamped" an auction it does not stop any single one of you from bidding on that auction does it? The notion that stamping does harm is quite ridiculous in my opinion. If an item has already taken some bids and I am genuinely interested in winning that item then the fact that someone has "stamped" it has no bearing on whether I will bid on it or not.

As for trading wins for bids, again, I really do not see why some see this as a problem? what difference does it make? e.g If I win a $50 Walmart gift card and I swap it for 100 bids it's actually beneficial for the site is it not?, as the money has remained within the site and has not been taken away to be spent at Walmart. I really DO NOT see what difference it makes, the site hasn't just given away 100 "FREE" bids has it? No. The site has actually just sold another 100 bids... if anyone sees this any differently then in a nutshell you are just plain wrong in my opinion.

Good luck with your bidding everyone :)


I agree and disagree, but I think the argument is a little different. The issue with Stamping is quite ridiculous. If that is the case, then nobody should ever put the 1st bid in. All it says is that you were first to bid, or that you want the item, and possibly intend to fight for it, OR you could just be hoping nobody bids, so I agree there.

As for the trading items for bids, that one is a little tricky. Though it is fair in aspects of the person to the site, the issue comes in where people would aim for items nobody wants and just trade them back for bids, thus creating a higher difficulty for those whom actually want these items.

For example:

A gift card to Sno-ball Land or Soup Planet. Nobody knows about these places so they have no use for them, in which maybe only 2 or 3 people would go for this item. If it is known that people can trade the cards back for more bids, that creates a problem because instead of fighting 2 people, now a person is fighting 20 people over something they don't need/want/can't even use, which pushes people away from the site. I say it pushes them away because, if someone has a lesser budget and can't even win simple stuff that is not even relevant to other users they have no reason to bid as they know someone else is just going to snatch it and trade it anyways. This then creates bid stacking, where the powerbidders will start hogging everything they can get and just trading back for more bids to a point where they can literally just take any item they want.

#59

coolguy451
  • coolguy451
  • Member
  • Members
  • 1,144 posts

As for the trading items for bids, that one is a little tricky. Though it is fair in aspects of the person to the site, the issue comes in where people would aim for items nobody wants and just trade them back for bids, thus creating a higher difficulty for those whom actually want these items.

For example:

A gift card to Sno-ball Land or Soup Planet. Nobody knows about these places so they have no use for them, in which maybe only 2 or 3 people would go for this item. If it is known that people can trade the cards back for more bids, that creates a problem because instead of fighting 2 people, now a person is fighting 20 people over something they don't need/want/can't even use, which pushes people away from the site. I say it pushes them away because, if someone has a lesser budget and can't even win simple stuff that is not even relevant to other users they have no reason to bid as they know someone else is just going to snatch it and trade it anyways. This then creates bid stacking, where the powerbidders will start hogging everything they can get and just trading back for more bids to a point where they can literally just take any item they want.


Even though I understand your example proto, wouldn't it make more sense to have the owner identify and put up only items that many people want to avoid situations like this? I agree with neverwalks about being able to trade items for bids since it just ensures the owner that the user is reinvesting back into the site (by exchanging say a $50 card for bids). If people are "abusing" the system by only bidding on items no one else wants, I think it is the job of the site owner to recognize this and they should stop posting these items and go with more items that seem to be more attractive to their customers.

In many cases, like on bittybidz that was mentioned, the items listed were mainly recycled (maybe it is easier to keep reposting these instead of creating new auctions). Even when an item would only receive 1-2 bids it would end up being posted over and over. Maybe you could argue that people shouldn't bid on it because they are taking advantage, but I think that a person who bought bids has the right to bid on any items they want (within the rules) and if exchanging is allowed they are just following the rules set up for them, which I think is a smart strategy especially when a person might have a limited budget and they are trying to fight against people willing to spend a lot more than they can. If new sites did a better job evaluating auctions (time posted, # of viewers, # of bidders, etc) then I believe this issue would be moot, because all of the items being posted would be ones that many people would want so that no one is walking away with crappy items for a penny and exchanging them for bids.

#60

ProtoProtoss
  • ProtoProtoss
  • Member
  • Members
  • 743 posts

I respect your opinion CG, but I'm looking at it moreso as the penny auction owner is putting items like that up on purpose for the lower budgeting people and those whom have interest in such items, and don't want to necessarily only cater to those whom spend more. I honestly think it's better in attracting more customers as it is friendlier for them.

The only items I believe should be able to be exchanged for bids should be cash value cards (Direct visa or mastercard pre-paid cards) as those could just buy bids anyways. However, an item like a $50.00 card to walmart is not exchangeable at walmart for $50.00, therefore should not be able to exchange for direct bids. The point I am trying to make is, currently plenty people can win. If all items were exchangeable for bids, then newcomers would have no chance to win anything unless they have an enormous budget because the powerbidders would just take everything and change it for bids, then you will eventually end up with a site where you only see the same 10 names winning everything. Then it will come to a point where the powerbidders stop fighting each other and whomever marks an item first gets it... and then what?

Now on the other hand, IF it is stated in the rules or on the particular auction that the item is exchangeable, then that is completely different.

Edited by ProtoProtoss, 14 October 2010 - 02:50 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users