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

#61

coolguy451
  • coolguy451
  • Member
  • Members
  • 1,144 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.


Good post, I see what you are saying (and it sounds like one of the problems that dealdash continues to deal with). I still think exchanging for bids is okay but only when the site takes other factors into account when deciding if it is a good option to have on their site ( win limits, BIN availability, # of active users etc).

PS Have you been playing SC2, if not I think you should think about changing your username:smilielol5:

#62

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

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.


I would say BOTH :) ...personally when I "stamp" it is because I fully intend to fight for it but in addition of course I hope that no-one bids and I snag a bargain (although that is very rarely the case :smilielol5: )

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.


I do get what you are saying and I do understand the dynamics, however and I will quote you here "the issue comes in where people would aim for items nobody wants and just trade them back for bids" ...so really the onus is on the sites to list items people actually want maybe? from the sites perspective and I'll quote again "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"...I'm quite sure a site would rather see 20 people fighting over something than 2 people fighting over something and to be fair, the part of don't need/want/can't even use kind of becomes redundant if the site allows you trade for bids does it not? Like I say, I do understand the dynamics and the fact that those users with a limited budget could be scared away but this is where a good system of win limits comes into play and if a site has a good structure with its win limits then the user with the smaller budget should still be able to use the site effectively because a PB would not want to waste their slots on the cheaper items. If a user chooses to "bid stack" as you call it then again I don't really see what the problem is... every bid they stacked they have effectively paid for by trading their win. I don't see how it gives a PB any kind of advantage either as most PBs would win regardless of whether the bids were purchased or traded, it doesn't give them the ability to take anything they want, a PB already has that ability, again, the importance of win limits comes into play as it really is the only effective way to control a PB. Also with regards to "bid stacking" it might be worth pointing out again that the stacked bids were actually paid for and also the user with the stacked bids still attracts counter bids before they actually win the item.

For example:

A user wins 3 gift cards to Sno-ball Land or Soup Planet worth say 50 bucks each (total $150) and trades them for say 300 bids then decides to go for a Coffee maker (worth $150 for example)... that coffee maker then takes 600 bids from say 3 different users at 200 each say... now the user using his stacked bids is now 200 down (but they were paid for because the user didn't receive their $150 worth of gift cards) but that users bids also helped to draw at minimum a matched amount (short of 1 if the user wins) in counter bids.

Or another example and one which I have come across in the past whereas a site owner referred to the stacked bids as "house money"... I will mention NO names and NO sites but I watched an auction that was pretty profitable for a site and the owner referred to the auction as being humorous to watch as he knew the 2 users that were fighting it out were using what he called "house money"... I actually disagreed with the way the owner viewed this situation. I have a lot of respect for this site owner both as a site owner and as an individual but I did say to them that I viewed it differently and didn't really see that the 2 users that were fighting it out were doing so with house money because at the moment they won their previous auctions and traded those wins for bids it no longer belonged to the house (if that makes sense?)... the users could have simply taken the money, instead they chose to take the bids of equal value. At that point the user is no longer playing with house money because the bids belong to the user NOT the house.

Now, I think I read earlier in the thread that the user using traded bids can bid more freely and risk free... the psychology of the situation may suggest that they are correct, the stacked bids user may well bid with reckless abandon as at this point they may well themselves think that they are playing with free bids but I believe this user will soon come unstuck... the bids were NOT free and never were. They are merely losing their previous wins at a later date if you understand what I said previously? So again good news for the site... and heres the example...

User A won $400 in gift cards and swapped for 800 bids
User B won $350 in gift cards and swapped for 700 bids...

User A proceeded to place 695 of those bids in an auction against User B who only placed 694 bids for an item worth $400 before deciding to stop making User A the winner.

Yes the site didn't take any new money from the auction... why? because they already had it when both users had swapped their previous wins for bids. (just as they would have already had it had the users previously purchased those bids)... however the site has just recouped 1389 bids (worth $694.50) for an item worth $400, so still good for the site. In fact from the sites perspective the psychology of the user playing with stacked bids and reckless abandon may well actually be MORE beneficial to a site for the simple reason of this... looking at what was being said previously... Would User A and User B have gone anywhere near as deep as they did had they actually been buying their bids as the auction progressed? The psychology of the situation suggests perhaps not (in my opinion).

Yes I agree that the figures could be altered so that User A placed 2 bids and User B only placed 1 bid so the site only recouped 3 bids and lost $398.50 but this is the case with every single auction a site lists... they may well list 20 auctions per day and all 20 auctions end at just 1 cent... that is the chance that a PA site takes and the total nature of their industry. The real reason that sites often go under so fast is because they were either poorly prepared in balance against the risks they are taking (under funded for example) or they just couldn't get the user base to a size they needed in order to remain profitable and survive, again balanced against the risks they take when listing items worth hundreds of dollars that may well end for just a few cents or maybe they just didn't advertise and market themselves correctly...

either way I do not for one moment personally believe that either "stamping" or "trading" wins for bids has any real impact on whether a site survives or does not survive and I disagree with anyone that believes otherwise.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] :12: Bid Long and Prosper :12:

#63

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

I would say BOTH :) ...personally when I "stamp" it is because I fully intend to fight for it but in addition of course I hope that no-one bids and I snag a bargain (although that is very rarely the case :smilielol5: )



I do get what you are saying and I do understand the dynamics, however and I will quote you here "the issue comes in where people would aim for items nobody wants and just trade them back for bids" ...so really the onus is on the sites to list items people actually want maybe? from the sites perspective and I'll quote again "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"...I'm quite sure a site would rather see 20 people fighting over something than 2 people fighting over something and to be fair, the part of don't need/want/can't even use kind of becomes redundant if the site allows you trade for bids does it not? Like I say, I do understand the dynamics and the fact that those users with a limited budget could be scared away but this is where a good system of win limits comes into play and if a site has a good structure with its win limits then the user with the smaller budget should still be able to use the site effectively because a PB would not want to waste their slots on the cheaper items. If a user chooses to "bid stack" as you call it then again I don't really see what the problem is... every bid they stacked they have effectively paid for by trading their win. I don't see how it gives a PB any kind of advantage either as most PBs would win regardless of whether the bids were purchased or traded, it doesn't give them the ability to take anything they want, a PB already has that ability, again, the importance of win limits comes into play as it really is the only effective way to control a PB. Also with regards to "bid stacking" it might be worth pointing out again that the stacked bids were actually paid for and also the user with the stacked bids still attracts counter bids before they actually win the item.

For example:

A user wins 3 gift cards to Sno-ball Land or Soup Planet worth say 50 bucks each (total $150) and trades them for say 300 bids then decides to go for a Coffee maker (worth $150 for example)... that coffee maker then takes 600 bids from say 3 different users at 200 each say... now the user using his stacked bids is now 200 down (but they were paid for because the user didn't receive their $150 worth of gift cards) but that users bids also helped to draw at minimum a matched amount (short of 1 if the user wins) in counter bids.

Or another example and one which I have come across in the past whereas a site owner referred to the stacked bids as "house money"... I will mention NO names and NO sites but I watched an auction that was pretty profitable for a site and the owner referred to the auction as being humorous to watch as he knew the 2 users that were fighting it out were using what he called "house money"... I actually disagreed with the way the owner viewed this situation. I have a lot of respect for this site owner both as a site owner and as an individual but I did say to them that I viewed it differently and didn't really see that the 2 users that were fighting it out were doing so with house money because at the moment they won their previous auctions and traded those wins for bids it no longer belonged to the house (if that makes sense?)... the users could have simply taken the money, instead they chose to take the bids of equal value. At that point the user is no longer playing with house money because the bids belong to the user NOT the house.

Now, I think I read earlier in the thread that the user using traded bids can bid more freely and risk free... the psychology of the situation may suggest that they are correct, the stacked bids user may well bid with reckless abandon as at this point they may well themselves think that they are playing with free bids but I believe this user will soon come unstuck... the bids were NOT free and never were. They are merely losing their previous wins at a later date if you understand what I said previously? So again good news for the site... and heres the example...

User A won $400 in gift cards and swapped for 800 bids
User B won $350 in gift cards and swapped for 700 bids...

User A proceeded to place 695 of those bids in an auction against User B who only placed 694 bids for an item worth $400 before deciding to stop making User A the winner.

Yes the site didn't take any new money from the auction... why? because they already had it when both users had swapped their previous wins for bids. (just as they would have already had it had the users previously purchased those bids)... however the site has just recouped 1389 bids (worth $694.50) for an item worth $400, so still good for the site. In fact from the sites perspective the psychology of the user playing with stacked bids and reckless abandon may well actually be MORE beneficial to a site for the simple reason of this... looking at what was being said previously... Would User A and User B have gone anywhere near as deep as they did had they actually been buying their bids as the auction progressed? The psychology of the situation suggests perhaps not (in my opinion).

Yes I agree that the figures could be altered so that User A placed 2 bids and User B only placed 1 bid so the site only recouped 3 bids and lost $398.50 but this is the case with every single auction a site lists... they may well list 20 auctions per day and all 20 auctions end at just 1 cent... that is the chance that a PA site takes and the total nature of their industry. The real reason that sites often go under so fast is because they were either poorly prepared in balance against the risks they are taking (under funded for example) or they just couldn't get the user base to a size they needed in order to remain profitable and survive, again balanced against the risks they take when listing items worth hundreds of dollars that may well end for just a few cents or maybe they just didn't advertise and market themselves correctly...

either way I do not for one moment personally believe that either "stamping" or "trading" wins for bids has any real impact on whether a site survives or does not survive and I disagree with anyone that believes otherwise.


I agree Neverwalks. Personally, I don't care if people talk outside of the PA's. They can jaw with each other all day long about what they are going to stamp, but the winner is the final bid. If a PA fails to control this with Win Limits and an adequate amount of auctions for the ratio of users, they lose.

I also agree with the exchange of wins for bids. If I win a netbook for 10 cents & trade it for bids, I seriously doubt if the PA owner would complain. Less work & no shipping fees to pay. All sites offer bid packs. You bid on them and if you win... You get Bids! You pay for those bids just like you would pay for any other auction, so what is the difference?

It was mentioned that someone new may come to the site & face a PB with stacked bids from all those trades. Everyone is new to a site when they join. Someone new can "stack bids" also. It is one way they could eventually battle a PB for something they really want. It requires observation. You have to get to know that PA .... who bids, win limits, time of day that is best, etc etc etc. You can work around these obstacles and win, if you do your homework. woot

#64

nixnutz7897
  • nixnutz7897
  • Member
  • Members
  • 627 posts

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:


Agreed!! :) I'll agree not to use such words, if you can agree not to use whiners...it's only fair :wink: Thanks for the forgiveness...we all get a little revved up sometimes.

Starting to get a very clear picture on everyone's perspective here. Turning into a very interesting discussion, IMHO. Thanks for your insight coolguy and neverwalks...you both make excellent points! I'm swaying a bit....

neverwalks--in your example of User A and User B winning gift cards and exchanging them for 800 and 700 bids, respectively, what if both users used their free sign-up bids to win a $25 gift card as a beginner auction (generally less competition) exchanged that for bids, then continued to use those bids to pile up their caches of 1500 combined bids? Now, they have invested $0 to win those 1500 bids (DISCLAIMER: I realize that this is the most extreme example, but even if it's $50 worth of bids...u know?) Isn't this then a problem for the site owner? Sure, they didn't have to "pay out" those gift card wins, but ultimately, that bidder now becomes a pretty significant force and could potentially start winning for 3 cents a shot on $0 invested.

Not arguing, just playing the devil's advocate here...I'm swaying, but I still think bid exchanges can be a slippery slope. I also concede that, if a bidder is able to parlay $0 into 800 bids, that's a very effective bidder!! Kudos to just such a bidder... woot

I also concede that it's the site owner's responsibility to monitor these things and make adjustments to prevent/minimize their effect. (that was a very good point made in a previous post) If a bidder is able to do all that, then I would agree that it's the site owner's responsibility to adjust things. That adjustment might be to eliminate bid exchanges...

#65

Tim@SpeedClik
  • Tim@SpeedClik
  • Member
  • Members
  • 662 posts

Agreed!! :) I'll agree not to use such words, if you can agree not to use whiners...it's only fair :wink: Thanks for the forgiveness...we all get a little revved up sometimes.

Starting to get a very clear picture on everyone's perspective here. Turning into a very interesting discussion, IMHO. Thanks for your insight coolguy and neverwalks...you both make excellent points! I'm swaying a bit....

neverwalks--in your example of User A and User B winning gift cards and exchanging them for 800 and 700 bids, respectively, what if both users used their free sign-up bids to win a $25 gift card as a beginner auction (generally less competition) exchanged that for bids, then continued to use those bids to pile up their caches of 1500 combined bids? Now, they have invested $0 to win those 1500 bids (DISCLAIMER: I realize that this is the most extreme example, but even if it's $50 worth of bids...u know?) Isn't this then a problem for the site owner? Sure, they didn't have to "pay out" those gift card wins, but ultimately, that bidder now becomes a pretty significant force and could potentially start winning for 3 cents a shot on $0 invested.

Not arguing, just playing the devil's advocate here...I'm swaying, but I still think bid exchanges can be a slippery slope. I also concede that, if a bidder is able to parlay $0 into 800 bids, that's a very effective bidder!! Kudos to just such a bidder... woot

I also concede that it's the site owner's responsibility to monitor these things and make adjustments to prevent/minimize their effect. (that was a very good point made in a previous post) If a bidder is able to do all that, then I would agree that it's the site owner's responsibility to adjust things. That adjustment might be to eliminate bid exchanges...


The adjustment would be win limits not eliminating bid exchanges
if a bidder wins a $50 walmart gift card and sells it(on ebay or to a friend)
the bidder comes back and buys bid: its the exact same thing
I believe your argument isnt valid because you seem to be swaying towards preventing users from buying bids at all
even if the user doesnt sell the $50 walmart gift card
the next time the bidder goes to a walmart store
the bidder will probably use the gift card instead of their own funds
which could be used to buy more bids
So even if a user has 5000 bids
with a win limit of 3 per week for example
he/she cant dominate the site
Another plausible "adjustment" as you call it
would be increasing the number of nailbiter auctions

Edited by Tim@SpeedClik, 14 October 2010 - 02:12 PM.


#66

nixnutz7897
  • nixnutz7897
  • Member
  • Members
  • 627 posts

The adjustment would be win limits not eliminating bid exchanges
if a bidder wins a $50 walmart gift card and sells it(on ebay or to a friend)
the bidder comes back and buys bid: its the exact same thing
I believe your argument isnt valid because you seem to be swaying towards preventing users from buying bids at all
even if the user doesnt sell the $50 walmart gift card
the next time the bidder goes to a walmart store
the bidder will probably use the gift card instead of their own funds
which could be used to buy more bids
So even if a user has 5000 bids
with a win limit of 3 per week for example
he/she cant dominate the site
Another plausible "adjustment" as you call it
would be increasing the number of nailbiter auctions


Thanks Tim...makes some sense and I really appreciate the input from a site owner. You offer a much more unique perspective than us bidders can offer.

BTW...not swaying toward preventing bidders from buying bids, I'm swaying toward being convinced that bid exchanges are not the slippery slope that I think they are. That make any sense?

#67

Tim@SpeedClik
  • Tim@SpeedClik
  • Member
  • Members
  • 662 posts


BTW...not swaying toward preventing bidders from buying bids, I'm swaying toward being convinced that bid exchanges are not the slippery slope that I think they are. That make any sense?


I know that was what you meant
was just saying that your argument was swaying
towards preventing bidders from buying bids


#68

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

I agree Neverwalks. Personally, I don't care if people talk outside of the PA's. They can jaw with each other all day long about what they are going to stamp, but the winner is the final bid. If a PA fails to control this with Win Limits and an adequate amount of auctions for the ratio of users, they lose.

I also agree with the exchange of wins for bids. If I win a netbook for 10 cents & trade it for bids, I seriously doubt if the PA owner would complain. Less work & no shipping fees to pay. All sites offer bid packs. You bid on them and if you win... You get Bids! You pay for those bids just like you would pay for any other auction, so what is the difference?

It was mentioned that someone new may come to the site & face a PB with stacked bids from all those trades. Everyone is new to a site when they join. Someone new can "stack bids" also. It is one way they could eventually battle a PB for something they really want. It requires observation. You have to get to know that PA .... who bids, win limits, time of day that is best, etc etc etc. You can work around these obstacles and win, if you do your homework. woot


Yup... many variables involved such as those we have mentioned but the main thing is that "stamping" and "bid trades" will not be what sends a site under and are certainly no cause for a red flag IMHO.

neverwalks--in your example of User A and User B winning gift cards and exchanging them for 800 and 700 bids, respectively, what if both users used their free sign-up bids to win a $25 gift card as a beginner auction (generally less competition) exchanged that for bids, then continued to use those bids to pile up their caches of 1500 combined bids? Now, they have invested $0 to win those 1500 bids (DISCLAIMER: I realize that this is the most extreme example, but even if it's $50 worth of bids...u know?) Isn't this then a problem for the site owner? Sure, they didn't have to "pay out" those gift card wins, but ultimately, that bidder now becomes a pretty significant force and could potentially start winning for 3 cents a shot on $0 invested.

Not arguing, just playing the devil's advocate here...I'm swaying, but I still think bid exchanges can be a slippery slope. I also concede that, if a bidder is able to parlay $0 into 800 bids, that's a very effective bidder!! Kudos to just such a bidder... woot .


Again, I totally understand the dynamics and totally understand what you're saying... I have put this to the test and pretty much done exactly that on sites in the past... I have quite literally spent nothing or pretty damn close to it and have bid stacked to thousands of bids and then took the items I wanted... again though, I see nothing wrong with this... it took great skill and patience to get there so why should I feel bad about that? Do you think a PA site feels bad for you when you have just dropped $1000 on an item and walked away the loser? ...hmmm I'm thinking not so much LOL ...In order to take it they also have to be prepared to give it...

Again, it is the risk the PA site takes daily when listing auctions that can potentially end at just 1 cent and it is also the risk they take when giving away free bids.

I am not a fan of free bids being given away to be honest and I am not a fan of coupon codes either, the reason I'm not a fan of either is because those free bids are going to be going up against paid bids and I don't think this a fair policy, I also don't think 20% coupon code purchased bids going up against fully paid bids is a level playing field either, and likewise I am not a fan of multiple bid prices on the same site either. If a site sells a 10 bid pack for $7 and 100 bid pack for $50 then theres is a difference of 20 cents per bid... this does not represent a level playing field. I keep hearing the smaller bidders complaining that they can't win and have to spend lots of bids to go up against the higher level users but find it strange that I rarely read of any of them complaining about this practice. (maybe a good topic of debate for another thread).

You need to read everything being said and then make the links because the same things are being said in many different ways, but fundamentally all roads lead to Rome as they say... "stamping" does NOT stop any other bidders from placing bids and "Trading" wins for bids is generally at minimum as good for the site as it is the user although in my opinion it's actually better for the site than the user.

The adjustment would be win limits not eliminating bid exchanges
if a bidder wins a $50 walmart gift card and sells it(on ebay or to a friend)
the bidder comes back and buys bid: its the exact same thing
I believe your argument isnt valid because you seem to be swaying towards preventing users from buying bids at all
even if the user doesnt sell the $50 walmart gift card
the next time the bidder goes to a walmart store
the bidder will probably use the gift card instead of their own funds
which could be used to buy more bids
So even if a user has 5000 bids
with a win limit of 3 per week for example
he/she cant dominate the site
Another plausible "adjustment" as you call it
would be increasing the number of nailbiter auctions


Bingo!! It is EXACTLY the same thing... I have mentioned this to many sites in the past when they have asked about bid trading... quite simply, what is the difference? "okay then send me the $100 paypal payment and I'll see you in a few minutes when I purchase more bids with it, then you'll end up with less your $100 back after paypal have taken their cut" ;) LOL.

It is simply easier for all concerned if a user wishes to bid trade... the site keeps the money in house and saves themselves the work of having to order and ship and the user saves themselves the effort of either selling or returning their win in order to purchase more bids. I must say though, many users keep their wins because they really wanted the item. The bid trader is generally the person that is wanting to merge many smaller items into a larger item. I know of players that send everything back to Amazon and take the credits, then when they have enough credits to purchase what they want they simply do so. Example... a user goes after only Amazon gift cards or uses a site that they know uses Amazon as a supplier so return their smaller wins for credit and then when they have accumulated enough for that big screen t.v or latest and greatest laptop they simply make their purchase with the credits... it's a very effective method of getting exactly what you want rather than what a site chooses to list. (It's probably also much easier and cheaper to stack up smaller wins for Amazon credit and get that big screen t.v than have to battle a PB for one listed on a site LOL).



BTW...not swaying toward preventing bidders from buying bids, I'm swaying toward being convinced that bid exchanges are not the slippery slope that I think they are. That make any sense?


You should be convinced by now in all honesty because they do more good than harm as I have shown above... for every line of argument you can offer up against this practice I will be able to give you an answer that squashes it ;) LOL

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

#69

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

I should have added to the above post that of course I have taken and used free bids and of course I have used coupon codes... I'm just not a fan of either is all.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] :12: Bid Long and Prosper :12:

#70

nixnutz7897
  • nixnutz7897
  • Member
  • Members
  • 627 posts

You should be convinced by now in all honesty because they do more good than harm as I have shown above... for every line of argument you can offer up against this practice I will be able to give you an answer that squashes it ;) LOL

Good luck with your bidding everyone :)


I am...so much so that I just offered a site a bid exchange for some items I'm due. Figured it was worth a shot and it seems that the general consensus is that it's OK.

Just want to thank you for taking the time to respond so thoroughly. Your arguments are very compelling. I think what sent me over the edge is that the site owners need to realize that they're taking risks. If they allow things to occur on their sites, which increases their risks, then it's on them.

Good luck to you as well!

#71

ILikePennyAuctions
  • ILikePennyAuctions
  • Junior Member
  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Come on Pennywarriors... do everyone right by putting some real limits in place! 2 wins per day is a JOKE because you only have 25 or so auctions per day. It's not like you are Quibids where they have hundreds of auctions each day. And even they have stricter limits! 2 wins per day when there are only 25 or so auctions means the small group that monopolize the site ruins the fun for everyone. We all know who the small group of folks are, so no need to mention them here. I visited your site, I Really like your interface, but I will NOT be putting any money into an account there until I see some real limits. One win per two or three days seems fair considering the size of your site. Besides, you are only hurting your own profits because these folks are getting all the auction wins for 2 or 3 cents in many cases. If you want to keep giving away $100 items for 2 or 3 cents, then so be it.

#72

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

I am...so much so that I just offered a site a bid exchange for some items I'm due. Figured it was worth a shot and it seems that the general consensus is that it's OK.

Just want to thank you for taking the time to respond so thoroughly. Your arguments are very compelling. I think what sent me over the edge is that the site owners need to realize that they're taking risks. If they allow things to occur on their sites, which increases their risks, then it's on them.

Good luck to you as well!


LOL... I'm sure most have done it at some point or another, like myself and Tim said, it really isn't any different to receiving your money and then just buying more bids with it.

Your welcome to the replies... I hope that they helped not only you but also others that may be reading and also undecided as to the idea and I'm always happy to offer advice (all be it only my opinion) whenever I can.

Good luck :)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] :12: Bid Long and Prosper :12:

#73

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

Come on Pennywarriors... do everyone right by putting some real limits in place! 2 wins per day is a JOKE because you only have 25 or so auctions per day. It's not like you are Quibids where they have hundreds of auctions each day. And even they have stricter limits! 2 wins per day when there are only 25 or so auctions means the small group that monopolize the site ruins the fun for everyone. We all know who the small group of folks are, so no need to mention them here. I visited your site, I Really like your interface, but I will NOT be putting any money into an account there until I see some real limits. One win per two or three days seems fair considering the size of your site. Besides, you are only hurting your own profits because these folks are getting all the auction wins for 2 or 3 cents in many cases. If you want to keep giving away $100 items for 2 or 3 cents, then so be it.


As the man says...timing is everything. We sent out an e mail blast early this morning to all of our registrants notifying them of our new limits.....3 wins per week measured midnight-to- midnight, Sunday-to-Sunday. As far as Quibids is concerned, we'll catch them in due time. Give us 6 months.

#74

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

I really like this site but I was not going to get spanked again like I did in auctions here. Can't go against all those powers that be. But with a more balanced playing field, I feel much better and will be back!

Thanks Penny Warriors!

#75

caveninit
  • caveninit
  • Senior Member
  • Members
  • 2,554 posts

I really like this site but I was not going to get spanked again like I did in auctions here. Can't go against all those powers that be. But with a more balanced playing field, I feel much better and will be back!

Thanks Penny Warriors!

yep....it's all about win limits...need to give everyone a chance. Glad to see the new limits in place.

#76

Tim@SpeedClik
  • Tim@SpeedClik
  • Member
  • Members
  • 662 posts

Yup... many variables involved such as those we have mentioned but the main thing is that "stamping" and "bid trades" will not be what sends a site under and are certainly no cause for a red flag IMHO.




You forgot something
paypal gets paid twice
when the $100 is transfered tot he winner
and when the bid packs are purchased
its basically a lose-lose for bidder and owner
and win-win for paypal


#77

bidz4fun
  • bidz4fun
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

As the man says...timing is everything. We sent out an e mail blast early this morning to all of our registrants notifying them of our new limits.....3 wins per week measured midnight-to- midnight, Sunday-to-Sunday. As far as Quibids is concerned, we'll catch them in due time. Give us 6 months.


Hopefully when you do catch up with them you will re-evaluate the win limits also. 3 wins per week is not enough to keep regular bidders interested.
With that being said I love your site and your customer service is awesome, shipping is ultra fast. I just wish I could play more and not be locked out so quickly.

#78

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

Hopefully when you do catch up with them you will re-evaluate the win limits also. 3 wins per week is not enough to keep regular bidders interested.
With that being said I love your site and your customer service is awesome, shipping is ultra fast. I just wish I could play more and not be locked out so quickly.


We love you on the site as well. This endeavor is all about balance. We "need" the regulars but we also require fresh bidders. I spend an incredible amount of time instructing new bidders each day on the basic penny auction platform. That together with the seasoned bidders will help us over the neophyte hump. We're getting there. Each day we pick up a little more inertia and move closer in on the competition. Thanks for your kind words. You know we work hard at this end to keep up our end of the bargain: an honest straight forward fun shopping experience with immediate free shipping and unbelievable customer service (me). Thanks again.

P.S. I can use some suggestions for new types of merchandise. We're starting to push some housewares, fashion and even a taste of toys once in a while. With the Holidays, I'm going to sell some cooking ware and china. Thoughts??

#79

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

Any kind of outdoor gear or cards.

#80

BidShark
  • BidShark
  • Member
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts

Hey Dan,

This has nothing to do with stamping, but I've been watching your site for awhile. I just want to get a fell for it before I go ahead with buying a bid pack...

Anyway, I was just wondering how you regulate win limits, because I see that 1 individual has won 4 auctions these past couple days. If I read correctly, the win limit is set at 3...I would think that once that limit is reached that individual wouldn't be able to bid anymore.

This worries me. I would not want to be outbid by someone that's past their win limits, then have that auction cancelled, or other things....

I really do like the idea of your site and it makes this guppy feel a little better in big ocean that is PA's.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users