Posted By:
JoannI think smaller increments can only help both seller and bidders.
With 10% increments plus the 10-20% buyer's fees on top of it, there is not enough precision or resolution in the system to really accurately zero in on actual value. There comes a point where the perceived value of a card is above the current bid but lower than the next available bid. It seems to me like this happens a lot - like there is a race to a ceiling and whoever gets in the last bid without having to overshoot wins it.
Of course, this doesn't apply when a few bidders "have to have it". But when there are mental calculations of value in play, I think that large increments stop the bidding artificially short. When the next increment is $100 to $120 higher - you can kind of get the sense that maybe something might go $1100 but $1200 seems like too much - having the option to bid higher but not too high would probably induce the next bid.
So for sellers, it would probably (in most cases but not all) result in a bit more money because the last bidder was willing to go x/2% higher but not x% higher.
But two definite downsides:
First, ebay makes people crazy because someone can outbid you by a very small amount on a fairly large purchase. The lose-by-the-proverbial-nickel can be aggravating. But in a regular auction with no snipe opportunities, this would be minimized. (Although imagine setting your max and going to bed, and waking up the next morning to see that you lost the card by a minimal amount.)
Biggest downside? By far - and serious. The 10 minute or 30 minute rule - even if by lot and not whole auction - would go on forever if the bidding increments got too small.
10% feels like too much. I don't know what would be too little. 5% certainly seems like a good start.
Joann