Ebay as the shill bidder

[SMPEP]

A lot of folks on here complain about shill bidding by buyers and say that Ebay condones it by not taking more stringent action. But what about the fact that Ebay itself is a shill bidder. What do I mean?

Let's take a look at their second chance offer system. Someone just offered me a second chance at an item. My max bid was $410. When the top bidder bowed out as a nonpaying buyer, Ebay allowed the seller to make me a Second Chance offer. For $410. The next highest bidder after me was $330. I SHOULD get the item for $330 plus the next increment. That what would happen in an auction with no shill bidding, right?

But no. Ebay makes me pay $410 for the item. So in effect Ebay just shill bid me up from one bid above $330 to $410.

That strikes me as a class action lawsuit waiting to happen - but I'm not a lawyer.

Cheers,
Patrick Prickett

[stlcardinalsfan]

Why in the world would you agree to a second chance offer at that price when there was no idea below you? You are not bound to buy the item

[SMPEP]

My options are - pass on the item (and it gets offered to the guy below me for $330) or accept the $410 offer.

If I want the item, I have no other option but to pay $410.

Even though in a fair auction I get it at $335.

[vintagerookies51]

"eBay makes me pay $410 for the item."

No they don't, they give you the unfair option to. Not anything illegal

[SMPEP]

If I want the item, how do their actions differ from shill bidding?

[SMPEP]

And yes, I considered passing on the offer for this very reason. But the seller didn't do anything wrong. They didn't set the price. Ebay did. And Ebay set a price that is in essence the same as the shill bid price. Not the price of a fair auction.

They CHOOSE to do something that is illegal. Neither the seller nor I had a choice to decide the price.

[D. Bergin]

You could have just declined the offer and asked the seller to put it up for bid again, and that you would be involved in the bidding, but are uncomfortable with the bid price as it is set right now.

If it was just between you and the other guy up at $410, there's no guarantee there wouldn't have been somebody in there between $330 and $410 that were blocked out by the higher bidding, or had a lower snipe rejected.

[pawpawdiv9]

Simply, if the seller has it re-listed, and you place the 355 in hopes you win it this time at that price.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

My options are - pass on the item (and it gets offered to the guy below me for $330) or accept the $410 offer.

If I want the item, I have no other option but to pay $410.

Even though in a fair auction I get it at $335.

Maybe..maybe not....there might have been some snipes at $380-400, that failed to go off just because of what the auction was at. Non paying bidders ruin it for everyone.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

You could have just declined the offer and asked the seller to put it up for bid again, and that you would be involved in the bidding, but are uncomfortable with the bid price as it is set right now.

If it was just between you and the other guy up at $410, there's no guarantee there wouldn't have been somebody in there between $330 and $410 that were blocked out by the higher bidding, or had a lower snipe rejected.

+1. Exactly. Just because there was a non paying bidder doesn't mean you would have automatically won it at your bid. Even though the winning bidder never paid, there is a good chance that it will hit $400 again on the relist.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If you were willing to pay 410 and now can get it for 410 I really don't see your problem. As Bobby said, there is no way to know how the bidding would have gone absent the high bidder.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you were willing to pay 410 and now can get it for 410 I really don't see your problem. As Bobby said, there is no way to know how the bidding would have gone absent the high bidder.

He wants it for $330 though. He wants it as cheap as possible. Im trying to explain to him, that even though the winning bidder never paid, he might not have won it for his $330 bid.

[SMPEP]

So wait ... let me get this straight ...

Everyone on this board condemns shill bidding (with the exception of about 3 people who get roundly attacked in every debate on the topic). You all say it's bad if someone (who does not know your max bid) places bids with the intentional purpose of making you pay more. (Even though the shill bidder may never guess your highest price).

BUT you all think it's okay that Ebay (who knows your highest price to the penny) gives you an option to buy the item at the equivalent of the shill bid price - instead of at price you would have won the auction at the very first time. (The potential other snipes between $330 and $410 argument is weak as I have a last second snipe set - they would have already been in by that point. That's a red herring. And what about if there were no other snipes? You assume there are but that's not the case for a lot, if not the vast majority, of items.)

And to be clear, the point I'm making - which seems lost on people in the thread - is NOT whether I should have accepted the offer or not. Or the price paid for the item. Those are both irrelevant.

The point is - Ebay is acting exactly as a shill bidder does. Their Second Chance operating practice has EXACTLY the same effect as being shill bid against. You are forced to pay your maximum price by having fictitious bids placed against you. Everyone condemns shill bidding by individuals. But as long as Ebay gives you an option - you think it's okay that they shill bid in the Second Chance offer because you can always decline and try to win the fair auction a second time ... after the "fair" auction you already won had nonpaying bidders that prevented you from winning it at the fair price the first time.

Wow.

[swarmee]

eBay is not acting like a shill bidder.

1) The auction is over and you did not win it.

2) You are now being given a chance to buy it through a Buy-It-Now. You can choose whether or not to accept this price.

3) You also have the ability to message the seller and recommend a lower price. The seller can agree to that and relist the item for BIN/BO at above the auction price and you can click the Best Offer and send it to seller. Or the seller can sell it to you off-site and forego eBay fees at all.

4) So no, eBay is not acting like a shill bidder. The first auction has completed, and you're now in the process of buying a card with a price, and the ability to negotiate.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think it's the OP against the rest of the world here.

[nsaddict]

You surely had a choice to buy or not buy. This actually happened to me. To make things simple, I'd explain this to the seller and ask would he take 350. If he relists and a bidder comes in at 405 and and not bid on any other cards in the last 30 days probably a shill and f___ the seller. In my case the seller did accept a slightly higher bid than runner up. Is it possible the seller had 2 of the same?

[ramram]

I know exactly what the OP is getting at and I FULLY agree with his point. You can add a lot of "ifs" and "buts' but in essence he is exactly right. I had it happen today on an iphone I purchased. The original high bidder had a zero feedback and, supposedly, was attempting to scam the seller so the seller offered it to me as a second chance. Sure, I could walk but that's not the point here.

Rob M

[perezfan]

I agree with the OP as well.

The "second chance" offer should be at the next increment above the last LEGITIMATE bid. Second Chance is a good idea, but this is bad implementation, IMO. I've felt this way ever since Ebay implemented it.

To each his own, I guess.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I agree with the OP as well.

The "second chance" offer should be at the next increment above the last LEGITIMATE bid. Second Chance is a good idea, but this is bad implementation, IMO. I've felt this way ever since Ebay implemented it.

To each his own, I guess.

Just because the winning bidder never paid does not mean it was a shill bidder. I recently had a Warren Spahn card end where the winning bidder never paid. I sent a second chance offer which the runner up did no accept. I am not gonna keep going down the list, because the lower offers (high bids) are not acceptable to me. I feel if I run another .99 cent auction, it should get close to what the non paying bidder bid it up to. That is describing how an auction works with a non paying bidder from a sellers point of view.

In my particular instance, the non paying bidder bid $38 and did not pay. The runner up bid $37 and did not accept the 2nd chance offer. The THIRD place guy bid $20. That is NOT acceptable to me. If it went only one increment above, you would never have a 2nd chance offer go through (unless you had multiple bidders all bid roughly the same thing close to the ending bid.

If the non paying bidder stole the auction and didn't pay, I would NOT send any second chance offers. I would relist. That seldom happens though. If they steal the card, 98 times out of 100, they are going to pay. If they bid a premium and don't want to pay (which famously happened here on a Marichal rookie I had), I am expecting that price now, because obviously TWO people thought it was worth that much.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ebay isn't doing anything. The seller is making an offer. You can see the bid history and judge for yourself whether you think the high bid was legit or not. If you don't want the card at the price you were just willing to pay because you suspect shenanigans, pass. How this is an issue is beyond me.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Ebay isn't doing anything. The seller is making an offer. You can see the bid history and judge for yourself whether you think the high bid was legit or not. If you don't want the card at the price you were just willing to pay because you suspect shenanigans, pass. How this is an issue is beyond me.

PS - I block all non paying bidders.....if you checked my history on the Spahn card, the person who won the first one, will be nowhere near the 2nd one. I won't allow it. I also block retractors. Just makes life easier.

[pokerplyr80]

What about the option of emailing the seller and offering him 335, or 350 and see what happens since it appears you no longer want to pay 410?

[glynparson]

Op's argument makes no sense to me. This is not shill bidding it isn't even close to it. It could be exploited by schill bidders but it is in no way the same thing. I think the system as it is currently set up is the fairest way to handle it. They do not require you to except a second chance offer so I fail to see the issue.

[ALR-bishop]

I am just a buyer on eBay. If I get a 2nd offer from a seller does it always come through eBay pursuant to their price protocol being discussed here, or does the seller have the ability to contact buyers independently with an offer. ? Did sellers ever have that capability ?

[Snapolit1]

I had an auction last month where some numb nuts bailed on the auction an hour before it closed. Had been the winning bidder for days. Wasn't a shill bidder but some supposed charitable type organization. I have no idea what their deal is. Should eBay have penalized me as seller because someone effed with my auction? I don't think so. I would have been really pissed off if they had offered my item carte blance to the underbidder at his losing bid.

I have rejected every second chance offer I've ever received, assuming some kind of shenanigans went on.

[celoknob]

I generally agree with the OP, although I would probably not call it eBay shilling or illegal just poor practice.

Once the high bid was determined to be a non paying bidder or otherwise fraudulent then the auction is compromised. Once the auction is compromised there is no valid reason to use an invalid bid to determine the appropriate price point. If any 'second chance offer' seller option is automated through eBay, it should be the next increment above the new 2nd highest bidder.

Two other points:

1) this practice could certainly encourage sellers to get a buddy to shill bid for them knowing there is less risk if they accidentally over shill and the reward is the option of offering the item (possibly well) above true auction value or having the buyer reject but now with the seller having valuable information of what someone will max bid on it. We certainly know this shilling by acquaintences or by using second accounts happens and is not always easy to detect.

2) of course the seller can just offer the card as a buy it now to the new high bidder at their maxed out bid from the compromised auction, but this should not be an automated eBay feature and as a buyer I would be weary it could have been shilled. In any case the seller is benefitting and the buyer is losing from the inappropriate activity whether it was selling or not.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by celoknob

I generally agree with the OP, although I would probably not call it eBay shilling or illegal just poor practice.

Once the high bid was determined to be a non paying bidder or otherwise fraudulent then the auction is compromised. Once the auction is compromised there is no valid reason to use an invalid bid to determine the appropriate price point. If any 'second chance offer' seller option is automated through eBay, it should be the next increment above the new 2nd highest bidder.

Two other points:

1) this practice could certainly encourage sellers to get a buddy to shill bid for them knowing there is less risk if they accidentally over shill and the reward is the option of offering the item (possibly well) above true auction value or having the buyer reject but now with the seller having valuable information of what someone will max bid on it. We certainly know this shilling by acquaintences or by using second accounts happens and is not always easy to detect.

2) of course the seller can just offer the card as a buy it now to the new high bidder at their maxed out bid from the compromised auction, but this should not be an automated eBay feature and as a buyer I would be weary it could have been shilled. In any case the seller is benefitting and the buyer is losing from the inappropriate activity whether it was selling or not.

The problem with your scenario is that you have the THIRD place bidder determining the price of the auction. The third place bidder rarely enters a competitive bid. Also you may have had some failed snipes not go off because they were higher than the 3rd place bidder but lower than the winning bidder (whose bid is determined by the underbidder).

[SMPEP]

Bobby - by your own flawed logic - no one told you as a seller that you HAD to make a second chance offer (to the 2nd, 3rd or 45th place buyer). You as a seller LIKE that Ebay shill bid my $37 bid up from the next increment of $21 - because YOU like the $37 price better and don't want the hassle of listing another auction.

So gee, what have we all learned ... sellers LIKE shill bidding. Buyers don't.

I guess that's not a real shock.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

Bobby - by your own flawed logic - no one told you as a seller that you HAD to make a second chance offer (to the 2nd, 3rd or 45th place buyer). You as a seller LIKE that Ebay shill bid my $37 bid up from the next increment of $21 - because YOU like the $37 price better and don't want the hassle of listing another auction.

So gee, what have we all learned ... sellers LIKE shill bidding. Buyers don't.

I guess that's not a real shock.

I don't engage in shill bidding!! I don't like NON-PAYING BIDDERS the same as every other sellers. Get off of your high horse! You are wrong, and totally missing the point.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

Bobby - by your own flawed logic - no one told you as a seller that you HAD to make a second chance offer (to the 2nd, 3rd or 45th place buyer). You as a seller LIKE that Ebay shill bid my $37 bid up from the next increment of $21 - because YOU like the $37 price better and don't want the hassle of listing another auction.

So gee, what have we all learned ... sellers LIKE shill bidding. Buyers don't.

I guess that's not a real shock.

The $37 bid is closer to where the auction should land. More so than the $20 which is a steal, or the level based upon a card one grade lower! Sounds like you need a lesson in basic economics! Or a VCP subscription. Maybe both.....

[bobbyw8469]

Real talk. And please quit PMing me!

[SMPEP]

Who cares what VCP says or what the card is worth? That is completely irrelevant to the topic.

The point is:

1) Ebay has a choice in how they choose to allow sellers to offer Second Chance Offers.

2) They could chose to have a Second Chance Offer that is one incremental unit above the next legitimate bid (which is the actual result that would have happened if the highest bid hadn't occurred) OR they could choose to use your maximum bid (to which they have insider information - unlike traditional shill bidders) and offer that price.

3) Ebay has chosen to abuse their inside knowledge, and offer it at your maximum price.

4) Now you have thrown out the red herring - that the buyer has a choice to accept the offer or not. Sure they do. But that is irrelevant. Ebay already knows the highest amount you are willing to pay for the card. You told them your highest price when you bid. (Again the inside information is key.)

5) You have also throw out the red herring that - you can negotiate with the seller. Sure. Maybe the seller will negotiate. Maybe they won't. But that's irrelevant. It's not the Seller's job to run a fair auction. That's EBay's job. That's why they get paid. The seller's job is to get the most money for their card. So the seller isn't doing anything wrong in offering the second chance at the buyer's maximum price. BUT they wouldn't have known that price if Ebay didn't tell them. Without the fraudulent bidder, the fair market price would have been one increment over the next highest bid - NOT the bidder's maximum bid. Again, it's EBay's obligation to run a fair auction. That would be the fair auction result.

6) You also throw out the red herring of "gee ... maybe there were other snipes that did not execute." Okay. Maybe. But what are the odds? 1 in 1,000 where you have this minority situation? 1 in 100? Certainly not much better than that. But what about the counter example. What if "gee .. no one else would have bid." Then explain how exactly what Ebay did isn't in effect EXACTLY the same as shill bidding. The buyer was pushed to the absolute highest price that they are willing to pay by fake bids. Because in essence Ebay is placing fake bids against your maximum bid price when they offer the second chance at your maximum price. And they have inside knowledge to do it! And they get to set their "highest" fake bid at the spot that pushes your maximum bid to the exact penny of your highest offer - which is worse than most shill bidding because they can't get quite that accurate.


And finally Bobby ... I PMed you to ask you to please ban me from your future auctions. I thought you would prefer that the public did not know that potential customers of yours are choosing not to deal with you because they doubt your character and ethics. I apologize for that mistake. I will not PM you again.


Patrick Prickett

[Peter_Spaeth]

Why does he have to ban you? You can just not bid. Seems like foolish drama.

[FourStrikes]

JMO, just fuck**g ditch the .99 opening bid and list your sh*t for what's acceptable - disclaimer: haven't sold on the Bay for 4-5 years, and while the auction/bidding world has certainly changed, I personally didn't give a sh!t 'cuz I named my acceptable minimum price,,,IF I wanted (needed) $20 on an item, it got listed at $19.99, and IF it didn't hit that mark, I got the f**k over it and simply refiled it in my inventory...NOT suggesting how YOU should run your personal business, but I personally avoided a sh!ttload of personal grief by simply listing it as what I could NOT live without, as it saved me from the "sour grapes/WTF?" commentary...

JMO.

I personally - on principal - REFUSE to be "butt-hurt" over the actions of a few, or others...

again, JMO.

DS

[bobbyw8469]

Bottom line...Ebay does not SHILL BID. To think so is ignorant. Case closed.

[pokerplyr80]

Patrick I don't understand why you have discounted the possibility that other snipes would have been placed between the 3rd highest bid and yours. 1 in 100, or 1 in 1,000? I think the odds are much higher. I would put the over/under at 1 in 3 if there were a way to take bets on this.

Also, isn't it a common practice to offer the under bidder a chance to buy the item at the next highest bid if the winner doesn't pay in any auction, not just ebay?

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Patrick I don't understand why you have discounted the possibility that other snipes would have been placed between the 3rd highest bid and yours. 1 in 100, or 1 in 1,000? I think the odds are much higher. I would put the over/under at 1 in 3 if there were a way to take bets on this.

Also, isn't it a common practice to offer the under bidder a chance to buy the item at the next highest bid if the winner doesn't pay in any auction, not just ebay?

2nd Chance offer is also there if you have a duplicate and want to offer it to the next highest bidder.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

2nd Chance offer is also there if you have a duplicate and want to offer it to the next highest bidder.

This as well....the seller probably has no interest in selling you the item for $310 especially if he received a bid of $400. Why don't you out the item so we can see if $300 is indeed a realistic selling price?

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

4) Now you have thrown out the red herring - that the buyer has a choice to accept the offer or not. Sure they do.
5) You have also throw out the red herring that - you can negotiate with the seller. Sure. Maybe the seller will negotiate.

Your red herrings are that you don't understand the meaning of the phrase. Those are NOT red herrings. They are legitimate choices.