Quote:
Originally Posted by tschock
I'm not sure where this is even implied, and not the point anyway. If something would have gone for less (in an auction setting), why is it ok then that it was shilled, as long as you got it for what you were "willing to pay"?
Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to clarify.
|
What I am trying to say is that an "auction setting" is really no different than a BIN setting when you assume that there is the potential for shill bidding.
To imagine a world where the shiller is eliminated and the price drops down by $50 is the same thing as imagining a world where a seller places his listing price $50 less than he was willing to sell something for. Stated another way, if you told the shiller up front that he was going to get caught and prosecuted, he would either list his item at the higher price and list it with a higher reserve or minimum starting bid. The fantasy of a world where shilling doesn't exist and markets-clear prices are realized doesn't exist, least of all on eBay.
The reverse is also true. If you had a used car that you wanted to sell for $1,000, and a guy saw it and bought it for that price, you'd be happy, right? But, what if he recognized that your car had really rare features, and he flipped it immediately for $100,000? Of course the buyer would have wanted to get more than $1,000 for it in that case. But there is no mechanism for getting any more money to the buyer. The buyer was happy at his price point, as was the seller, but for different reasons. That certainly doesn't make speculating as a buyer illegal or immoral.