I was the victim of shill bidding on ebay!

[howard38]

/

[peterose4hof]

What other large Ebay sellers might (allegedly) fit into this debate besides Probstein? I know the name BigBoydSportscards3 has come up a lot. Anyone else?

[smtjoy]

Originally Posted by peterose4hof

What other large Ebay sellers might (allegedly) fit into this debate besides Probstein? I know the name BigBoydSportscards3 has come up a lot. Anyone else?

I keep an eye on all of them, I like to check VCP prior to bidding, you would be surprised how many times the same item is for sale again from the same consignor or another consignor (like it was last sold by Probstein123 and now its for auction with PWCC), big red flags and I avoid bidding. The thing about the consignors is they do provide a good service for those wanting to sell with little to no experience or those just not wanting to deal with it and a lot of them are honest and do not shill their auctions.

But the BIG issue imo is its the perfect cover for any dishonest seller and if most of the consignors turn a blind eye when a consignee wins their own item, rumor has it some just charge their fee and relist or return (as long as its a client sending lots of cards you get a pass).

Also I check the bidding after I do win something from one of them and I look for the bidding % and the retractions is a huge sign something funky is going on. Its really cut down on my bidding on ebay for over a year now, sad but right now I think I am getting better deals as a buyer thru AH's then consignors sales on ebay. I do think the feds have had an effect on the AH's and they are all for the most part playing it safe.

[seablaster]

Originally Posted by howard38

Even with a snipe a buyer can end up paying more because of a shiller as long as there are other bidders that are not using a service. If an underbidder's gets shilled to his max bid then someone who won with a snipe likely paid more than he would or should have.

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here.

It doesn't matter if the underbidder gets shilled to their maximum because their maximum still would have been exceeded by the winning bidder anyway.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by seablaster

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here.

It doesn't matter if the underbidder gets shilled to their maximum because their maximum still would have been exceeded by the winning bidder anyway.

I believe the point is Why should you be happy with paying the maximum? Haven't you ever been to a live auction? If my *max* on an item is $500, I don't scream out "$500!". The bids increment, and depending on who's there, I may be the winner at $450. Or $100. That is what an auction is. If you were shilled up to your max bid, someone stole your money, just as sure as if they swiped it from your wallet.

[HRBAKER]

If the underbids that you "outsnipe" have been driven up prior by a shill doesn't it still affect the final price you pay in a negative way?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

If the underbids that you "outsnipe" have been driven up prior by a shill doesn't it still affect the final price you pay in a negative way?

Not always.

If I place a snipe for say $100 set for 5 seconds from the item ending, and you have a max of $80 that you bid 3 days before I'll still win for one increment over $80 even if someone shills you to exactly $80. In that sort of scenario there's essentially no difference shilled or unshilled. (The shilling still happened, and was still wrong, but had no effect on the final price.)

It could affect the final price if for instance I have the same snipe for $100 you bid $80 two days earlier and the shiller bids say $85. In that case yes, shilling happened and affected the final price for the buyer.

It might also happen if I'm basing my bid on the current bids- In other words a more competetive bidding method
Sensible bidding =You figure a price you'd pay for the card based on the card itself, bid that price and no higher.
Competetive bidding= Figure that since it;s already $80 and I want it so I'll bid $100 even though $80 is retail or above.

The first combined with sniping limits the potential for shilling.
The second leaves a lot of room for the shiller to work.

Steve B

[HRBAKER]

Steve,

If the opener is $4.99 and a legitimate bidder puts a proxy bid in of $65 and is the only legitimate bidder but is driven to say $50+ by a series of "shill" bids and then I snipe and win it for say $55 - I would say my price was adversely affected by a shill even though I sniped.

Extreme example I know.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Steve,

If the opener is $4.99 and a legitimate bidder puts a proxy bid in of $65 and is the only legitimate bidder but is driven to say $50+ by a series of "shill" bids and then I snipe and win it for say $55 - I would say my price was adversely affected by a shill even though I sniped.

Extreme example I know.

How do you win it for 55 if another bidder has a 65 max?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Steve,

If the opener is $4.99 and a legitimate bidder puts a proxy bid in of $65 and is the only legitimate bidder but is driven to say $50+ by a series of "shill" bids and then I snipe and win it for say $55 - I would say my price was adversely affected by a shill even though I sniped.

Extreme example I know.

That's not how the proxy bid works. If a legit bidder places a $65 proxy you can't win it for $55. The bider who bid $65 would win for 55+one increment.

Steve B

[seablaster]

Steve is correct.

In the original scenario that Howard presented, both the winning bidder and the underbidder were legitimate bidders. If the underbidder had a maximum bid of say $500, it doesn't matter if a shiller bids him up to that amount IF another legitimate bidder comes in with a bid greater than $500.

I by no means think shilling or safety bids are acceptable. What I would like to know is what we could do in regard to these bid retractors. No one can give a reasonable explanation for 40 bid retractions in 6 months. Is there any recourse through eBay or do they really just not care?

[HRBAKER]

Yep,
That's right now thinking about it.
The final price would be one increment above the high of the "other" legitimate bidder.

[celoknob]

Originally Posted by seablaster

Is there any recourse through eBay or do they really just not care?

No, they really do not care. Obviously, if they were really interested in the intregrity of their auctions there is no way they would allow someone with 40 retractions to continue.

I was really surprised when I first realized this about a year ago but have now accepted that this type of corruption is part of ebay. Fortunately I feel it has only affected a few percent of my auctions, buying or selling. Still, it makes ebay less fun when you know avoidable corruption is an accepted part of the system.

[howard38]

.

[seablaster]

Originally Posted by howard38

If the underbidder doesn't know there is a sniper and no one is shilling he might stop his bid at say $10 even though he's willing to go higher if necessary. If he is shilled it then becomes necessary to keep bidding if he wants to win and therefore bids as high as $20. If a snipe has been set at $21 and no one else bids then the sniper has paid about $10 more than he should have.

I see where you are coming from Howard. I guess at this point I am working under the assumption that most bidders are savvy and experienced; they know their maximum bid well in advance of the auction end.