Nobody cares about ebay shill bidding but

[nsaddict]

Mike Q. you are way OUT of the loop here! No doubt you get paid in a timely fashion, but that has NOTHING to do with this thread. However, I'm not suggesting Rick shills himself, but does very little to combat the problem. Please explain why a high percentage of his auctions have bidders bidding almost exclusively with him, many that have low feedback with high retractions. Also he doesn't get "stuck" winning items. You need to go back and read the facts here. If you don't get it you never will.

an example... http://tinyurl.com/mna8w3m check bidder with 641 feedbacks

edited to add:
Bidder Information
Bidder: a***c ( 641Feedback score is 500 to 999)
Feedback: 100% Positive
Item description: 2009 Bowman Chrome BLUE Refractor Mike Trout RC 150/150 BGS 9.5 w/ 10 AUTO
Bids on this item: 4

30-Day Summary
Total bids: 167
Items bid on: 72
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 53% Help
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 93

[Leon]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

Mike Q. you are way OUT of the loop here! No doubt you get paid in a timely fashion, but that has NOTHING to do with this thread. However, I'm not suggesting Rick shills himself, but does very little to combat the problem. Please explain why a high percentage of his auctions have bidders bidding almost exclusively with him, many that have low feedback with high retractions. Also he doesn't get "stuck" winning items. You need to go back and read the facts here. If you don't get it you never will.

an example... http://tinyurl.com/mna8w3m check bidder with 641 feedbacks

Doesn't everyone have 93 bid retractions in the last 6 mos.? I actually think this is almost one for law enforcement. It is that over the top.

[Qcards]

To Richard L; not sure where you are coming from re "not getting it".

I have been to Rick's office to drop off items and if you saw the operation in action, you would realize that the guy doens't have time to micro manage bidding action on every lot.

This is more of an eBay problem than a seller issue.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Qcards

To Richard L; not sure where you are coming from re "not getting it".

I have been to Rick's office to drop off items and if you saw the operation in action, you would realize that the guy doens't have time to micro manage bidding action on every lot.

This is more of an eBay problem than a seller issue.

I want to trust Rick too...but how do you explain not taking action against someone that bids over 50% of their bids, on your items, with 93 bid retractions in the last 6 months? Is that the behavior of an honest person?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Qcards

This is more of an eBay problem than a seller issue.

You're wrong, dude! When the seller is made aware of it and does nothing about it, it's definitely a seller issue. The fact that Rick had been made aware (twice now) of Panky shilling his own auctions and does nothing about it speaks volumes of Rick's character.

Edited to add: Not only does Rick do nothing about it, he still lets Panky continue to consign with him.

[nsaddict]

Mike, you really can't speak for his entire operation? And I disagree it's only an ebay issue. There are other prolific sellers on ebay that have cancelled bids with low feedback or high retractions, perhaps you could mention this to Rick? Could you post the items you consigned in the last 90 days? Do you happen to know Joe Pankiewicz?

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Qcards

To Richard L; not sure where you are coming from re "not getting it".

I have been to Rick's office to drop off items and if you saw the operation in action, you would realize that the guy doens't have time to micro manage bidding action on every lot.

This is more of an eBay problem than a seller issue.

Seems like you are either apologizing for, or just ignoring the aspect of shill bidding, as you are ignoring the proof provided of Rick's knowledge of this. (see Panky thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=174608, among other examples provided)

Or, just a thought as to another possibility..... You DO get it, but as a consignor, simply enjoy the "fruits of shilling", whether doing it yourself or not?

Nothing motivates people more than a vested interest.

[ullmandds]

agreed...if i were a consigner i probably wouldn't have a problem with more $$$$ in my pocket either?! how'd u feel as a buyer?

[nolemmings]

I have been to Rick's office to drop off items and if you saw the operation in action, you would realize that the guy doens't have time to micro manage bidding action on every lot.

ah yes, the sad plight of many: "I'm too busy counting my money to care how it is I'm making it". Really tugs at your heartstrings, doesn't it?

[tschock]

One thing that doesn't get discussed much is how shill bidding negatively affects other SELLERS as well.

Unlike Leon and other deep pockets who can pay anything (just kidding, Leon), many of us have a budget.

So for example, let's say I have a $500 budget. I am looking at Bob's item A (auction) and Joe's item B (fixed price $300). My main goal is item A, but will buy item B if I still have enough left in my budget. I put in a max bid of $300 for item A (up front or snipe, doesn't matter). If item A gets shilled to over $200, then Joe doesn't sell item B. So Bob's shill bidder just cost Joe a sale. How do you think Joe, as a SELLER, would view this?

This IS different than losing out to non-shill Sam bidding over $200 on item A (and then Joe not selling item B), which is letting the market determine the actual value of Bob's item, and to what extent Joe can compete in a "free" market.

(I'm sure someone could come up with a better example of adverse effect on the seller than this)

[ALR-bishop]

David---I snipe but would not say shilling does not impact me. Someone can run up the price of their card during the auction or at the end with their own snipe and I pay a higher price if the shill is above other bids against me.

But if I get the card at my snipe price then to my way of thinking it does not matter from a practical bottom line standpoint whether the seller set his price by a BIN, a reserve, a minimum bid, or a shill. The ethics are sure different and I try to avoid auctions where regular shilling occurs, but if I need or want a card,I just set my snipe at what I am willing to pay for it...and let go.

I understand others disagree and I respect their views. I am only speaking for myself after years of buying on ebay and from auction houses

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

But if I get the card at my snipe price then to my way of thinking it does not matter from a practical bottom line standpoint whether the seller set his price by a BIN, a reserve, a minimum bid, or a shill. The ethics are sure different and I try to avoid auctions where regular shilling occurs, but if I need or want a card,I just set my snipe at what I am willing to pay for it...and let go.

I understand others disagree and I respect their views. I am only speaking for myself after years of buying on ebay and from auction houses

+1

I appreciate that shilling is illegal and wrong and if the seller wants a minimum or reserve just set it, but it is less evil than the chip and retract strategy used to 'out' max bids in the netherworld of eBay consignment sales. The only way to participate in the eBay system with any semblance of security is to use snipes to hide my max bid and to try and force the shillers into setting de facto reserves that I can decide whether to meet when i set my snipe rather than throwing down a max bid that the shillers can chip away at until they hit it only to retract to the next lowest level.

[Lordstan]

Interesting thread.
I have bought an item or two from Rick and didn't feel I was shilled, but others experience obviously differs.

My point to responding was to the discussion about how having a max bid in mind and using a snipe does in fact work, to a degree, to protect bidders from shilling.

My understanding of the most common way a shill works is that they bid up an auction to see where another bidders top bid is and then retract to just below it. If I place my max bid 10-20 seconds or less from the end there is really no time for a shill to bid me up to my max. If the winning bid is below my max I win, if not I won't, but there isn't really way, in this model, for a shiller to get me to pay more.
Another shill model, is to bid until they hit an amount and force people to bid above that amount. In a sense, this creates a hidden reserve amount. Well, in this case, if I am willing to pay $500 for something and a shill bids it to $200 right at the beginning I can still choose whether I want to pay the $200 or not. While it might've sold for less without the shill, it also might've not been for sale if the consignor wasn't guaranteed they were going to get the $200 or it would've started with a $200 reserve/opening bid to begin with. While starting with an opening bid of $200 would be more transparent and/or ethical, the net result is pretty much the same. I put a snipe of $500 with 5 secs to go and I either win it for over $200 or I don't.

If you believe that Rick is either complicit in the shilling or is implicitly approving of the misbehavior by inaction, certainly you can voice your opinion, by not supporting his auctions. That being said, my experience is that stuff trumps all. I think Kenny's quote sums it up perfectly.
"I think one big problem is that all too often stuff trumps everything else. If you've been looking for a specific card for a long time and it finally shows up, I suspect there is a tendency, at least on the part of some people, to bid on the card, try to win it, and then bitch about being cheated after they've filled their want list."
I also don't think Sports Memorabilia is alone in this quagmire. I think it's very a common pattern of behavior in any collectible arena.

[packs]

What's the deal with bidders who bid excessive amounts of times? I saw one auction recently that had something like 33 bids but the high bid was something like $25. Why?

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by packs

What's the deal with bidders who bid excessive amounts of times? I saw one auction recently that had something like 33 bids but the high bid was something like $25. Why?

That can be a function of eBay mobile on an iPhone. It sets up the bid automatically at the next increment but you have to specially type in any other bid. I've often been bidding from a place where typing in a bid isn't convenient so I've just tapped the mobile next number repeatedly until I either top or hit where I'd like to stop.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

My understanding of the most common way a shill works is that they bid up an auction to see where another bidders top bid is and then retract to just below it. If I place my max bid 10-20 seconds or less from the end there is really no time for a shill to bid me up to my max. If the winning bid is below my max I win, if not I won't, but there isn't really way, in this model, for a shiller to get me to pay more.

I'm not sure sniping eliminates shill bidding. I hear others say that, but I'm not so sure it's true. There are also snipe shills (or is it a shill snipe?) that you have to consider.

Let's say a seller has a card and they really don't want to take less than $100 for it. They start the auction at $.99 and let it run. With a couple hours left in the auction, it's only at $30 and the seller starts to get nervous. The seller places a snipe of $99.99 with one of their other accounts and that ensures that it won't go for less than their desired amount. Well, let's say you have a snipe of $95, but you lose to the snipe shill of $99.99. You got shilled and never even knew it.

It's a snipe, but it's also a shill. Too many people focus on the shill during the auction and not the snipe shill at the end of the auction which happens way too often.

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I'm not sure sniping eliminates shill bidding. I hear others say that, but I'm not so sure it's true. There are also snipe shills (or is it a shill snipe?) that you have to consider.

Let's say a seller has a card and they really don't want to take less than $100 for it. They start the auction at $.99 and let it run. With a couple hours left in the auction, it's only at $30 and the seller starts to get nervous. The seller places a snipe of $99.99 with one of their other accounts and that ensures that it won't go for less than their desired amount. Well, let's say you have a snipe of $95, but you lose to the snipe shill of $99.99. You got shilled and never even knew it.

It's a snipe, but it's also a shill. Too many people focus on the shill during the auction and not the snipe shill at the end of the auction which happens way too often.

David,
I don't think sniping stops shilling, but I think it can lessen the effect on the buyer to a degree.
Snipe shilling can certainly happen, but in your example it didn't cost you any money. They shiller bought his own item for $99. You didn't win the card because of shilling, but no money was taken out of your pocket. I believe the legal phrase that is used is that you are still "whole." (I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night!). Additionally, if you're pissed about losing the item at $99, because you would've paid $100 for it, why bid only $95?
I do wholeheartedly agree that it would be more ethical to just start the items at the minimum you're willing to accept and go with it. It's just that many start with low bids trying to capture the feeding frenzy mentality of the buyers and then panic if it's not up where they want it. Unfortunately, until buyers, sellers, and ebay are each held accountable for their roles in the
game, it will continue.
Best,
Mark