Lesson learned; Max bid on eBay

[1952boyntoncollector]

yeah I have had dealings with the seller...hes one of those 'no hurry to sell' guys or 'I have higher offer' when deal with him direct and then days later its on ebay no reserve...

[Exhibitman]

Enter Scumbag.

Song they should track behind all of their listings.

Sorry that happened but not surprised. eBay is shill heaven now and not using a sniper program is as good as asking for it, especially with the consignment sellers.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Gobucsmagic74

I'd ask the seller to cancel my bid as I'd have no interest in bidding in an obviously shilled auction. Just another thought.

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Enter Scumbag.

Song they should track behind all of their listings.

Sorry that happened but not surprised. eBay is shill heaven now and not using a sniper program is as good as asking for it, especially with the consignment sellers.

Guys, this auction was not shilled. I'm pretty sure this is the item in question...

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d...p2047675.l2565

If you look at the bidding history, the guy that Dan was bidding against originally bid before Dan bid. Besides, a shiller could have ran it up even more.

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Guys, this auction was not shilled. I'm pretty sure this is the item in question...

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d...p2047675.l2565

If you look at the bidding history, the guy that Dan was bidding against originally bid before Dan bid. Besides, a shiller could have ran it up even more.

It seems his concern was a bit pre-mature. I assume Dan is pleased, as he indicated his max bid was $2500 and that he was willing to pay that amount.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Gobucsmagic74

It seems his concern was a bit pre-mature. I assume Dan is pleased, as he indicated his max bid was $2500 and that he was willing to pay that amount.

I don't think his concern was premature. Please don't misconstrue the following because I'm not making any accusations here. What happens if the "0" bidder was made up by someone that wanted to reveal the high bid and what happens if the seller "knew" the under bidder? Again, I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm just saying "what if?" I'd be a bit unhappy with soemone retracting a bid like that on an auction I was bidding on.

It may not have been the case here but....

[D. Bergin]

Based on another post above and looking at the bids, the bid was cancelled by the seller because of concerns about the veracity of the bidder. It wasn't retracted.

Originally Posted by Fred

I don't think his concern was premature. Please don't misconstrue the following because I'm not making any accusations here. What happens if the "0" bidder was made up by someone that wanted to reveal the high bid and what happens if the seller "knew" the under bidder? Again, I'm not saying that's the case here. I'm just saying "what if?" I'd be a bit unhappy with soemone retracting a bid like that on an auction I was bidding on.

It may not have been the case here but....

Apparently the bid was canceled by the seller and not retracted. It makes no difference though because the card never got shilled up to Dan's max which was his concern but didn't occur, which is why I said the concern may have been a bit pre-mature. There was an assumption on Dan's part, and mine when I gave my advice, that the auction was destined to be shilled up to his max bid amount. We were mistaken and all is well from Dan's perspective...I assume anyways, which I should probably stop doing as this scenario illustrates.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Guys, this auction was not shilled. I'm pretty sure this is the item in question...

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d...p2047675.l2565

If you look at the bidding history, the guy that Dan was bidding against originally bid before Dan bid. Besides, a shiller could have ran it up even more.

Just because the person bid before Dan bid, I don't see how that proves that this was not shilling. Many instances of shilling happen when a seller/consignor have a "hidden reserve" that they are trying to shill the price up to. So the person doesn't have to shill up to the max bid, just up to their "reserve." In addition, the bidder may have seen this thread on this board, and didn't want to seem too obvious.

That the bidder who had his bid retracted wasn't the underbidder doesn't matter either. Obviously in this case, that bidder was a 0 feedback bidder so it could have just been a new account created to see what the max bid was. That new account "may" have been associated with the underbidder (or not).

Obviously, this doesn't prove shilling either. The 0 feedback bidder could have been a completely different person not associated with the underbidder. I've seen cases where someone puts in a large bid like this to try to determine the max bid for the highest bidder, probably in order to determine if they want to put a snipe in if the max bid is still lower than what they are looking at. If if there is a regular reserve on the card, they put in a high bid to try to determine what reserve the seller set on the card. I guess the point is that this could still be anything, and I think the best strategy in general is to still snipe, and not put max bids in, especially ebay auctions.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by glchen

Just because the person bid before Dan bid, I don't see how that proves that this was not shilling. Many instances of shilling happen when a seller/consignor have a "hidden reserve" that they are trying to shill the price up to. So the person doesn't have to shill up to the max bid, just up to their "reserve." In addition, the bidder may have seen this thread on this board, and didn't want to seem too obvious.

That the bidder who had his bid retracted wasn't the underbidder doesn't matter either. Obviously in this case, that bidder was a 0 feedback bidder so it could have just been a new account created to see what the max bid was. That new account "may" have been associated with the underbidder (or not).

Obviously, this doesn't prove shilling either. The 0 feedback bidder could have been a completely different person not associated with the underbidder. I've seen cases where someone puts in a large bid like this to try to determine the max bid for the highest bidder, probably in order to determine if they want to put a snipe in if the max bid is still lower than what they are looking at. If if there is a regular reserve on the card, they put in a high bid to try to determine what reserve the seller set on the card. I guess the point is that this could still be anything, and I think the best strategy in general is to still snipe, and not put max bids in, especially ebay auctions.

Come on, Gary. Are you for real?

If someone wanted to shill Dan up, they obviously could have because his proxy bid was exposed with the bid cancellation.

Did you even look at the bidding history? Did you notice that the user that had his bid cancelled is no longer a registered user? Did you also notice that he bid on several other items from 6 other sellers too?

Read before you post.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Come on, Gary. Are you for real?

If someone wanted to shill Dan up, they obviously could have because his proxy bid was exposed with the bid cancellation.

Did you even look at the bidding history? Did you notice that the user that had his bid cancelled is no longer a registered user? Did you also notice that he bid on several other items from 6 other sellers too?

Read before you post.

David, I don't know if you're just being naïve, but I did look at the bidding history. I don't see how that proves anything. People who shill often bid in other auctions to try to mask their shilling activities. The fact that he's no longer a registered bidder doesn't mean anything. Please read my post completely also. As I stated, it may not be shilling, but I don't think that the bidding history proves this.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Yes, Gary, I'm being naive.

Clearly I don't get it.