TOPIC: NEW $8k Order Auction: ENDED

I would suggest that in order to cross the $6,000 thresholds everybody send in some reasonable bids. Say your max on a PYP is $115, perhaps send in $105 now and we can trigger the auction end sooner.

I did have a mistake on my back-end spreadsheet that wasn't showing all of the bids on each item. That has been fixed now.

PM SENT

Kirk Bauer wrote: I would suggest that in order to cross the $6,000 thresholds everybody send in some reasonable bids. Say your max on a PYP is $115, perhaps send in $105 now and we can trigger the auction end sooner.

I did have a mistake on my back-end spreadsheet that wasn't showing all of the bids on each item. That has been fixed now.

One problem i see here is that the high bid isnt fully going toward your end goal since the current bid is only one increment over the 2nd highest. Even if i bid $150 on all the PYPs, my bid will still only add $1/PYP to the total.

But im not sure there is a good way to count all the max bids...unless you are willing to take a risk on last day bids hitting the goal, go ahead and announce end time when max bids reach the goal.

First post updated; we are getting closer!

Total: $5,294.75 out of $6,000 goal.

First post updated; we are getting closer!

Total: $5,308.75 out of $6,000 goal.

Note that there are certain advantages to putting out early bids, and setting your realistic max bid up front. First of all it helps this get funded. Secondly it puts you ahead of another person with the same max bid. Finally it is less work for you and me to not have to update your bid so often. If you tell me your max I automatically increase your actual bid only as much as necessary to keep you winning the item(s).

Inching towards the goal. There are some great deals available still if this makes it to the funding target.

We had a large strong bid on PYPs and teeth and we are now very close to our goal. It isn't a matter of if we get to the goal at this point, just a matter of when.

Total: $5,761.75 out of $6,000 goal

I do want to point out a strange situation that comes up from time to time and I wanted to explain how I'm handling it and make sure I'm doing this in the appropriate way.

Scenario:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $110
Person B has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $100

New bid comes in from Person C for all 4 of those items with a max bid of $105.

The way I'm doing this is Person A has their current bid increased to $105 to keep their two items. But then person C has to go to $101 to beat the max bid of Person B. This ends up being:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $105, max bid $110
Person C has a bid for 2 items, current bid $101, max bid $105

The strange thing is at this moment Person C is winning at a lower price than Person A, which I don't really like. On one hand Person A is getting everything they wanted, while Person C is only getting half of what they wanted, but on the other hand the earlier bidder is paying a higher price. I'm open to suggestions on how this should work.

Kirk Bauer wrote: I do want to point out a strange situation that comes up from time to time and I wanted to explain how I'm handling it and make sure I'm doing this in the appropriate way.

Scenario:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $110
Person B has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $100

New bid comes in from Person C for all 4 of those items with a max bid of $105.

The way I'm doing this is Person A has their current bid increased to $105 to keep their two items. But then person C has to go to $101 to beat the max bid of Person B. This ends up being:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $105, max bid $110
Person C has a bid for 2 items, current bid $101, max bid $105

The strange thing is at this moment Person C is winning at a lower price than Person A, which I don't really like. On one hand Person A is getting everything they wanted, while Person C is only getting half of what they wanted, but on the other hand the earlier bidder is paying a higher price. I'm open to suggestions on how this should work.

I think it would be reasonable to put person A's bids up to $105 over person C for the 2 that originally belonged to person B, and put person C's bids up to $105 for those that originally belonged to person A, there by making it $105 each. This was, all that truly matters is that person A bid before person C, and should have their max bid considered first, and have no chance to pay less than person C, who bid after person A.

If they had different max bids, that would be a different story of course, but the same situation would still apply for the most part.

What I'm looking for is a scenario where person A is rewarded in all aspects for bidding first. This may or may not be what you are actually looking for though.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I think it would be reasonable to put person A's bids up to $105 over person C for the 2 that originally belonged to person B, and put person C's bids up to $105 for those that originally belonged to person A, there by making it $105 each. This was, all that truly matters is that person A bid before person C, and should have their max bid considered first, and have no chance to pay less than person C, who bid after person A.

That makes a lot of sense, and I can apply that methodology. Thanks!

I meant that Person A should never have to pay more than Person C when they have the same max bid. I think I said it wrong before.

Kirk Bauer wrote: I do want to point out a strange situation that comes up from time to time and I wanted to explain how I'm handling it and make sure I'm doing this in the appropriate way.

Scenario:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $110
Person B has a bid for 2 items, current bid $90, max bid $100

New bid comes in from Person C for all 4 of those items with a max bid of $105.

The way I'm doing this is Person A has their current bid increased to $105 to keep their two items. But then person C has to go to $101 to beat the max bid of Person B. This ends up being:

Person A has a bid for 2 items, current bid $105, max bid $110
Person C has a bid for 2 items, current bid $101, max bid $105

The strange thing is at this moment Person C is winning at a lower price than Person A, which I don't really like. On one hand Person A is getting everything they wanted, while Person C is only getting half of what they wanted, but on the other hand the earlier bidder is paying a higher price. I'm open to suggestions on how this should work.

My first thought was that the unequal bids was correct, if unfortunate...but then it occurred to me: if person A was actually placing these bids, as soon as the items they had a bid on went over 101, they would just shift their bid to the cheaper items. So once C has 2 items at 101 and 2 at 102, person A tries to claim the 101 items for 102...of course, person Cs bid will then take them for 103, so person A moves back to the first items...etc. end result, A has 2 for 105, C has 2 for 105.