TOPIC: Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions?

I am 100% for transparency and feedback (especially in these areas were a lot of trust is put into the auctioneers) and will definitely include in the details for my auctions. If it does cause people to not want to use my auction, I 100% understand as you need to be comfortable with whatever system you choose to participate in.

I did look back into the two auctions you bid on the orbs and neither included any carryover bids for the Dragon Orb but did have multiple competing bidders throughout as I think people were trying to get in their last bids before SkullCon. Not sure if that helps, but just wanted to be 100% transparent on these

Fred K wrote: Endgame - you aren’t correct that it can’t be a profit motive. At worst, you break even. If you get above average URs you clear a couple hundred dollars. If you get a GT you don’t use, you can clear over $1K. I don’t begrudge someone making a few hundred dollars as it can be a lot of work. If someone runs a ton, though, it can definitely be monetized. It won’t make enough to be a day job but it likely isn’t a loss (unless it is designed poorly.)

Presumably augumented auctions and auction everything auctions are ruining the profit margin enough people aren’t running them to make a profit. If there is indeed a sizable margin to be had, I’d be happy to help auctioneers that want to run “non profit” auctions eat into that margin.

Endgame wrote:

OrionW wrote:

Utaku Soto wrote: Quick items:

1.) In regards to the question on collusion, I think the point was there is a difference if a group comes together to agree to limit the number of auctions vs. a facilitator offering help running auction but not limiting them to running auctions simultaneously (ie Wade mentioned being the first sponsor and also ran multiple independent auctions, Flic also falls into this category). I am just trying to offer this as a service and not as a bottleneck.

2.) In regards to rollover bidding, one thing to note was this is offered to all bidders (high or low) and was a mix in who continued to carry over from one to the next. Was more used during the preorder period when they were coming fast and furious than now, but do still have bidders that carry over speculative bids from auction to auction.

The more I think about rollovers the more I am displeased. It feels like I was bidding against a spreadsheet in your auctions and not real people. Going forward I would ask that you disclose that your auctions have an inside track (rollovers) and an outside track (general public). Your auctions are not standard lightning auctions and shouldn’t be listed as such on the forums.

What’s the difference between the auctioneer sending you a PM saying “in my last auction, you bid 50 on a ring of the 5th circle. Would you like to bid that again?” Vs me watching the auctions and bidding 50 the second they open?

In the auction I was in someone had set what was effectively a floor of $405 for the dragon orbs (they had a rolling bid of $400). I paid this in two auctions in a row before they got the orb for much less. I don’t know if they had other bids in the auctions, but if they did I effectively lowered the price of those bids by paying more for the orbs and contributing more than normal to fully funding the auction. It feels like market manipulation.

In a normally functioning auction everyone is putting in bids usually at different times. You have no guarantee that you are first. Also you may end up bidding in a different auction, so that $400 bid could have ended up in a different auction. This is even more of an issue as Utako’s auctions don’t have end dates, so unless I break norms and cancel my bids I am stuck bidding against the floor in the spreadsheet even if other auctions have the item for less.

Edit : based on Utako’s post it sounds like I was up against another motivated bidder and not a rollover bid. This makes me feel better about my situation, but not necessarily about undisclosed rollover bids. Rollover bids need to be disclosed upfront.

Based on the bidding data, the dragon orb in both of your auctions saw opening bids (neither of which were carryovers) of $300 or lower and only jumped after the auction had started.

However that all said, I very much want to be transparent with the community and if it helps to have that clarified before placing bids, I'm more than happy to add it to the overall Auction Information.

Utaku Soto wrote: Based on the bidding data, the dragon orb in both of your auctions saw opening bids (neither of which were carryovers) of $300 or lower and only jumped after the auction had started.

However that all said, I very much want to be transparent with the community and if it helps to have that clarified before placing bids, I'm more than happy to add it to the overall Auction Information.

Thank you for the transparency. I definitely appreciate it.

I think the rolling bids were widely disclosed? I bid in one of the early ones and knew.

I think Heyward's points are spot on. Collusion vs sponsorship is pretty obviously different, given shipping/etc.

ini wrote: Collusion vs sponsorship is pretty obviously different, given shipping/etc.

Until I see two sponsored auctions running under the same facilitator at the same time or a sponsored auction at the same time as a non-sponsored auction from the same facilitator, the same serialization is happening.

There is also something to be said for different people giving it a go.

Rules consistency and combined shipping are huge pluses for buyers.

I have definitely met a lot of great people as their auctioneer. I would wish that for more of the community.

I've run my own auctions (3 this token year I believe) and sponsored one of Utaku's.

I hope to do about the same yearly. More if it feels like there is an unmet need. Less if others were to request it.

Matthew Hayward wrote: A few thoughts:

1. It is simply not true the that “before the end of last year we almost always had people coordinate 8k auctions so there want more than one running at a time.”

You can go look at the history of auction threads to see this is true, and can also see it by reading the prior thread on this.

2. In my opinion, the only valid reason to support a system of limitations on forum auctions is for some reason that substantially benefits auctions bidders and buyers.

There are words for when a bunch of sellers form an agreement to cooperate, independent of what buyers want: cartel, collusion. There is also a reason why these terms have a negative connotation.

3. Bidders / buyers are showing their preferences by where they bid.

Auctions fail for exactly one reason: bidders did not find the offering interesting of valuable enough.

No one “owes you” your “turn” to run an auction.

No one is preventing you from running an auction whenever you want.

Auctions are not a limited resource that should be divided up among the sellers, for the benefit of the sellers.

Before endorsing a plan of seller collusion please state clearly how buyers benefit from this plan.

4. There are substantial benefits as a buyer for using the same auctioneer over and over:

* combined shipping
* trust based on demonstrated past operating of fair auctions and past fulfillment
* familiarity with bidding procedures and rules - which in the past has caused a lot of hard feelings when a buyer and seller aren’t in alignment

5. There are many different auction formats. Limiting auctions to one at a time presents the risk of stalling auctions in the forum as one with an format that buyers find unappealing drags on, blocking auctions that are more appealing.

6. BE NICE. BE COOL.

Trying to enforce made up rules on other forumites by disparagement, bullying, or treating them worse would not be nice, and would not be cool.


7. Constructive suggestion: if sellers really like this idea, no one is stopping you from:

* forming a completely voluntary, 100% opt in “guild of mono sellers” who agree that among their guild to run only one guild auction at a time, bound by whatever other procedures voluntary guild members adopt

* this guild should have as a core bedrock principle that absolutely no disparagement, bulling, or different treatment of other non-guild sellers, or buyers who bid in other auctions will be tolerated by the guild of any guild members

* this sellers guild could announce their approach and appeal to buyers, rather than trying to enforce their ideas on other sellers

* then buyers can choose whether they like the way members of the guild run things or not

Speaking for myself, I would bid in auctions put up by anyone - guild or not - whose structure met my preferences as a buyer.

Also speaking for myself, I would tend to avoid auctions of sellers who cast aspersions on other auctioneers for failing to behave the way those sellers dictate.

Great points Matthew.

My personal opinion - If anyone wants to run an auction, then run an auction. If there's already 2, 3, 6 or however many auctions going on and that makes you feel like it might not be the best time to do one then don't do it. People might not like the fact that someone else continues to run auctions all the time but oh well, everyone has a right to run them whenever they want to. I've participated in Utaku's auctions and will continue to do so if what he's selling, the current price points of the items, and the terms seem the best for me at the time. If another auctioneer has a more appealing auction running I'll bid on that one.

Utaku Soto wrote: Based on the bidding data, the dragon orb in both of your auctions saw opening bids (neither of which were carryovers) of $300 or lower and only jumped after the auction had started.

However that all said, I very much want to be transparent with the community and if it helps to have that clarified before placing bids, I'm more than happy to add it to the overall Auction Information.

Matt, out of curiosity, are you thinking about adding info about which items have carryover bids, or actually saying what the carryover bid amount is? If it's the latter, I can see a few undesirable outcomes.

1) People will see the amount and decide they don't want to bid more than that, and don't bid at all. In that case, the final bid might be well below market value.

2) If people see what the carryover bid amount is, they will know exactly how much they have to bid in order to top it.

3) Someone might intentionally bid up to just under the amount the carryover bid is at, assuring that the bid goes for at least that much.

Hi Mike - Great clarification question! This is more a policy note to confirm all bidders will be given the opportunity to carry their bids into the next auction if interested.

As a general rule, I keep all of the bidding data under lock and key as think any direct sharing of amounts or scope is a breach of privacy for any participants. This is also true for sponsored auctions as I do not share any bidding information with the sponsors throughout the auction.

Thank you for the question and hope that helps clarify!

Utaku Soto wrote: Hi Mike - Great clarification question! This is more a policy note to confirm all bidders will be given the opportunity to carry their bids into the next auction if interested.

As a general rule, I keep all of the bidding data under lock and key as think any direct sharing of amounts or scope is a breach of privacy for any participants. This is also true for sponsored auctions as I do not share any bidding information with the sponsors throughout the auction.

Thank you for the question and hope that helps clarify!

Not good enough. What you are running is the difference between an auction with a reserve price compared to the others that do not have any floor value for new bidders.

At a minimum you should indicate that you are not running a “standard” lighting auction and put an asterisk next to any item that is carrying over a bid from the previous auction.