Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

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

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #49

OrionW wrote:

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.

Maybe he should just change the wording on his auction pm then.

Hello,

I’m starting a new auction on <date >. In the last auction you bid X on Y items that you did not win. If you would like to bid that again, please reply to this PM. Bids will be processed in the order received.

Processing in the order received is exactly the same as when I was serially bidding on all the trade goods in auctions with my standard bid template.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #50

Endgame wrote:

OrionW wrote:

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.

Maybe he should just change the wording on his auction pm then.

Hello,

I’m starting a new auction on <date >. In the last auction you bid X on Y items that you did not win. If you would like to bid that again, please reply to this PM. Bids will be processed in the order received.

Processing in the order received is exactly the same as when I was serially bidding on all the trade goods in auctions with my standard bid template.


This would just be a continuation of the current process where there is an inside track for bidders already in the club and outside track for the general public who bid in the auctions thinking they are standard auctions.

Buyers deserve to know what is going on. The disclaimer and information needs to be in the auction posting if it is to be transparent.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #51

Just to add my thoughts. I successfully ran an auction last year and was looking forward to run one during pre-orders. There was such a steady stream of auctions going on repeat that I didn't feel like I could run one at that time. I keep waiting for a time to jump in but there was never one.

I eventually found a slower period in late April early May and tried one, even offered free shipping to compete, but it did not matter as it failed. The demand didn't seem to be there.

As the year goes on it is harder to succeed as demand begins to cool. But I learned my lesson, I was trying to play nice by not competing but the stream of auctions never let up. So I missed out. So now I'll just run one when I want and hope it funds.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #52

David Harris wrote: Just to add my thoughts. I successfully ran an auction last year and was looking forward to run one during pre-orders. There was such a steady stream of auctions going on repeat that I didn't feel like I could run one at that time. I keep waiting for a time to jump in but there was never one.

I eventually found a slower period in late April early May and tried one, even offered free shipping to compete, but it did not matter as it failed. The demand didn't seem to be there.

As the year goes on it is harder to succeed as demand begins to cool. But I learned my lesson, I was trying to play nice by not competing but the stream of auctions never let up. So I missed out. So now I'll just run one when I want and hope it funds.


Going by past history, auctions might pick up again after GENCON, when people are trying to grab UR tokens (like Platinum Nugget) before they go out of the ordering window. Although I think Platinum Nuggets have already been very heavily ordered, so maybe they won't see that big a spike in demand at the end.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #53

OrionW wrote:

Endgame wrote:

OrionW wrote:

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.

Maybe he should just change the wording on his auction pm then.

Hello,

I’m starting a new auction on <date >. In the last auction you bid X on Y items that you did not win. If you would like to bid that again, please reply to this PM. Bids will be processed in the order received.

Processing in the order received is exactly the same as when I was serially bidding on all the trade goods in auctions with my standard bid template.


This would just be a continuation of the current process where there is an inside track for bidders already in the club and outside track for the general public who bid in the auctions thinking they are standard auctions.

Buyers deserve to know what is going on. The disclaimer and information needs to be in the auction posting if it is to be transparent.


Orion is 100% correct here.

The completely fair way to handle it would be to not carry over any previous auction bids. Carrying over places any new bidders at a disadvantage vs anyone already actively bidding in an existing auction. That's definitely not OK.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #54

OrionW wrote:

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.


Let's say a new auction starts. A new bidder wants some amount of PYPs, but they are not there exactly when the auction opens. The new bidder sees that all the PYPs have bids on them. The new bidder can decide if they think their bid is going to be good enough to win the PYPs they want. Where is the difference if some of the bids came in before the auction started or right as it started?

Jeff Martin wrote: All damage is Sacred.

The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #55

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: The completely fair way to handle it would be to not carry over any previous auction bids. Carrying over places any new bidders at a disadvantage vs anyone already actively bidding in an existing auction. That's definitely not OK.


How is a new bidder at a disadvantage?

Jeff Martin wrote: All damage is Sacred.

Last edit: by Grizwald.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #56

Yeah, this isn't a real issue lol. If your price is higher, then you get the thing. If it's not, then you don't? Ties are so rare that it doesn't really matter. The alternative methods (queues/etc) have the same timing issue based on when it goes live.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #57

Grizwald wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: The completely fair way to handle it would be to not carry over any previous auction bids. Carrying over places any new bidders at a disadvantage vs anyone already actively bidding in an existing auction. That's definitely not OK.


How is a new bidder at a disadvantage?


I don't feel strongly either way on this, but here's an example of how a new bidder might be at a disadvantage. For quite a bit of time this summer, PYPs were selling in the $85-$90 range in auctions. If someone had a carryover bid for $85 for PYPs in an auction, they would be guaranteed of getting the PYPs if the bidding were $85 or less. A new bidder would have no chance of getting the PYP at the $85 price, the lowest they could win the PYP at would be $90.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #58

ini wrote: Yeah, this isn't a real issue lol. If your price is higher, then you get the thing. If it's not, then you don't? Ties are so rare that it doesn't really matter. The alternative methods (queues/etc) have the same timing issue based on when it goes live.


Ties are incredibly common. In auctions I’ve run at least 25% of all bids end up with ties. That number goes up on trade goods since the market seems to be relatively defined.

Utako - I definitely recommend reducing the number of auctions you are running to allow others a reasonable chance. We’re a community generally able to resolve things ourselves - it seems that your non-stop auction approach is creating negativity. Best to resolve it amicably as a community.

Fred
What do we want? Evidence based science! When do we want it? After peer review!

Elf Wizard build
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=570&id=247398

Rogue build
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=569&id=245490#287189

Items for Sale or Trade
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=583&id=247555

Items needed to complete my collection
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=61&id=253058
Last edit: by Fred K.
The topic has been locked.

Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions? 2 months 3 weeks ago #59

I will say I simply stopped all bids because every time we placed bids it always seemed we ended up paying max bid right as the auction funded. It frankly gave the appearance that funding was a function of overbidding on the max instead of inching up. And funny enough every auction was just enough to close as it changed the owner of the patron. Utaku, feel free to examine the auctions where myself was bidding. It didn’t take me long to simply avoid the information monopoly I clearly wasn’t privileged to. Under lock and key? How can you possibly prove that?

I was once a multi thousand annual auction junkie. I got burned twice this year

Fred’s 2x8K which I will personally never participate in again nor wait if I ever did run an auction…

Second was the constant sniper hits and easily identifying where the last moment bids came from on Utaku’s auctions certainly didn’t prove to be a good look for me

Auctions. Are meant to not be queued. FOMO is real in auctions and repeating the same auction over and over removes the fear unless you are unsure there may not be another for awhile. That lack of assurance actually provides time decay demand. Not knowing there is one right behind this one, causes higher biddings

Depressed prices happen when it loses its FOMO and becomes a commodity. $80 PYPs anyone??
Jamie
AureliusBP

Ranger for Epic
tdcharactercreator.com/#/character/edit/b4b81c8d-c52e-4ffa-b291-a2eba22a6a8c

Ranger QUick and Dead
tdcharactercreator.com/#/character/edit/9f97836c-9066-455b-904a-eea17eadbbb9

CHECK OUT THE TOKENS FOR SALE
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=61&id=252721#397741

Ioun Stone Nuggets AVAILABLE

Am on Discord as AureliusBP if you want realtime chat.
Last edit: by Jamie Campbell.
The topic has been locked.

Sleeper Fantasy Football 2022 2 months 3 weeks ago #60

If others have carryover bids, you have to beat them.

The process can only advantage one side (auctioneer, new bidder, prior bidder)

I'd you feel you're being cheated, don't bid.

That said, I'd agree that everyone should have a chance, knowing I'm part of the problem.
First ever death in True Horde
"Well, with you guarding 2 players, that means you take 90. Are you dead?"
-Incognito

My token shop/trade thread: Wade's Wide World of Wonder 

My Current Paladin Build 
The topic has been locked.
Time to create page: 0.156 seconds