Quote:
Originally Posted by T206Collector
If a seller's ability to artificially inflate prices is removed, why would he agree to voluntarily lower his real price? I just don't think that's how it works. If he can't shill a card he bought for $50 to $100, I don't think that'll mean he'll list it for $50. I think the fair assumption is that he'll raise his price as high as possible to get at the same buyer who was willing to pay $100. I don't think it is fair to assume that the seller will now sit on his hands and sell his items at auction with the uncertainty of the market. Frankly, I think the move to BINs of so many ebay sellers over recent years proves as much.
|
So what you are saying above is that a guy buys a card shilled from $50 to $100. And that same card won't be sold at a $50 BIN but a $100 BIN? So how is $100 more than $100???
The move to BINs could also be due to the artificially high prices from shilled auctions as well, couldn't it? Hmmmm... That might explain the ton of "museum pieces" that keep getting the same BINs over and over. Might also explain ebay's recent announcement to at least get a token 30 cents for the museum pieces or cough up a store subscription. Perhaps ebay DOES know more than us about how well BINs are working or not. If your theory (on the move to BINs) was correct, I think ebay would have moved in the other direction and made BINs free for the first 100 (rather than auctions).