eBay... probstein123

[cfhofer]

Sniping exists because of hard close times. There is zero benefit to bid sooner and perfectly legal. Agree with everyone above on those points.

For those stating "Just bid the highest you are willing to pay" - that only works for pieces with an established market value (cards, for example). What about for high-end rare or one-of-a-kind memorabilia? Shouldn't a healthy auction establish that price point? We all have that one piece on our want list we are willing to pay "more than anyone else". That is when sniping is annoying.

However, I think sniping has created a bit of a monster (for these particular pieces). I've seen more eBay auctions for rare sports memorabilia end early now than ever before. Instead of losing to a last second snipe, collectors are contacting sellers directly with their best offer to BIN early on. Since these auctions get very little early action, sellers are enticed to take the sure amount. There was a time when those were just low-ball offers, but not anymore. This practice is technically legal if the BIN transaction is done through eBay.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by cfhofer

However, I think sniping has created a bit of a monster (for these particular pieces). I've seen more eBay auctions for rare sports memorabilia end early now than ever before. Instead of losing to a last second snipe, collectors are contacting sellers directly with their best offer to BIN early on. Since these auctions get very little early action, sellers are enticed to take the sure amount. There was a time when those were just low-ball offers, but not anymore. This practice is technically legal if the BIN transaction is done through eBay.

Ebay encourages this now allowing you to add a "best offer" option on auction style listings. I assume an attempt to curtail taking the transaction off eBay.

[cfhofer]

Great point Rob. I think you are right.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by cfhofer

For those stating "Just bid the highest you are willing to pay" - that only works for pieces with an established market value (cards, for example).

For me, I don't need an established market price to know the highest amount I'm willing to pay for an item. "What I'm willing to pay" does not equal "value." The key part being "willing to pay." The item might be commonly selling for $100 but I decide I'm not paying over $80. Conversely an item might be selling for $100 but I want it badly or need it soon, maybe I'd be willing to spend $120. This also applies to one of a kind items. There have been plenty such items that are not in my collection because someone else was willing to pay more than I was. If I regret anything it's that I don't have more disposable income, not that I didn't place a higher bid.

[cfhofer]

Derek/dgo71-

"I don't need an established market price to know the highest amount I'm willing to pay for an item"

You state you don't need market value to determine willingness to pay, but proceed to provide a market value example ($100) as a starting point...paying more ($120) or less ($80) depending on your needs. So you do use market value, whether you realize it or not. The two go very much hand-in-hand. Sometimes people disregard market value (or one isn't established) but we should take it into consideration when we buy anything (house, car, boat, gas, etc.), as your example illustrates. I'm willing to pay $10 for a ballpark beer, but I'm well aware I'm getting ripped off.

"There have been plenty such items that are not in my collection because someone else was willing to pay more than I was"

Sure, that happens to all of us. But there are some items I'm willing to pay 10% more than anyone else. What is that exact amount? I don't know but a healthy auction would determine that much better than a single snipe bid. In those instances, my final price point is determined by what everyone else is willing to pay for it.

[dgo71]

I guess you misunderstood me. If I determine I'm willing to pay 120 then it doesn't matter that the market value is 100. I might not even know what the market value is when determining what I'm willing to pay. I used those numbers as examples to illustrate a point but I guess it wasn't clear enough. I definitely see your point of how an established market value might sway your decision but at the end of the day it's still up to you how much you're willing to spend.

Edited to add:
I can give you a specific example of this theory. There was a signed card I wanted for a set I'm working that had a current bid of $20- something at the time I discovered it. I was willing to pay $150 for it, which I felt was probably far more than it was worth, but was the figure I determined I'd be comfortable paying. I bid the 150 and ended up getting the item for slightly over $50. Had I gotten it for $149.99 I would have been just as happy. Market value was nothing more than an afterthought when deciding what to pay. If someone else wanted it more, I would have been disappointed sure, but also comfortable in the fact that I wasn't willing to pay what it would have taken to win.

[dgo71]

To your second point, if the bids of others determines how much you are bidding, then you're really not making your own decision. You say you'd pay 10% more but I'm sure even that stipulation has its limit. So find that limit, and bid that. Otherwise you're really not making a decision on your own terms.

Edit: doesn't eBay have a feature to autobid if you are outbid? If you have a max in mind, that would seem like a helpful feature.