Reserve Price Changes
UFO
Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
From mid-September we will be changing the circumstances under which
sellers may use a Reserve Price in their eBay.co.uk Listings.
Currently, a Seller may set a Starting Price and Reserve Price at
whatever level they wish. After the change a seller will be able to list an
Item with a Starting Price as low as they like, but the Reserve Price will
need be £50 or above. This change will be implemented across all Categories.
The Fees when using Reserve Prices will remain the same.
We have decided to make this change after months of research and
contact with the Community. We recognise that the Reserve Price option is
one valued by many sellers and we hope that this change will not have an
overly negative impact.
The decision has been made to prevent the misuse of the Reserve Price.
Many new or inexperienced sellers use a Reserve incorrectly and diminish the
chance of a successful sale. We do not currently believe that abolishing
Reserve Prices altogether is attractive. We believe the £50 minimum for
Reserve Prices offers an excellent compromise at this time.
We will provide further details and precise timings in due course.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
> ***Reserve Price Changes***
> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
Weve done this one.
I am glad its happening.
Others are not.
PLZ PLZ.
--
Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on
the same night.
UFO
Lost the plot
Dom Robinson
says...
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>
> > ***Reserve Price Changes***
> > Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
> Weve done this one.
> I am glad its happening.
> Others are not.
> PLZ PLZ.
>
>
had to use it yourself if you didn't want to.
--
Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor), http://LeilaniWeb.co.uk (editor),
/* 995 DVDs, 295 games, 33 videos, 90 cinema films, 82 CDs, concerts & news
/* doom 3, sparks lil beethoven, bourne identity se, thief deadly shadows
Fight back against "PRESS RED": http://dvdfever.co.uk/pressrel/pressred.shtml
How crap is your postal service? Vent your spleen! http://tinyurl.com/2z7wa
Dr Zoidberg
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>
>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
> Weve done this one.
> I am glad its happening.
Why?
Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely bother
myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to let stuff go
too cheaply.
When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings that
are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the listing"
--
Alex
"We are now up against live, hostile targets"
"So, if Little Red Riding Hood should show up with a bazooka and a bad
attitude, I expect you to chin the bitch! "
www.drzoidberg.co.uk
www.ebayfaq.co.uk
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <oo7ei0t9e9i12fr3a...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
>says...
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>>
>> > ***Reserve Price Changes***
>> > Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>> Weve done this one.
>> I am glad its happening.
>> Others are not.
>> PLZ PLZ.
>>
>>
>Why are you glad? How is removing choice in anything a good option? You never
>had to use it yourself if you didn't want to.
I covered it in the original thread.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>>
>>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>> Weve done this one.
>> I am glad its happening.
>
>Why?
>Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely bother
>myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to let stuff go
>too cheaply.
>
>When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings that
>are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the listing"
Let the true market value win!!!
You can always use BIN.
Yngvarion
"Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record" <m...@neverumind.com> wrote in message
news:e2lei0h46jrijbc3n...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:02:41 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
> <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
> >> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
> >>
> >>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
> >>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
> >> Weve done this one.
> >> I am glad its happening.
> >
> >Why?
> >Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely bother
> >myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to let stuff
go
> >too cheaply.
> >
> >When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings that
> >are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the listing"
> Let the true market value win!!!
> You can always use BIN.
>
part with. It reached the reserve of 50GBP, and more, which I never thought
it would. It certainly did not seem to put off bidders, they were fighting
over it.
Under similar circumstances I would use a reserve again but never on a
regular basis.
Krythy
Dr Zoidberg
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:02:41 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
> <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>>>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>>> Weve done this one.
>>> I am glad its happening.
>>
>> Why?
>> Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely
>> bother myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to
>> let stuff go too cheaply.
>>
>> When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings
>> that are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the
>> listing"
> Let the true market value win!!!
True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
that particular item.
If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
> You can always use BIN.
Yes you can but that sets a maximum price of the auction and often things go
for more than expected, and in the past you could also use a reserve to
guarantee a minimum.
Now this is being taken away.
Less choice is a bad thing.
Bill Payer
<m...@neverumind.com> wrote:
>>Why are you glad? How is removing choice in anything a good option? You never
>>had to use it yourself if you didn't want to.
>I covered it in the original thread.
What's that Tit'ass ? are you thinking of a career in politics, sounds
like something our Tony would say...
"I refer the honorable member to my previous answer" :)
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
wrote:
And you still can for £50 and above.
I personally do not and will not bid on a reserve auction if I can
help it.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
It is just a rather mundane and boring answer.
I just do not like reserves and therefore avoid bidding on them
whenever possible.
Nothing more, nothing less, I don't like them.
Dr Zoidberg
So don't bid on them.
I wouldn't bid on a lot of auctions , but that doesn't mean that they should
be banned from ebay.
Amanda Angelika
> Let the true market value win!!!
> You can always use BIN.
ROFL! Does eBay represent a "true market value"?
I know with art, things tend to sell on eBay because they are bright and
colourful and have impact in thumbnail form and are cheap. If you put a
Rembrandt up there without a reserve you'd be lucky to get 10 quid for it.
A) because the colours may look a bit dull and B) because if it isn't
painted with a 5" brush people think it's a photo or a repro (i.e not a real
painting) C) And lets face it most people wouldn't know a real work of art
work from a tea tray if it hit them on the head LOL
Generally with some things art in particular E-bay doesn't even represent a
"true" market let alone a "True market value" and if they didn't charge
artists outrageous fees and place stupid restrictions on reserve price
auctions, you would actually get more real British artists selling their
work directly. But with the current fee structure as an artist it is only
viable to show and sell lower priced works through eBay, the fee structure
also favours "art" that is manufactured in sweatshops in the Far East and
marketed with bogus artist names, which one could regard as a scam.
IMO The nature of the art in the art sections, the restriction in choice and
the reason that so few real British artists use Ebay as a venue to sell
their work is a direct result of EBay's manipulation of the market and it's
greedy and outrageous fee structure.
IMO in terms of the art sections eBay's policies benefit neither Self
Representing artists or the art buying public. The current fee structure
merely feeds eBays profits and favours third world tat and scammers. It
could be a lot better :)
--
Amanda
ebay listings: http://tinyurl.com/q5hx
ebid listings: http://tinyurl.com/5jx8o
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 29/07/2004
Charlie Farley
I think you are being a little tough on eBay.
My wife sells paintings and pays gallaries or exihibition organisers
anything between
10 and 40 per cent on sales. Sometimes she also has to pay a flat
hanging fee.
People don't but art on eBay because if you are paying a few hundred
quid for a squiged-up mess of materials worth about Ł15 you want to
clock it first.
--
Charlie Farley
Dom Robinson
says...
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:33:39 +0100, Bill Payer <bi...@payer.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:55:16 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
> ><m...@neverumind.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>Why are you glad? How is removing choice in anything a good option? You never
> >>>had to use it yourself if you didn't want to.
> >
> >>I covered it in the original thread.
> >
> >What's that Tit'ass ? are you thinking of a career in politics, sounds
> >like something our Tony would say...
> >"I refer the honorable member to my previous answer" :)
> It is just a rather mundane and boring answer.
> I just do not like reserves and therefore avoid bidding on them
> whenever possible.
> Nothing more, nothing less, I don't like them.
>
paper daily, for some reason, the bent-nosed publicity-whore.
Still no reason to remove choice.
Dom Robinson
> As to removing choice I am sure you will recognise there are lots of
> ways removing choice improves community life (the choice to con others
> is one.). The same goes for not including certain choices in the first
> place.
>
I state my reserve price in the auction if I use one.
Alternatively, you can ask the seller what the reserve price is.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <87oei0t3fnceg4k4a...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
>says...
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:33:39 +0100, Bill Payer <bi...@payer.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:55:16 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
>> ><m...@neverumind.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>Why are you glad? How is removing choice in anything a good option? You never
>> >>>had to use it yourself if you didn't want to.
>> >
>> >>I covered it in the original thread.
>> >
>> >What's that Tit'ass ? are you thinking of a career in politics, sounds
>> >like something our Tony would say...
>> >"I refer the honorable member to my previous answer" :)
>> It is just a rather mundane and boring answer.
>> I just do not like reserves and therefore avoid bidding on them
>> whenever possible.
>> Nothing more, nothing less, I don't like them.
>>
>So, I can't stand Jodie Marsh, but that doesn't stop her appearing in the
>paper daily, for some reason, the bent-nosed publicity-whore.
>
>Still no reason to remove choice.
At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
why I didn't want another argument over it.
There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
an appropriate season or setting a high start price - high strat price
is probably cheaper than the cost of setting the reserve anyway.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <tb5fi0pa8qprf4reg...@4ax.com>, nos...@me.nut says...
>> As to removing choice I am sure you will recognise there are lots of
>> ways removing choice improves community life (the choice to con others
>> is one.). The same goes for not including certain choices in the first
>> place.
>>
>I state my reserve price in the auction if I use one.
Yours may be the exception to the rule, even I may bid on the
exception, I commend you for being so open.
>Alternatively, you can ask the seller what the reserve price is.
And they reply with bid and find out. Only 1 ever actually revealed
their price.
Dom Robinson
says...
> >Still no reason to remove choice.
> At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
> why I didn't want another argument over it.
>
> There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
> heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
>
> Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
As has been said in this thread, it's not necessarily the true value depending
on how many are bidding.
> an appropriate season or setting a high start price - high strat price
> is probably cheaper than the cost of setting the reserve anyway.
>
Then the seller should do some research and set the reserve accordingly.
Bob Goddard
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> writes
>Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:02:41 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
>> <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>>>>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>>>> Weve done this one.
>>>> I am glad its happening.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>> Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely
>>> bother myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to
>>> let stuff go too cheaply.
>>>
>>> When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings
>>> that are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the
>>> listing"
>> Let the true market value win!!!
>
>True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
>that particular item.
>If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
>is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
(Bob
--
>---B---------| This space unintentionally left |---NB - "News"--->
Goddard | blank. | may be updated
>---b---------| |--occasionally--->
www.goatherd.freeserve.co.uk/sheds.html www.bobsticks.co.uk
Amanda Angelika
Yes I used to sell my work through a Gallery in London and they used to
charge 50% or more if you count VAT added to the total price. You can also
pay hanging fees with open exhibitions. But generally if you sell your work
through galleries or shops, it's done on a sale or return basis and there
are no up front fees. The commission percentage was never a problem for me
though, because if you sell through a good gallery you can usually get a
good price in any case :)
> People don't but art on eBay because if you are paying a few hundred
> quid for a squiged-up mess of materials worth about Ł15 you want to
> clock it first.
Well actually people do buy art on eBay quite a lot of it in fact. The point
I was making though is ebays fee structure favours lower priced high
turn-over items. But that strategy doesn't work well with art. People will
pay Ł1000+ for fine Oil paintings (well people have paid that sort of money
for my paintings before now), but the turn-over can be slow, no up and
coming artist with any business sense is going to list higher priced
paintings over and over again on Ebay incurring heavy fees every time until
they sell. There are better places to sell fine paintings where you are not
going to be fleeced.
What this means though is eBays fee structure restricts market choice to the
eBay art consumer. But I don't suppose this should come as a surprise really
eBay are in business to maximise profits, they have no altruistic intentions
towards either sellers or buyers, any one who thinks otherwise is living in
cloud cuckoo land.
--
Amanda
Dr Zoidberg
any different.
Ebay are trying to justify removing reserves as they claim that items
without them finish higher so its really in the customers interest not to
have a reserve.
That may or may not be true but their real motivation is that they want
every item to sell even if the seller is unhappy , just so the FVF fees
apply.
soundmix
> > which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
> >
> Thats not how real auctions work
If a lot at a real auction has a reserve price the auctioneer will start the
bidding much lower to build up a momentum which'll hopefully carry the price
up to and beyond the reserve. If, on the other hand, he were to start the
bidding at the seller's reserve price he'd attract fewer (if any) bids and
probably end with a poorer result.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 19/08/2004
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <42hfi0te3mm4it77m...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
>says...
>> >Still no reason to remove choice.
>> At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
>> why I didn't want another argument over it.
>>
>> There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
>> heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
>>
>> Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
>
>As has been said in this thread, it's not necessarily the true value depending
>on how many are bidding.
Then as I have said, wait until those items are selling well.
The true value is what people are prepared to pay. I suspect with the
removal of the under £50 reserve, people might realise a higher price.
>> an appropriate season or setting a high start price - high strat price
>> is probably cheaper than the cost of setting the reserve anyway.
>>
>Then the seller should do some research and set the reserve accordingly.
They still can for items over £50.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
As eBay point out at great lengths, eBay isn't an auction house!
>Ebay are trying to justify removing reserves as they claim that items
>without them finish higher so its really in the customers interest not to
>have a reserve.
A point I believe to be true.
>That may or may not be true but their real motivation is that they want
>every item to sell even if the seller is unhappy , just so the FVF fees
>apply.
If you set a realistic start price (including postage) then you just
might be surprised. As a (now infrequent) buyer I believe in the
combined prices regardless of start price. The important bits to me
are:
1. Is there a bidding war going on?
2. What is the full combined price right now?
3. What am I prepared to bid?
If there is a reserve, I wont even waste my time as the seller has
99.9% of the time over estimated the value of the goods.
Dr Zoidberg
Aside from the legal issues which have yet to be decided one way or the
other , offering an item for sale where people take it in turns to out bid
each other makes it an auction.
>> Ebay are trying to justify removing reserves as they claim that items
>> without them finish higher so its really in the customers interest
>> not to have a reserve.
>
> A point I believe to be true.
Maybe , maybe not.
I'd be inclined to agree with them but that doesn't mean that people
shouldn't be given the option of using a reserve.
>> That may or may not be true but their real motivation is that they
>> want every item to sell even if the seller is unhappy , just so the
>> FVF fees apply.
>
> If you set a realistic start price (including postage) then you just
> might be surprised. As a (now infrequent) buyer I believe in the
> combined prices regardless of start price. The important bits to me
> are:
>
> 1. Is there a bidding war going on?
> 2. What is the full combined price right now?
> 3. What am I prepared to bid?
>
> If there is a reserve, I wont even waste my time as the seller has
> 99.9% of the time over estimated the value of the goods.
What a load of shite. If that were the case then items would never sell.
It may be more than *you* wanted to pay but the fact that they do meet the
reserve shows that it wasn't too high.
Weren't you the one claiming that something is worth what people are willing
to pay earlier on?
And anyway , how do you know what the reserve price is unless its stated in
the listing.
Do you have some amazing telepathy that lets you know
Dom Robinson
> >True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
> >that particular item.
> >If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
> >is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
>
> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
>
>
at £40. If I start at £40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20, people bid and
it creeps up to £40 if enough people bid that way (but not always)
It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
Dom Robinson
says...
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:20:56 +0100, Dom Robinson
> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <42hfi0te3mm4it77m...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
> >says...
> >> >Still no reason to remove choice.
> >> At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
> >> why I didn't want another argument over it.
> >>
> >> There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
> >> heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
> >>
> >> Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
> >
> >As has been said in this thread, it's not necessarily the true value depending
> >on how many are bidding.
> Then as I have said, wait until those items are selling well.
Oh, fine. I'll get my crystal ball out, shall I?
Well done Ebay, I'll just end them "due to an error in the listing" 10 mins
before the auction closes and you'll only get the listing fee.
> The true value is what people are prepared to pay. I suspect with the
> removal of the under £50 reserve, people might realise a higher price.
Then they'll bid up to the reserve and beyond. Duh!
It's nowhere near the Utopian vision you've come up with.
> >> an appropriate season or setting a high start price - high strat price
> >> is probably cheaper than the cost of setting the reserve anyway.
> >>
> >Then the seller should do some research and set the reserve accordingly.
> They still can for items over £50.
Either you know you're not helping, ie. trolling, or you're just being
incredibly thick.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
For items over £50 they can still set a reserve.
>>> That may or may not be true but their real motivation is that they
>>> want every item to sell even if the seller is unhappy , just so the
>>> FVF fees apply.
>>
>> If you set a realistic start price (including postage) then you just
>> might be surprised. As a (now infrequent) buyer I believe in the
>> combined prices regardless of start price. The important bits to me
>> are:
>>
>> 1. Is there a bidding war going on?
>> 2. What is the full combined price right now?
>> 3. What am I prepared to bid?
>> If there is a reserve, I wont even waste my time as the seller has
>> 99.9% of the time over estimated the value of the goods.
>
>What a load of shite. If that were the case then items would never sell.
>It may be more than *you* wanted to pay but the fact that they do meet the
>reserve shows that it wasn't too high.
>Weren't you the one claiming that something is worth what people are willing
>to pay earlier on?
Yes, and I stand by that. Yes it may have been higher than I was
prepared to bid and no I wont bid on them unless I have to or if the
reserve has been disclosed in the description.
>And anyway , how do you know what the reserve price is unless its stated in
>the listing.
>Do you have some amazing telepathy that lets you know
No, I watch them along with similar items I may be interested in just
to get a feel for the going rate. Those with reserve may or may not
sell but they certainly attract less bids.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <a6ngi05mpnhl6il2c...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
>says...
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:20:56 +0100, Dom Robinson
>> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <42hfi0te3mm4it77m...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
>> >says...
>> >> >Still no reason to remove choice.
>> >> At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
>> >> why I didn't want another argument over it.
>> >>
>> >> There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
>> >> heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
>> >>
>> >> Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
>> >
>> >As has been said in this thread, it's not necessarily the true value depending
>> >on how many are bidding.
>> Then as I have said, wait until those items are selling well.
>
>Oh, fine. I'll get my crystal ball out, shall I?
>
>Well done Ebay, I'll just end them "due to an error in the listing" 10 mins
>before the auction closes and you'll only get the listing fee.
>
>> The true value is what people are prepared to pay. I suspect with the
>> removal of the under £50 reserve, people might realise a higher price.
>
>Then they'll bid up to the reserve and beyond. Duh!
No because there wont be one.
But you just might get extra people bidding that wouldn't bid before
including me.
Likewise I also avoid sellers that do not use Pay Pal or who have
excessive unreadable T&C.
>It's nowhere near the Utopian vision you've come up with.
No such thing as Utopia.
>> >> an appropriate season or setting a high start price - high strat price
>> >> is probably cheaper than the cost of setting the reserve anyway.
>> >>
>> >Then the seller should do some research and set the reserve accordingly.
>> They still can for items over £50.
>
>Either you know you're not helping, ie. trolling, or you're just being
>incredibly thick.
Derrrrrrrrr. As I said very early on in this thread, I didn't want to
be dragged into an argument as It had already been done to death in a
previous thread that I had started whilst trying to pass on the info
to the group.
Sticks n stones etc.
Neale D. Hind
<nos...@me.nut> writes
>On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:18:45 +0100, Dom Robinson
><murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <tb5fi0pa8qprf4reg...@4ax.com>, nos...@me.nut says...
>>> As to removing choice I am sure you will recognise there are lots of
>>> ways removing choice improves community life (the choice to con others
>>> is one.). The same goes for not including certain choices in the first
>>> place.
>>>
>>I state my reserve price in the auction if I use one.
Why would you do that rather than just set the initial price at your
reserve?
<snip>
--
Neale Hind
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children
Neale D. Hind
>Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:53:26 GMT, "UFO" <u...@spamfree.zz> wrote:
>>
>>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>> Weve done this one.
>> I am glad its happening.
>
>Why?
>Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely bother
>myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want to let stuff go
>too cheaply.
I'm aware of at least one corporate seller that uses the reserve price
to gather potential sales prospects to whom they then send 'second
chance' offers.
>When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings that
>are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the listing"
I thought you could end a listing for any reason at all?
Neale D. Hind
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> writes
>In article <Ky31DBDPp9JBFwF$@godwit.plus.com>, sp...@spam.spam.invalid says...
>> >True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
>> >that particular item.
>> >If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
>> >is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
>>
>> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
>> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
>>
>>
>What a load of crap. I might start something at £20 but want to set a reserve
>at £40. If I start at £40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20, people bid and
>it creeps up to £40 if enough people bid that way (but not always)
>
>It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
>things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
I believe the £9.99 thing was to force the sales assistant to open the
till drawer to issue change. This reduced the chance of the £10 note
ending up in their pocket.
Dom Robinson
says...
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:49:35 +0100, Dom Robinson
> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <a6ngi05mpnhl6il2c...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
> >says...
> >> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:20:56 +0100, Dom Robinson
> >> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <42hfi0te3mm4it77m...@4ax.com>, m...@neverumind.com
> >> >says...
> >> >> >Still no reason to remove choice.
> >> >> At the end of the day, it will please some and upset others which is
> >> >> why I didn't want another argument over it.
> >> >>
> >> >> There are cases for both. In my experience, it was being abused
> >> >> heavily and hence my total dislike for them.
> >> >>
> >> >> Let true value win. Nothing to stop anyone holding out till there is
> >> >
> >> >As has been said in this thread, it's not necessarily the true value depending
> >> >on how many are bidding.
> >> Then as I have said, wait until those items are selling well.
> >
> >Oh, fine. I'll get my crystal ball out, shall I?
> >
> >Well done Ebay, I'll just end them "due to an error in the listing" 10 mins
> >before the auction closes and you'll only get the listing fee.
> >
> >> The true value is what people are prepared to pay. I suspect with the
> >> removal of the under £50 reserve, people might realise a higher price.
> >
> >Then they'll bid up to the reserve and beyond. Duh!
> No because there wont be one.
If there was one, is what I'm still on about.
> But you just might get extra people bidding that wouldn't bid before
> including me.
How would I get extra people bidding? That's not going to happen if I've
stated the reserve in the description already.
Dom Robinson
> In message <itgfi0dr2sokoore6...@4ax.com>, Pete
> <nos...@me.nut> writes
> >On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:18:45 +0100, Dom Robinson
> ><murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>In article <tb5fi0pa8qprf4reg...@4ax.com>, nos...@me.nut says...
> >>> As to removing choice I am sure you will recognise there are lots of
> >>> ways removing choice improves community life (the choice to con others
> >>> is one.). The same goes for not including certain choices in the first
> >>> place.
> >>>
> >>I state my reserve price in the auction if I use one.
>
> Why would you do that rather than just set the initial price at your
> reserve?
>
I might start something at £20 but want to set a reserve at £40. If I start at
£40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20, people bid and it creeps up to £40 if
enough people bid that way (but not always).
It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
Dom Robinson
realise instantly that it's near-as-dammit a tenner, but a lot of chavs will
think "Ooh, 9 and a bit."
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
>On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:55:52 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
><m...@neverumind.com> wrote:
>
>>Likewise I also avoid sellers that do not use Pay Pal or who have
>>excessive unreadable T&C.
>
>I'm getting to this point. I haven't used a cheque in years and don't
>even have a cheque book. Postal Orders are just too expensive and
>require going to the PO.
>
>I can understand why people don't want to use paypal because of the
>fee but I can not fathom the logic in not using a direct internet
>transfer.. specially when they obviously have a bank\ building society
>and it save both of us a trip out and reduces the buying cycle by at
>least 4 days.
>
>As to T&Cs I just wish it was illegal to say you will not accept your
>legal responsibility...
>
>One thing that annoys me is this "buyer to pay all return postage"
>stuff. I am not a tester for their faulty or shoddy misdescribed items
>so why should I pay the postage?
>Pete
As both a seller and buyer I agree with all you say except that it can
take just as long for funds to transfer via online deposit.
I haven't had any returns yet though I have refunded fees including
postage.
I make no claims to cover return postage but you win some, you loose
some.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You Dom, are the exception, most do not disclose the reserve even when
asked. However, if I didn't notice the reserve price and there were
other similar items without a reserve then the others might be looked
at and yours neglected.
Derek.
Charlie Farley
I can't understand this. Why would it creep up to £40 if you've
already told buyers it's no deal until they bid at least £40 (reserve
not met keeps coming up but surely they know that already)?
Sorry I must be going daft tonight.
--
Charlie Farley
Amanda Angelika
>> When this comes into effect expect to see a large number of listings
>> that are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an error in the
>> listing"
>
> I thought you could end a listing for any reason at all?
Yes you can end a listing if it doesn't reach a satisfactory price (or you
can simply say you lost the item or sold it elsewhere), so technically you
can completely override eBays restrictions on reserve price auctions and
avoid the extra fees levied on them, they are simply charging people for
something they are entitled to do in any case, it's a total farce.
All the extra fees and restrictions on Reserve price auctions really achieve
(apart from lining eBays pocket) is keep buyers in the dark about the
intentions of the seller. AFAIK If the hammer doesn't actually come down
(which in this case is the end of the auction) you are not legally obliged
to sell an item at auction. So technically as a seller you are entitled to
set a reserve, keep it private, and withdraw an item if it doesn't reach
that sum. Mind if you did that openly on eBay you would probably suspended
as a result, but obviously you don't have to be open about it.
Personally I think all these restrictions and extra fees simply create bad
will towards eBay, it's supposed to be an Auction site IMO they should allow
it to run as such and not attempt to fleece sellers out of extra fees or
discourage reserve price auctions. I mean if sellers start withdrawing
auctions minutes before the end you just get disappointed buyers, which
again causes bad will.
I think eBay's policies on Reserve price auctions are absolutely stupid. And
if you look at statistics of the popularity of eBay it seems to be going
down hill. The whole point of low starting prices and reserve prices is to
encourage bids. Personally as an artist I like it when people bid for my
work, even if it doesn't reach a reserve price it's encouraging to get bids,
it's also a good selling strategy for art, it enables people to express
their appreciation for your work and although it pushes the prices up a bit,
people know they are getting something special and well liked by others.
Apart from having a serious intention i.e. Sales, auctions are supposed to
be fun and entertaining, and I think this is part of the reason why eBay
became so popular, people like competing for bargains this is the whole
point, it's what makes eBay different to an ordinary shopping site. You need
bids on an auction site and low starting prices and modest reserves is the
way to encourage bidding. IMO by discouraging reserve price auctions they
are removing the entrainment, and that strategy will ultimately kill eBay.
Personally I advise people to sign up to Ebid.co.uk unlike Feebay they don't
charge any fees for standard listings or reserve price auctions IMO it's a
better system all round. :)
--
Amanda
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Personally I advise people to sign up to Ebid.co.uk unlike Feebay they don't
>charge any fees for standard listings or reserve price auctions IMO it's a
>better system all round. :)
>--
>Amanda
Yea right,
Sporting goods, fishing = Ebid 27 items Ebay 12,305 items
Bring back Yahoo auctions.
--
All those that beleive in Telekenetics raise my hand.
All those that believe in time travel join NTHell.
(Posting via a dodgy NTL server which has it's clock set an hour ahead)
Kevin F Stubbs
Hey...we actually agree on something :-))
Cheers
Kevin
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
I might be a bit hot headed at times but I do try to be reasonable.
Humbug
<sp...@spam.spam.invalid>, "I always pay it extra."
>But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
>which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
Exactly so.
--
Humbug
Humbug
Angelika" <manic...@hotmail.com>, "I always pay it extra."
>Well actually people do buy art on eBay quite a lot of it in fact.
Myself included. I have bought a number of paintings and prints.
--
Humbug
Amanda Angelika
> <manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Personally I advise people to sign up to Ebid.co.uk unlike Feebay
>> they don't charge any fees for standard listings or reserve price
>> auctions IMO it's a better system all round. :)
>> --
>> Amanda
> Yea right,
> Sporting goods, fishing = Ebid 27 items Ebay 12,305 items
> Bring back Yahoo auctions.
I know Ebid only has about 200,000 members still it's growing fast, they are
opening sites in the US and in Europe. There are plenty of bargains there,
agreed you don't have the huge selection you have on eBay and the traffic is
low but for standard listings it's free, which means at this stage you can
just list hundreds of items for nothing until they sell. Or even list higher
price items without being fleeced for fees.
The other thing is whilst eBay seems to be a victim of it's own success and
going down hill, through IMO bad management decisions such as the reserve
price restrictions and pure greed Ebid is growing and developing and the
potential for growth is enormous. In the long term it is better to be
involved with things that are growing and developing than something like
eBay which if current trends are anything to go by has had it's day.
--
Amanda
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 30/07/2004
Kevin F Stubbs
> going down hill, through IMO bad management decisions such as the reserve
> price restrictions and pure greed
Ebays recent changes have all been for the benefit of buyers not sellers. So the
number of bidders may be on the increase...but sellers may be looking at other
market places especially private sellers who cannot cover Ebays mounting fees in
their 'profit margins' as they don't have any.
Cheers
Kevin
Amanda Angelika
> <kevin_f...@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>> Bring back Yahoo auctions.
>>
>> Hey...we actually agree on something :-))
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Kevin
> I might be a bit hot headed at times but I do try to be reasonable.
Well you can still list stuff on Yahoo auctions on the US site
http://auctions.yahoo.com/ if you accept paypal and are prepared to post
worlwide it's just another auction site out there which presents a
competative selling opportunity, the listing fees are very reasonable. :)
--
Amanda
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 30/07/2004
Amanda Angelika
Yes I agree up to a point. But surely high fee's apart from cutting out
private sellers, also cuts out the smaller traders with lower turn-over
items. In many ways Ebay is IMO becoming a commercial online shopping mall,
which favours large volume sellers. I'm not sure if that is likely to
increase the number of bidders and potential buyers though. I mean as far as
I can see auction sites work because like a small country they have an
economy based on trade, IOW a community that are buying and selling to each
other.
It seems to me most people buy and sell on eBay, and it many ways it is the
private sellers and the smaller traders there are the lifeblood and source
of wealth, just like the peasants in a feudal society I suppose. I think
once you start over taxing the peasants IOW cutting out the small man/woman
they will revolt and go elsewhere, so rather than increasing bidders and
traffic to eBay I would argue eBays fee policies and restrictions are
detrimental to it's continued growth and in the long run could prove
disastrous, because it is killing the very community which is it's
lifeblood.
I honestly don't think the management strategy of eBay favours either buyers
or sellers, I think the main purpose of high fees and restrictions on
reserve price auctions are meant to maximise profits for eBay, so is IMO it
is motivated by greed, but I don't think that strategy can work forever
before people start voting with their feet.
Bob Goddard
>> >True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
>> >that particular item.
>> >If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
>> >is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
>>
>> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
>> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
>>
>>
>What a load of crap. I might start something at £20 but want to set a reserve
>at £40. If I start at £40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20, people bid and
>it creeps up to £40 if enough people bid that way (but not always)
Yes, but if you start at £20 and you accept that the price won't always
reach £40, then you are accepting that it could sell for £20. Why £20?
Because that is the minimum price you're prepared to sell it for. So,
until the bidding gets above £20 that's all the item is worth to you.
>It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
>things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
I think it's rather more like a shop selling things for a fiver because
it's half a tenner.
(Bob
--
>---B---------| This space unintentionally left |---NB - "News"--->
Goddard | blank. | may be updated
>---b---------| |--occasionally--->
www.goatherd.freeserve.co.uk/sheds.html www.bobsticks.co.uk
Bob Goddard
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> writes
>Bob Goddard wrote:
>> In message <2op4kuF...@uni-berlin.de>, Dr Zoidberg
>> <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> writes
>>> Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>>>> <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ***Reserve Price Changes***
>>>>>>> Date: 17/08/04 Time: 06:11:33 PM BST
>>>>>> Weve done this one.
>>>>>> I am glad its happening.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>> Nobody forces you to use reserve prices , and although I rarely
>>>>> bother myself I can see the advantages for sellers who don't want
>>>>> to let stuff go too cheaply.
>>>>>
>>>>> listings that are ended with ten minutes to go "because of an
>>>>> error in the listing"
>>>
>>> bidding on that particular item.
>>> If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then
>>> there is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
>>
>> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
>> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
>>
>any different.
Erm... perhaps you could explain how an item can sell on eBay for less
than the starting price? And perhaps you could then go on to explain why
eBay should *not* be different from a real auction?
>Ebay are trying to justify removing reserves as they claim that items
>without them finish higher so its really in the customers interest not to
>have a reserve.
Agreed, they are.
>That may or may not be true but their real motivation is that they want
>every item to sell even if the seller is unhappy , just so the FVF fees
>apply.
Yes - or maybe they make more money on the listing fees. Whatever, I'm
damn sure they're not doing it with their customers' interests in mind.
The only thing that puzzles me is what your statements have got to do
with my pointing out that on eBay an item can't sell for less than what
the seller is prepared to accept for it, as signified by the starting
price.
Dom Robinson
--
Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor), http://LeilaniWeb.co.uk (editor),
/* 1000 DVDs! 296 games, 33 videos, 90 cinema films, 82 CDs, concerts & news
/* charlie, athens 2004, pitch black se, riddick: dark fury, doom 3, sparks
Kevin F Stubbs
> or sellers, I think the main purpose of high fees and restrictions on
> reserve price auctions are meant to maximise profits for eBay,
Don't forget the change to T&Cs that outlawed surcharging for electronic money
services. This was done to promote PayPal by eliminating the only advantage the
other similar services (NoChex, Fastpay, etc) offered, i.e. lower charges to
pass along to buyers.
> so is IMO it is motivated by greed,
Absolutely no argument there :-)) Ebay are trying to maximise their profits by
making use of their monopoly position. Maybe its time Watchdog or similar did an
investigation in to Ebay itself rather than the scams and pitfalls they have
looked into briefly so far ?
It will be interesting to see how things change over the next year or so. I
doubt if Ebay will disappear or go under...but they may have to rethink their
approach.
Cheers
Kevin
Kevin F Stubbs
> reach £40, then you are accepting that it could sell for £20. Why £20?
> Because that is the minimum price you're prepared to sell it for.
What a load of cobblers. In your example, he accepts that there may only be a
single bid at £20 but that is not the same as accepting £20 as the price he is
willing to sell the item for. That is why you have reserves !!! The minimum
price he would sell it for would be the Reserve price. He is not willing to sell
it for the starting price, he just sets that below the price he actually wants
to encourage bidders. If it doesn't reach the reserve, i.e. the minimum price he
is willing to accept, then the item does not sell. Auctions do not start at the
minimum price a seller is willing to accept...they start below this and work up.
Cheers
Kevin
Amanda Angelika
Yes I agree :) It is unlikely they will go under because it's still the most
popular and best know auction site, so it would take some time for things to
go /that/ wrong.
But I think things can be surprisingly precarious. I mean high fees are
justifiable when eBay has high volume traffic and sellers can sell a
sufficient proportion of items listed to both cover all their fees and make
a reasonable profit. Once the proportion of sales out of total listings
starts to go below a certain proportion, depending on what other costs
sellers have. it can become a loss making enterprise very quickly. Once
people find they are making losses they start listing fewer items, look for
alternative ways to sell their goods. or lose interest in eBay and on-line
auctions all together, since a high proportion of people on eBay both buy
and sell, this affects traffic to the site, so you get even fewer potential
buyers and so the downward spiral continues.
So although I dare say eBay has sufficient reserves to sustain this likely
downward trend. I doubt if it could go on for ever without a serious review
of their fee structure. eBay has a good market position as auction sites go
but I wouldn't say it was a monopoly because there are numerous ways of
selling things on and off line which can be profitable. eBay can be a
convenient place to sell things but if it ceases to be competitive that will
show up fairly quickly.
That said I know people in the Antiques and collectables trade, and it does
seem from what people are telling me, there has been a bit of a market slow
down right across the board this year. It seems most people are waiting to
see how the months leading up the Christmas will go before shouting economic
recession. So if there is a general market slow down, I dare say in all
fairness to eBay it isn't entirely eBay's fault that things seem on a
downward slide there But if this is a general trend, sooner or later eBay
will have to review it's fees.
--
Amanda
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 29/07/2004
Dom Robinson
> In message <MPG.1b92a61f...@news.individual.net>, Dom Robinson
> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> writes
> >In article <Ky31DBDPp9JBFwF$@godwit.plus.com>, sp...@spam.spam.invalid says...
> >> >True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
> >> >that particular item.
> >> >If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders then there
> >> >is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
> >>
> >> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
> >> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
> >>
> >>
> >What a load of crap. I might start something at £20 but want to set a reserve
> >at £40. If I start at £40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20, people bid and
> >it creeps up to £40 if enough people bid that way (but not always)
>
> Yes, but if you start at £20 and you accept that the price won't always
> reach £40, then you are accepting that it could sell for £20. Why £20?
> Because that is the minimum price you're prepared to sell it for. So,
> until the bidding gets above £20 that's all the item is worth to you.
Wrong.
> >It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
> >things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
>
> I think it's rather more like a shop selling things for a fiver because
> it's half a tenner.
Wrong. Thanks for playing.
Dom Robinson
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:04:32 +0100, "Amanda Angelika"
>> <manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally I advise people to sign up to Ebid.co.uk unlike Feebay
>>> they don't charge any fees for standard listings or reserve price
>>> auctions IMO it's a better system all round. :)
>>> --
>>> Amanda
>> Yea right,
>> Sporting goods, fishing = Ebid 27 items Ebay 12,305 items
>> Bring back Yahoo auctions.
>
>I know Ebid only has about 200,000 members still it's growing fast,
Whatever, last month when I checked, there were 33 fishing items.
Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
<manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:36:12 GMT, Kevin F Stubbs
>> <kevin_f...@virgin.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Bring back Yahoo auctions.
>>>
>>> Hey...we actually agree on something :-))
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Kevin
>> I might be a bit hot headed at times but I do try to be reasonable.
>
>Well you can still list stuff on Yahoo auctions on the US site
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/ if you accept paypal and are prepared to post
>worlwide it's just another auction site out there which presents a
>competative selling opportunity, the listing fees are very reasonable. :)
Not quite the same though is it?
Amanda Angelika
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:51:28 +0100, "Amanda Angelika"
> <manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:04:32 +0100, "Amanda Angelika"
>>> <manic...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Personally I advise people to sign up to Ebid.co.uk unlike Feebay
>>>> they don't charge any fees for standard listings or reserve price
>>>> auctions IMO it's a better system all round. :)
>>>> --
>>>> Amanda
>>> Yea right,
>>> Sporting goods, fishing = Ebid 27 items Ebay 12,305 items
>>> Bring back Yahoo auctions.
>>
>> I know Ebid only has about 200,000 members still it's growing fast,
> Whatever, last month when I checked, there were 33 fishing items.
It's easy to be a big fish in a small pond :)
Well for sellers the fact there are thousands of items in a catogory ie
masses of competition doesn't mean any one is going to see your item that
tends to depend on how prominent you item(s) is/are and even if a site is
popular and has loads of traffic it doesn't garantee a fair share of that
traffic or of sales. If a site has hundreds of "featured items" for example
a standard listing can be left out in the cold.
So listing on less popular auction sites can potentially be a just as
profitable as eBay (particularly if you have nearly a whole catagory to
yourself) and with lower fees they have the potential to be even more
profitable.
They are good for buyers to. I bought a lovely Tag Heuer Ladies Watch
(replica) on eBid for £12= although a "cheap" copy it's a quality watch
certainly a real bargain at £12 inc P&P you'd be luck to buy a lump of
plastic for that even in Argos and this really looks like £1200 worth it has
a solid well built feel and really is waterproof to. Best bargain I've seen
in years :)
--
Amanda
---
Outgoing mail is certified Free of all known Germs and Viruses :)
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 29/07/2004
Bob Goddard
<kevin_f...@virgin.net> writes
I suggest you work your way back up this sub-thread, see what I was
replying to, and then reconsider who is talking cobblers here. I was
merely making a comment on the meaning of "true value" entirely outside
of the argument for or against the use of a reserve. Certainly an
auction, or even an eBay pseudo-auction, will start at less than the
seller is willing to accept if he sets a reserve. In which case the
reserve replaces start price as the "true value" from the seller's
perspective until someone bids more.
I don't *think* I'm talking cobblers here (though it's sometimes
difficult to be sure), so if you're reading it as cobblers then those
pesky little shoemakers are probably sneaking in at some point between
your ears.
Bob Goddard
>In article <jKg$94HeOU...@godwit.plus.com>, sp...@spam.spam.invalid says...
>> In message <MPG.1b92a61f...@news.individual.net>, Dom Robinson
>> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> writes
>> >In article <Ky31DBDPp9JBFwF$@godwit.plus.com>,
>> >sp...@spam.spam.invalid says...
>> >> >True market value only works if there is more than one person bidding on
>> >> >that particular item.
>> >> >If its something less common that may not find multiple bidders
>> >> >then there
>> >> >is a risk of it going for less than its worth.
>> >>
>> >> But there's no risk of it selling for less than the starting price -
>> >> which should never be less than it's worth to the seller.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >What a load of crap. I might start something at £20 but want to set
>> >a reserve
>> >at £40. If I start at £40, no-one bids, but if I start at £20,
>> >people bid and
>> >it creeps up to £40 if enough people bid that way (but not always)
>>
>> Yes, but if you start at £20 and you accept that the price won't always
>> reach £40, then you are accepting that it could sell for £20. Why £20?
>> Because that is the minimum price you're prepared to sell it for. So,
>> until the bidding gets above £20 that's all the item is worth to you.
>
>Wrong.
True, I had failed to notice that you'd introduced a reserve price into
the equation. I was more than somewhat knackered at the time. But the
principle is the same; until someone bids more, the item has no more
value to you than the minimum you are prepared to accept for it.
>
>> >It's a psychological thing to get custom, much the same as shops selling
>> >things for £9.99 because it's not quite a tenner.
>>
>> I think it's rather more like a shop selling things for a fiver because
>> it's half a tenner.
>
>Wrong.
Well, it seems to work for Sainsbury's.
>Thanks for playing.
BOGOF.
Dom Robinson
> >Thanks for playing.
>
> BOGOF.
>
Now you've got me thinking of those annoying windows adverts:
"I say, you buy one you get one free!!!" :)