21 Dec
2000
21 Dec
'00
2:11 p.m.
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:05:01PM -0800, Eric J. Korpela (korpela(a)ellie.ssl.berkeley.edu)
wrote:
On December
21, Aaron Nabil wrote:
I don't think this invalidates the point Aaron made. In fact it validates
it. Enter several hundred bucks for your maximum and you won't have to
snipe. If it goes above that, well, it was more than you were willing to
pay. What's the problem? If I can offer advise, use the proxy system.
Enter the amount maximum
amount you are willing to pay. You have absolutely, irrevocably defused
ANY danger of sniping.
If the item is commonly available through other sources, sure, I
agree. [...] my definition of "maximum" is a very subjective thing...
and may have nothing to do with the "street value" of the item.
[...]
. I'd pay several hundred bucks for a pdp11/34a in a
heartbeat on eBay. Why? Because I've been looking for one for a LONG
time [...] From what I see, the problem is in finding a foolproof
way in which to
determine that maximum. If I think that the market value of
something
is, say $100, and I really want it, I might bid $200. If I come back
to look at the auction and see that it's $300, I might re-evaluate my
initial valuation based on that.
It's just another example of incomplete information, which becomes a
problem when the incompleteness is imbalanced between parties.
To fix eBay would be to find something that doesn't lead to these
imbalances (which lead to market distortion in one direction or
another, since the price-setters will be behaving irrationally).
-Rich
--
------------------------------ Rich Lafferty ---------------------------
Sysadmin/Programmer, Instructional and Information Technology Services
Concordia University, Montreal, QC (514) 848-7625
------------------------- rich(a)alcor.concordia.ca ----------------------