"....in 22% of auctions, where there was proxy bid placed, the final selling 
price of the item did not max out the proxy bid."

It begs the question, "How does Ebay know what a maximum proxy bid was?"
I would think that should be private information. If that information were 
available to a seller, a seller might always max out the final price through 
insider "shill bidding."
Is it OK as long as the artificial bidding is done by Ebay's corporate sibling 
eShill? 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Richard Halegua Comic Art 
  To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 1:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [MOPO] eBay is doubling and tripling bid increments


  I loved this part Helmut:

  "eBay's transaction team will be conducting two tests to our site on bid 
increments. There was analysis done where in 22% of auctions, where there was 
proxy bid placed, the final selling price of the item did not max out the proxy 
bid. There will be two variants running and two control groups. The first 
variant test will increment the bid increment by 2x the current increment and 
the second test variant will increase the bid amount by 3x the current 
increment."


  between postal fees going up, ebay fees slapping sellers, and large bid 
increments.. where's the love? 
  Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
  ___________________________________________________________________
  How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
  Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
  In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
  The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

         Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
   ___________________________________________________________________
              How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
                                    
       Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
            In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
                                    
    The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

Reply via email to