Talk:Auction sniping

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from eSnipe was copied or moved into Auction sniping. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

eBay partner networks prohibits Sniping

eBay no longer allows for sniping (effectively via their control of partner networks that limits who can use the "placeOffer" API call)

the current eBay API to place an offer/bid requires a token granted after their "partner network" approval review (http://developer.ebay.com/devzone/xml/docs/Reference/eBay/PlaceOffer.html#PartnerNetworkApproval)

You need to abide by their T&S (https://epn.ebay.com/PublisherRegCC) where one of their clauses states: -

- Prohibited behaviors
-   The following behaviors are prohibited for all participants in the Network:
-   Sniping. You may not promote the Network through any Software Application that provides, or purports to provide, sniping functionality; that automatically places bids on behalf of users; or that automatically makes purchases on behalf of users.

So officially they may allow the sniping, but practically - they have removed the ability to do sniping using their API. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.164.50 (talk) 02:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Merge

Well sniper bid was a poor and obscure name and this is better. Both articles are rarely edited so I merged them myself. I also kept all information. The articles--okay now just one article--needs to be cleaned up, though. DyslexicEditor 08:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sellers generally object to bid sniping

Source? Kat, Queen of Typos 08:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As an eBay seller since Nov 1999 I actively encourage sniping, indeed I would prefer all potential buyers to snipe to maximize prices achieved.

Sniping does not disadvantage any bidder who decides the maximum value and then places a bid at that level. Bidders who object to sniping do so because they are less likely to win an auction 'on the cheap'.

--Bialystok (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that sellers dislike sniping has been unsourced since the above post three years ago, I'm removing it. 152.91.9.219 (talk) 05:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proxy Bidding as Antidote to Sniping

I would like to see someone address the following point in the article. I'm not an expert so I don't feel comfortable adding this information myself.

Properly used, proxy bidding is an antidote to sniping. If I am willing to pay up to $10 for an item, I'll bid that much. If someone snipes and pays $11, then I think they've overpaid.

If I thought it was OK to pay $11 for an item, then I would bid that much to start with. Using this approach there is no value in sniping and no need to worry about being outbid or sniped. The sniper has overpaid in my opinion if they take my item away.

If you have an abundance mentality, then there is no problem with going on to the next auction for the same item and bidding $10 there. Eventually I'll get the item at my price, (unless I'm wrong about its true value in which case I'll bid higher next time.) Erik 18:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad link deleted JudyJohn 23:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erik, you are almost correct. The problem here is that our sense of worth of an item is never a hard line, in fact it's often quite fuzzy. Therefore if the item is relatively rare, it probably isn't overpriced at an extra 10%. But then what about another 10%, and then another 10%?... you see the problem. If someone is bid sniping, you won't get a chance to reconsider whether it's worth that extra 10%. However, you could imagine hypothetical 'nibbles' by another bidder and compare them to your estimated maximum before finalising your maximum bid. Dreadpirate Roberts 08:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auction Sniper, a subsidiary of eBay?

I had always heard that Auction Sniper themselves were a small part of eBay. I have no proof of course, just rumours but maybe someone knows of a source? The one thing I can say for fact is that if you snipe something at say $20.02 and the person has a proxy bid in for $20.01 YOU will win, unlike using your own bid at eBay which makes you go their next price choice.Hilljayne 06:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hilljayne (talk • contribs) 06:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC). Your bidding scenario is incorrect. If the proxy bid is $20.01 and you happened to b id $20.02 you will be the high bidder for $20.02. Of course anyone looking at the bidding history will be able to tell that you will be out bid next time someone enters any bid.[reply]

Sniping software and services

For those who came here looking for auction sniping programs, there are plenty of them if you look in the old versions of this article. I dont want to get in the whole debate of why they were taken out. Just look around and you will be enlightened. --Chrisdab 03:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sniping converts English auction to sealed bid auction

It appears to me that if sniping is practiced universally, the effect is to change eBay's English ('normal) auction with proxy bidding into a sealed bid auction where the winner pays slightly more than the second placed bid. 128.232.250.254 12:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that the same thing? Maproom (talk) 17:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

eBay's auctions are NOT English auctions, they are rather a modified second price (Vickrey) auction. It is the partial unsealing of the bids that only makes it appear to those who do not know better to be an English (outcry ascending bid) auction. The winning bid on an eBay auction is the highest bid, not the last bid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.20.193.46 (talk) 19:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main point is still true: With sniping eBay becomes a sealed auction. 82.26.180.172 (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roth and Ockenfels

The (Roth and Ockenfels, 2000) NBER paper is still a working paper rather than published. It would be good to find an alternate, published source.Cretog8 (talk) 00:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorites paradox

I don't follow the recent addition about Sorites paradox. Is there a reference to someone who explains it more thoroughly? Is it something that can be briefly explained in this article (the connection via the Sorites paradox article isn't extremely enlightening.) Thanks! Cretog8 (talk) 04:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC) What is the highest you'll pay? If 1,000 why not 1,001. If 1,001 why not 1,002... QuentinUK (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Hello I just noticed that the the reference for the section about Sorites paradox was added as an external link in the main text of the page instead as a reference. I have now fixed this. Callum.moore (talk) 05:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I encourage sniping!

Sniping is the only way to win an eBay auction these days. I just hope eBay USA will not ban sniping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.80.56.78 (talk) 04:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sniping is preferred by professional traders. Since they know the price that an item can be resold for they can set up a bid below this with enough margin to make a profit on resale. They do not have to sit by the computer during the closing moments of an auction to place their final bids. It is not the only way to win. If you know what a dealer will be able to re-sell an item for just bid higher than that and you'll win.QuentinUK (talk) 18:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deterrents

This section is far too long - it represents about 50 percent of the entire article. The result is that (intended or not) it biases the article, giving the impression that auction sniping is undesirable. 92.234.49.13 (talk) 22:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly shows that Final Bid Extension is the way to go as it allows the price to go very high. (A slight disadvantage is that the seller has to wait, but it would be worth it with a bid increment being say 10%) 194.207.86.26 (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paper

Here is a paper which shows the best way to bid for equivalent items being sold by different sellers. It is to snipe on a large number of them at below what the item is worth. That way you increase your chance of winning an auction and being able to resell the item at a profit. " the optimal bid in auction i is equal to the bidder’s valuation multiplied by the probability of not winning any of the other auctions." http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/12586/1/gtdt06.pdf QuentinUK (talk) 00:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links is an advert?

The External Links section contains a single link to a pay-per-auction-win sniper tool. I think it should either be removed on the basis it is virtually an advert or the section extended to include other competing services. --91.125.128.36 (talk) 19:11, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in March 2012. Further details are available here.

University project

Hello I am looking at updating this page for a university assignment which is due in a few weeks. More information can be found about this assigmnet here Psychology_of_Internet_Behaviour. Callum.moore (talk) 22:58, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be linking to this page from Online Auctions and writing a small amount about sniping on that page as well as looking at making some revisions on this page. As it will be for an assessed assignment I would greatly appreciate any feedback as one of the criteria I am assessed on is my interaction with the wikipedia community. Callum.moore (talk) 20:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shill bidding

This section reads entirely about shill bidding with a sense to the porxy bid paradigm implemneted by ebay (especially the part at the end about the mutual cancellation of bidding and free relisting credit) and not to shill bidding as a whole which just applies to 3rd parties whose only intention it is to drive up the price of the action without winning it. Would sniping actually do anything about shills who only intend to raise the price of an item to just below what they believe to be a fair price for the item making sure that the item doesn't sell for much under what they consider to be a fair price? Callum.moore (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General Clean up

As noted by the notification at the top of the article, The article requires some clean up to bring it inline with expected standards. One thing that I have noticed is there were serveral links to ebay when the manual of style states that in general a link should only appear once on each page. As such I have removed all but the first link to ebay. Also does ebay need to be mentioned this many times? I don't think it actually adds to the article that every time online auction is mentioned it is followed with "such as ebay". Callum.moore (talk) 05:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have now removed the unnceessary mentioning of ebay after most occurances of term online auction as it added nothing to the understanding of the subject and served only to give the impression that ebay is only online auction site. Callum.moore (talk) 19:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Objections to sniping in the context of auctions with no automated bidding

The article concludes that objections to sniping are only "a subjective reaction to losing an auction for the usual reason of not bidding enough, than a reaction to a 'dirty trick'." However, this analysis (and the article as a whole) fails to account for sniping in online auctions without automated bidding. This has become normal now because of auctions in social media platforms. In this context the reasoning behind the objections being merely a subjective reaction falls apart, and it's logical that bid sniping is a negative both for the seller and for other bidders. For this reason there is often an "anti-snipe" in such autions. This should be included in the article. I don't have a source for it. The only part of what I just wrote that could be contended against is that auctions without automated bidding are normal. The rest follows logically and can't be disputed. 2001:4643:1480:0:5454:4A8C:7A99:7377 (talk) 09:34, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]