TOPIC: Going back to fewer auctions/non competing auctions?

Matthew Hayward wrote: A few thoughts:

1. It is simply not true the that “before the end of last year we almost always had people coordinate 8k auctions so there want more than one running at a time.”

You can go look at the history of auction threads to see this is true, and can also see it by reading the prior thread on this.

2. In my opinion, the only valid reason to support a system of limitations on forum auctions is for some reason that substantially benefits auctions bidders and buyers.

There are words for when a bunch of sellers form an agreement to cooperate, independent of what buyers want: cartel, collusion. There is also a reason why these terms have a negative connotation.

3. Bidders / buyers are showing their preferences by where they bid.

Auctions fail for exactly one reason: bidders did not find the offering interesting of valuable enough.

No one “owes you” your “turn” to run an auction.

No one is preventing you from running an auction whenever you want.

Auctions are not a limited resource that should be divided up among the sellers, for the benefit of the sellers.

Before endorsing a plan of seller collusion please state clearly how buyers benefit from this plan.

4. There are substantial benefits as a buyer for using the same auctioneer over and over:

* combined shipping
* trust based on demonstrated past operating of fair auctions and past fulfillment
* familiarity with bidding procedures and rules - which in the past has caused a lot of hard feelings when a buyer and seller aren’t in alignment

5. There are many different auction formats. Limiting auctions to one at a time presents the risk of stalling auctions in the forum as one with an format that buyers find unappealing drags on, blocking auctions that are more appealing.

6. BE NICE. BE COOL.

Trying to enforce made up rules on other forumites by disparagement, bullying, or treating them worse would not be nice, and would not be cool.


7. Constructive suggestion: if sellers really like this idea, no one is stopping you from:

* forming a completely voluntary, 100% opt in “guild of mono sellers” who agree that among their guild to run only one guild auction at a time, bound by whatever other procedures voluntary guild members adopt

* this guild should have as a core bedrock principle that absolutely no disparagement, bulling, or different treatment of other non-guild sellers, or buyers who bid in other auctions will be tolerated by the guild of any guild members

* this sellers guild could announce their approach and appeal to buyers, rather than trying to enforce their ideas on other sellers

* then buyers can choose whether they like the way members of the guild run things or not

Speaking for myself, I would bid in auctions put up by anyone - guild or not - whose structure met my preferences as a buyer.

Also speaking for myself, I would tend to avoid auctions of sellers who cast aspersions on other auctioneers for failing to behave the way those sellers dictate.

I agree 100% on points 1-6. #7 is you being you I guess. Well spoken written.

Utaku Soto wrote: Honestly, not really other than helping someone new out that might not normally do an auction and sharing the auction opportunities with others.

During the preorder cycle (when it was first introduced), it also gave people a way to continue to carry bids over from auction to auction, as well as combine shipping across multiple auctions while still supporting different community members that would sponsor auctions.

Larger goal was to help build a good reputation with the community and become a trusted resource that was part of the fabric of the TD community. I hope that has kind of happened, but as we can tell by this thread and discord, not all would agree.

Utaku Soto’s auctions are well run, with good communication and quick fulfillment. I’ve had only good experiences with them.

Don’t let a few forumites who have this particular hobby horse grievance that somehow forum buyers owe them a “turn” at running an auction bother you.

I used to be a Realtor. We were trained:

When talking to a seller, tell them that our experience would help them get top dollar for their home.
When talking to a buyer, tell them that our experience would help them pay bottom dollar for the home they wanted.

Both statements cannot be true at the same time, especially since we took 6-7% out of every transaction. So coming up with a scheme that helps sellers get top price for their tokens while helping buyers pay as little as possible? Not going to happen. Limiting auctions to run serially instead of in parallel might help sellers. You can pretend it is also in the best interest of buyers, if you like, but limiting competition never is.

To MH's point - sellers colluding to limit the supply of tokens by scheduling their auctions is probably illegal under fair trade and anti-trust laws. I don't the Feds would come after a handful of individuals selling collectibles for a game that 99% of the population never heard of, but just because you get away with something doesn't make it right.

I used to buy/resell Onyx sets. I don't think I ever did more than two a year. Anything more than that felt greedy. Now I don't do any, so I guess I no longer have a dog in this fight. But if you aren't able to sell out all the auctions you want to do, then maybe the problem is there are too many auctions and some of you folks need to cut back. The only solution to over-saturating the market is for sellers to stop. But most of you won't.

www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tragedy-of-the-commons.asp

Can someone explain to me how separate people colluding to run their separate auctions serially is worse ethically than individuals colluding to run their auctions serially through a single face person?

Because to me that is an awfully fine hair to be splitting.

I see an assumption here that I don’t think is accurate. That assumption is that the auctioneer is looking to profit from running the auction. If there were no auctions available, I would likely run one or more just to get access to certain components of an 8k and as a service to the community. The lightning auction type that is frequently run doesn’t leave room for significant profit in the first place (basically a shot at random URs and a GT) and we have seen plenty of augmented auctions and auctions that also sell the random URs that limit any potential profit to nearly nothing.

If there is no significant profit motive from the sellers, then basically the only intent would be to service the community / buyers. Perhaps a queue would, or would not, help, but splitting bids across multiple auctions is likely not ideal

Fiddy wrote: Can someone explain to me how separate people colluding to run their separate auctions serially is worse ethically than individuals colluding to run their auctions serially through a single face person?

Because to me that is an awfully fine hair to be splitting.

Agree completely - In one camp we have folks that want to get a shot to run an auction to have a chance to get a GT and in the other camp we have a group using a facilitator in order to get GTs.

I think where the facilitator model becomes a problem is if they end up with a monopoly of GHC GTs and set a new higher price for GTs. Not saying this going to happen, but I think that would be the concern.

As a buyer from both camps I just wanted to see a steady stream of dragon orbs, which I can tell you that I paid a higher price for in the facilitator auctions (~$405 an orb) and now that I know about rolling highest bids that makes sense. Had I known that I was going to pay more would I? - probably, it let me complete the elder transmute at Skullcon. Going forward though I will be more cautious with my max bids in the facilitator auctions.

Quick items:

1.) In regards to the question on collusion, I think the point was there is a difference if a group comes together to agree to limit the number of auctions vs. a facilitator offering help running auction but not limiting them to running auctions simultaneously (ie Wade mentioned being the first sponsor and also ran multiple independent auctions, Flic also falls into this category). I am just trying to offer this as a service and not as a bottleneck.

2.) In regards to rollover bidding, one thing to note was this is offered to all bidders (high or low) and was a mix in who continued to carry over from one to the next. Was more used during the preorder period when they were coming fast and furious than now, but do still have bidders that carry over speculative bids from auction to auction.

Utaku Soto wrote: Quick items:

1.) In regards to the question on collusion, I think the point was there is a difference if a group comes together to agree to limit the number of auctions vs. a facilitator offering help running auction but not limiting them to running auctions simultaneously (ie Wade mentioned being the first sponsor and also ran multiple independent auctions, Flic also falls into this category). I am just trying to offer this as a service and not as a bottleneck.

2.) In regards to rollover bidding, one thing to note was this is offered to all bidders (high or low) and was a mix in who continued to carry over from one to the next. Was more used during the preorder period when they were coming fast and furious than now, but do still have bidders that carry over speculative bids from auction to auction.

The more I think about rollovers the more I am displeased. It feels like I was bidding against a spreadsheet in your auctions and not real people. Going forward I would ask that you disclose that your auctions have an inside track (rollovers) and an outside track (general public). Your auctions are not standard lightning auctions and shouldn’t be listed as such on the forums.

OrionW wrote:

Utaku Soto wrote: Quick items:

1.) In regards to the question on collusion, I think the point was there is a difference if a group comes together to agree to limit the number of auctions vs. a facilitator offering help running auction but not limiting them to running auctions simultaneously (ie Wade mentioned being the first sponsor and also ran multiple independent auctions, Flic also falls into this category). I am just trying to offer this as a service and not as a bottleneck.

2.) In regards to rollover bidding, one thing to note was this is offered to all bidders (high or low) and was a mix in who continued to carry over from one to the next. Was more used during the preorder period when they were coming fast and furious than now, but do still have bidders that carry over speculative bids from auction to auction.

The more I think about rollovers the more I am displeased. It feels like I was bidding against a spreadsheet in your auctions and not real people. Going forward I would ask that you disclose that your auctions have an inside track (rollovers) and an outside track (general public). Your auctions are not standard lightning auctions and shouldn’t be listed as such on the forums.

What’s the difference between the auctioneer sending you a PM saying “in my last auction, you bid 50 on a ring of the 5th circle. Would you like to bid that again?” Vs me watching the auctions and bidding 50 the second they open?

Matthew Hayward wrote: A few thoughts:

1. It is simply not true the that “before the end of last year we almost always had people coordinate 8k auctions so there want more than one running at a time.”

You can go look at the history of auction threads to see this is true, and can also see it by reading the prior thread on this.

2. In my opinion, the only valid reason to support a system of limitations on forum auctions is for some reason that substantially benefits auctions bidders and buyers.

There are words for when a bunch of sellers form an agreement to cooperate, independent of what buyers want: cartel, collusion. There is also a reason why these terms have a negative connotation.

3. Bidders / buyers are showing their preferences by where they bid.

Auctions fail for exactly one reason: bidders did not find the offering interesting of valuable enough.

No one “owes you” your “turn” to run an auction.

No one is preventing you from running an auction whenever you want.

Auctions are not a limited resource that should be divided up among the sellers, for the benefit of the sellers.

Before endorsing a plan of seller collusion please state clearly how buyers benefit from this plan.

4. There are substantial benefits as a buyer for using the same auctioneer over and over:

* combined shipping
* trust based on demonstrated past operating of fair auctions and past fulfillment
* familiarity with bidding procedures and rules - which in the past has caused a lot of hard feelings when a buyer and seller aren’t in alignment

5. There are many different auction formats. Limiting auctions to one at a time presents the risk of stalling auctions in the forum as one with an format that buyers find unappealing drags on, blocking auctions that are more appealing.

6. BE NICE. BE COOL.

Trying to enforce made up rules on other forumites by disparagement, bullying, or treating them worse would not be nice, and would not be cool.


7. Constructive suggestion: if sellers really like this idea, no one is stopping you from:

* forming a completely voluntary, 100% opt in “guild of mono sellers” who agree that among their guild to run only one guild auction at a time, bound by whatever other procedures voluntary guild members adopt

* this guild should have as a core bedrock principle that absolutely no disparagement, bulling, or different treatment of other non-guild sellers, or buyers who bid in other auctions will be tolerated by the guild of any guild members

* this sellers guild could announce their approach and appeal to buyers, rather than trying to enforce their ideas on other sellers

* then buyers can choose whether they like the way members of the guild run things or not

Speaking for myself, I would bid in auctions put up by anyone - guild or not - whose structure met my preferences as a buyer.

Also speaking for myself, I would tend to avoid auctions of sellers who cast aspersions on other auctioneers for failing to behave the way those sellers dictate.

If only I had read this first.

I'd still have cancelled it, frankly, threads like this are why I cancelled it. There is no evasion this monk could have for threads like this. Rule 6 indeed should be the rule, and yet, and yet.

Rob F wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Utaku Soto wrote: No worries at all! I started running sponsored auctions this year during the preorder runs as a way to help people access the benefits of running an auction that either didn’t have the time, or weren’t comfortable running an auction on their own.

In a sponsored auction, I connected with the sponsor to set the funding amount and then I run the auction like my other auctions (including ordering and repackaging), however the sponsor then funds the gap and gets all the random PYPs as well as any Golden Tickets. I also record the openings on video for the sponsor to ensure transparency on what arrives.

So far I’ve run 6 sponsored auctions this year and have had 3 Golden Tickets for the sponsors which has been awesome! I have 2 more people in queue and will be running them back to back this month and then opening it back up to the community! New sponsors will get priority over members who have already sponsored to try and give more people access to the benefits of running auctions.

Hope that helps!

So, do you get anything from these sponsored auctions?
...other than solidifying your status as the auction guy?

Valid question.

The key reasons people run auctions is twofold:
1. They are planning $8k orders for themselves and have a good deal of extras they can’t use (that is why I tend to run one per year); or
2. Every $8K order will have extra URs (8-10)(though, I did get 12 one year) and a chance at a Golden Ticket. The secondary market for GTs is generally over $1K in resale value. So, if someone funds $7,500 of $8k costs and sells everything except for the extras, they only need the extra URs to be worth over $60 each to break even. The GTs, for all they don’t use personally, become a profit stream. The downside to that is it puts a good number of GTs in a single person’s hands rather than more distributed among the player base. I can say my first GT was from a $500 order (2 $500 orders) and I had no clue what it was. It was eye opening and definitely encouraged me to collect more. Now I’m 2 RoSP piece from having every non-unique UR+ printed (excepting the ring of three wishes - shameless plug PM me if you have RoSP 1 or 2 available for trade/sale!)

Reason 2 is why people run multiple auctions. It is also a good reason to have many different people running auctions as long as their auctions are reasonably well thought out (typical ebay type format, etc.). It can be a good way for newer players to fill out their collections - those random URs can quickly fill out someone’s collections.

Endgame - you aren’t correct that it can’t be a profit motive. At worst, you break even. If you get above average URs you clear a couple hundred dollars. If you get a GT you don’t use, you can clear over $1K. I don’t begrudge someone making a few hundred dollars as it can be a lot of work. If someone runs a ton, though, it can definitely be monetized. It won’t make enough to be a day job but it likely isn’t a loss (unless it is designed poorly.)

I don’t think we have ever had a significant problem on responsiveness, etc with anyone running auctions. If that was a problem many years ago, though, I wouldn’t know. I tend to tell people on my annual auction that I will respond within 1-2 days for each bid. On the other side, though, I don’t set minimums and throw in extra tokens for everyone who orders anything. I wouldn’t have a negative critique on anyone that has run auctions this year that I’ve seen (other than suggesting to make the pseudonyms fun.)

Fred

Endgame wrote:

OrionW wrote:

Utaku Soto wrote: Quick items:

1.) In regards to the question on collusion, I think the point was there is a difference if a group comes together to agree to limit the number of auctions vs. a facilitator offering help running auction but not limiting them to running auctions simultaneously (ie Wade mentioned being the first sponsor and also ran multiple independent auctions, Flic also falls into this category). I am just trying to offer this as a service and not as a bottleneck.

2.) In regards to rollover bidding, one thing to note was this is offered to all bidders (high or low) and was a mix in who continued to carry over from one to the next. Was more used during the preorder period when they were coming fast and furious than now, but do still have bidders that carry over speculative bids from auction to auction.

The more I think about rollovers the more I am displeased. It feels like I was bidding against a spreadsheet in your auctions and not real people. Going forward I would ask that you disclose that your auctions have an inside track (rollovers) and an outside track (general public). Your auctions are not standard lightning auctions and shouldn’t be listed as such on the forums.

What’s the difference between the auctioneer sending you a PM saying “in my last auction, you bid 50 on a ring of the 5th circle. Would you like to bid that again?” Vs me watching the auctions and bidding 50 the second they open?

Someone else might get their $50 bid in before you, if all bids come in after the auction opens. Which could matter since ties go to the first bidder.