Question
eBay sued in California by Pennsylvania man who charges that eBay illegally forces up prices when certain high bidders raise their maximum bid to guard against last-minute offers... Attorney of Pennsylvania man apparently alleges shill bidding and thus unlawful profits from the increased fees to it and PayPal... also claims required restitution would run in "excess of tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars during the past four years."
http://tinyurl.com/3peeb
Answer
Wow there are so many ways to "almost" steal. Took me a while to figure out what this fellow was accusing eBay of but when it finally clicked I was amazed. I wonder if anyone was aware of this happening. I wasn't but I'm kind of slow. I agree with him it's theft.
Reminds me of Mennen after-shave making the hole bigger in the bottle 20 or so years ago. I had used it my entire life, and started noticing too much was coming out when I shook it. Then I learned some high placed exec got a couple million bonus for suggesting the change and I haven't used it since. It increased their sales more than 500% the first year! I know they weren't stealing from me but somehow it didn't seem right so I switched.
Think of the hundreds of scams going on like this every day we're not aware of. Sigh.
Thanks for the post dstuber.
liveinhope
Answer
I'm not clear on this. Is he saying he believes that ebay itself is placing underbids when it sees that certain high bidders have raised their proxies?
How do you prove something like that.
Answer
the disadvantage of being the big kahuna
everyone wants a piece of you
here goes more of our fees to pay for legal eagles in nonsensical lawsuits.
Answer
I think this is right.
Bidder bids 1.65
Second bidder comes along and bids 1.50
Bidders receives notice about Proxy Bid and raises his bid to 2.00
The regular increments are .25 at that level, so,even though the 2nd bidder has not bid again, ebay bumps Bidder #1's bid up to 1.75 even though he would have won it at 1.65.
That could be huge if you think about millions of auctions ending every day.
Say 10% of the ending bids were raised by .01-.24 (that's just in the low range). What about the upper bids where increments are in the $$$.
EBay only increases bids when bidders have raised their maximums and when the prior top bid was between bidding increments. For example, bidding increments on items priced between $100 and $249.99 is $2.50. Durzy says eBay discloses such information on its Web site.
I have no idea how many auctions end a day, but if 1% of 4 mil bids were bumped up .12, that would be 4,800 a day or 1,752,000 a year
No small potatos there!
Just think what those numbers are it was 1.50?
Sheila
#142
Answer
The man's bid was up to $111.00. He had originally put in a maximum of $112.00. eBay sent an email informing him he would be out-bid if another bid was placed, because bid increments at this level are $2.50, so the next bid would be $112.50.
So the fellow increased his max bid to $112.50 to prevent this.
eBay immediately raised HIS bid $1.50 to $112.50 even though there were no more bids. (To meet the bid-increment requirement of $2.50.)
Had he not followed eBay's advice he would have won anyway with a bid of $111.00.
I know I'm not explaining this very well but eBay effectively ripped him off for a buck and a half. Probably not technically illegal but kind of an "icky" thing to do on eBay's part IMHO.
liveinhope
Answer
Does anyone have one of the emails that ebay sends in regard to this?
Sheila
Answer
Although eBay claims on its Web site that it is “not an auctioneer” because it does not control the final price of an item and does not possess the products being sold, California laws governing auctions and auctioneers clearly extend to eBay’s electronic bidding system and eBay’s employees and agents, Kathrein said.
The suit says eBay has failed to file a required bond with the California Secretary of State; violated the state Auction Act by failing to disclose its use of shill bidding, by not allowing the retraction of a bid once placed and by placing undisclosed bids on behalf of the seller. The company also has violated the state’s Consumers’ Legal Remedy Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law, the complaint says.
If you purchased goods or services through eBay between February 16, 2001 and today, and are listed as both of the last two bidders in the auction you may qualify to be part of this lawsuit. Contact the eBay Case Administrator at (415) 288-4545, or via e-mail at ebaycase*lerachlaw.com
How can we go back and look at auctions that we won over the last 4 years to see if we were listed as both of the last two bidders in the auction when eBay doesn't archive them?
Answer
Originally Posted by liveinhope
The man's bid was up to $111.00. He had originally put in a maximum of $112.00. eBay sent an email informing him he would be out-bid if another bid was placed, because bid increments at this level are $2.50, so the next bid would be $112.50.
So the fellow increased his max bid to $112.50 to prevent this.
eBay immediately raised HIS bid $1.50 to $112.50 even though there were no more bids. (To meet the bid-increment requirement of $2.50.)
Had he not followed eBay's advice he would have won anyway with a bid of $111.00.
I know I'm not explaining this very well but eBay effectively ripped him off for a buck and a half. Probably not technically illegal but kind of an "icky" thing to do on eBay's part IMHO.
liveinhope
More than likely the bidding went something like this...
A (the bidder who is suing) put in a proxy bid of $111.00. This bid was in excess of the minimum bid needed to record the bid...for the sake of argument let's say that when he placed his bid the bid was sitting at $100...his $111 outbid the previous bidder and his became top bidder at $105.
B comes along and enters a proxie bid of $110. A's proxie is higher so B is immediately outbid and the proxie system enters A's next bid so that he remains the top bidder. Problem is...the proxie system wants to enter a bid of $112.50 because the bid increment in $2.50 at this level, yet can only enter $111 because that is A's top proxie.
A gets the "you may be outbid" notice from eBay and decides to up his proxie..he goes in and puts in a bid for $150. the proxie system recognizes the bid and finishes the bid increment it was unable to do earlier when his proxie was $111..so the bid is raised to $112.50.
When A came back to up his proxie he would have been unable to enter a bid increase of less than $2.50, the system would not let him enter a bid for less than the bid increment, so his new proxie bid had to be more than $112.50.
The proxie system has worked this way since at least April of 98, when I first signed up with eBay...I don't know if that is the way it has always been but I believe it has.
Ebay explains this on the eBay site
Answer
The proxie system has worked this way since at least April of 98, when I first signed up with eBay...I don't know if that is the way it has always been but I believe it has.
Understood completely Sharronn, but I still don't feel the bidder should have had to cough up the extra buck and a half. This part of the program should have been repaired/changed and it hasn't been. That's the "icky" part. Like the man said.... a million here, a million there, before you know it we're talkin real money.
I don't know the bid increments on high-dollar items like cars, trucks, heavy equipment etc., but if the system works the same with them a bidder could be out several dollars.
I don't think I would have gone so far as to file a suit over $1.50, but I don't blame the fellow for being upset.
I do realize it would take a fair amount of work to change the proxy bidding program. We're only talking pennys, and it seems petty to even be talking about it.
This fellow has probably had it up to "here" with similar situations as have a lot of us. Ever notice in the business and corporate world the "rounding-off" is never to the customer's advantage? Check your gas and electric bills.