Trab ski auction: your input wanted

Ski Trab Duo FreeRando Light

I want to let everyone know that we will be doing an auction right here on the forum for a brand new pair of Trab skis. The auction will happen sometime around the middle of November, and the skis should ship during the first week of December. The skis will come from Wasatch Ski Distribution as part of the TAY sponsorship program.

The pair of skis that will be up for auction is this year's model of the Duo FreeRando Light, about which I have heard very good reports from some local skiers (haven't skied them myself). The full details are available, but here are some quick specs:

• Dimensions: 112/110-79-96  (split tip)
• Weight: 1140 grams per ski = 5.0 lbs. per pair
• Features Trab's Patented I-Beam aramid honeycomb core wrapped in 50% carbon / 50% glass weave which produces exceptional liveliness and rebound while remaining extremely light and rigid, delivering a very energetic ride.
• Length: 171 guaranteed to be available; other lengths possible, subject to distributor availability at the time

I see that this thread has been getting a few views, and hopefully that signals some interest in these skis! One of my trusted forum advisors suggested that I elaborate a bit on this topic, so I will do that, and also ask for input from the membership.

First, more of an explanation about why TAY has a pair of Trab skis to auction (though, in reality, TAY will never see the skis). Mark (a year round streaker) at Wasatch Ski Distribution contacted me this summer after seeing the discussion about advertising on TAY, and said he was interested in being part of the sponsorship program. Instead of a cash payment, however, he wondered if a pair of Trab skis could substitute. I told him that what TAY really needed was cash to pay expenses, but that if I could turn the skis into cash this could work. Mark said that he had no objection to my doing so, and we thus came to an agreement that Wasatch Ski Distribution would be a sponsor for 12 months (and they were the first to commit). I had to make a choice of which Trab ski model, and after getting input from several local skiers, decided on the Duo FreeRando Lights as being the most likely to be widely desired by skiers who frequent the TRs.

How to turn the skis into the cash that TAY needs? I had seen on another web site that people would donate goods and services to the site, which would then run an auction, generating cash for the site. I thought that this sounded like a good way to deal with this pair of Trab skis - keep it simple, and keep it local (e.g. not on eBay). I also figured that with an auction it was likely that the final price would not reach the street price, let alone the MSRP, which would be fine with me  - no problem with someone getting a good deal.

Here's where I'd like to get your feedback. Do you think that an auction here on the TRs is a good way to deal with this pair of skis, or do you have other ideas which might be better? I'm mainly looking for a procedure that is simple and doesn't require a lot of time and bookkeeping on my part (thus a raffle would not be desirable from my point of view). If we do go with an auction, what about details - starting bid, bid increment, reserve, auction length?

All opinions are welcome, and thanks in advance for your input!

I think the lottery should be restricted to only people with over 760 posts. kidding

My 2 cents.
Goods and services might be too difficult to quantify as they may be diverse in nature,so I think it should be a straight money auction like eBay. Higgest bidder wins.

Straight auction, easily the best method. The problem is how to work that...

Silent auctions are easy, but they generally won't produce as much money - I'd go with a thread and a lock-out time. A standard auction could work, but you'd risk folks trying to snipe at the end. My suggestion is to have a public thread where you post your bid, but have the final bidder pay $10 over the second highest bid.

So if the bidding went like this:

Bob: $100
George: $250
Alice: $400
Mark: $450

Then Mark would pay $410. This would encourage everyone to bid the max they're willing to pay, and they wouldn't have to keep coming back to see if the bid is still good or not.

To avoid malicious bids to force the winner to pay more, nobody should be allowed to place a bid lower than the current high bid.

It's not perfect, but it seems easy and fair.

Scotsman, an eBay-type auction is what I was thinking. Winner pays money and gets skis shipped to them. I will never see the skis (unless I subsequently ski with the winner).

lordhedgie, I hadn't heard of this auction variation. I can see how it could be advantageous in reducing sniping, but wouldn't that only work if each person could only bid once? And even then, what's to stop someone from putting in their one bid at the last minute?

Is sniping really that bad? Everyone who does auctions must be used to it by now.

The auction would be thread-based: create the thread and have people post their bids in the thread by replying. Bid increment $10? Definitely have a specified end time, just like on eBay. I would want to set up the auction end time to fall at a prime time so that all the snipers could get in on the action (prime time for the TRs seems to be during the workday on Monday  ;D ). Payment by PayPal or check.

Thanks to both of you for your input - anyone else?

Personally, I find sniping extremely annoying, and don't participate in online auctions where it occurs. Others might be used to it, but those of us who don't neccessarily have access to a computer in the final seconds, or don't want to risk losing an item over a roll of the dice to see who gets the last bid in before the deadline... It just doesn't seem to be worth it to encourage it, not to mention the fact that it seems that sniping would lower the final bid amount by removing the ability of others to counter the snipe bid.

And no, it doesn't make it impossible to snipe -- and some people on eBay still do it anyway. It just makes it pointless to snipe.

The alternative system to protect against sniping is not to have a set end time, but a rolling bidding. For example, during a one-week period, skiers A, B, C, D, E, and F all place bids, with D having the highest bid. During the next day, A, B, C, and E (only) are offered the chance to top D's bid. If A and B raise thier bids, with A having the new highest bid, then the next day B and D (only) would have a chance to raise their bids again. And so on and so forth, where every day another who placed a losing bid the day before would have a chance to raise again.

The upside to this bidding system is it ensures the person willing to pay the most will get the item, AND ensures that you get the most possible money. The downside is there's no way to predict when it ends -- it ends when everyone eventually gives up and stops outbidding each other. In that sense it most closely resembles a live auction, where sniping is impossible as the auctioneer would just continue the process a little longer every time a new bid is placed, but on forums the auction takes much longer...

Mind you, I'm already up two pairs of skis this summer, so I'm unlikely to bid anyway.

A raffle wouldn't have sniping and I can afford a $20 raffle ticket as opposed to a few hundred in an auction. But then you'd have multiple money streams to manage...

...besides if 50 people joined in a raffle at $20/pop, you'd make too much money ; )

-Dave

Dave, yes, I think a raffle would be a hassle on my end. Plus, as I mentioned before, I'm not looking to make the absolute most possible on this - just hoping to at least match the advertising credit the skis represent, and if someone gets a good deal, that's great.

What about a variation on lordhedgie's rolling bidding idea: run a standard auction (7 days?) with a fixed closing time. Then, everyone who has made a bid is allowed to make one more bid over the next 24 hours (again, with a fixed end time). All last chance bidders would have an idea of where the final price was headed based on the action of the first 7 days. This last chance bid might work best to be "silent" - it could be done by PMing me with the final bid. This last chance method would seem to reduce the problem of sniping.

Any thoughts?

New, original, unique... I like it.

I also agree with Dave_R -- between my wife and I we've obtained four pairs of skis this summer, so I'm not really prepared to justify buying another pair right now. But a raffle... Heck, I could do that.

Aside from the bookkeeping hassle for me, I agree that a raffle would be a good way to go because it would allow people to participate who otherwise wouldn't (eg. lordhedgie, already has spent enough on skis this year). I thought I remembered that raffles might have some special regulations, so I checked WA gov websites, and this does seem to be the case.

Raffles are considered a form of gambling (game of chance) in this state, and therefore regulated. The RCW chapter is 9.46 , and the specific subsection for raffles is 9.46.0277 :
""Raffle," as used in this chapter, means a game in which tickets bearing an individual number are sold for not more than twenty-five dollars each and in which a prize or prizes are awarded on the basis of a drawing from the tickets by the person or persons conducting the game, when the game is conducted by a bona fide charitable or nonprofit organization, no person other than a bona fide member of the organization takes any part in the management or operation of the game, and no part of the proceeds thereof inure to the benefit of any person other than the organization conducting the game," [the emphasis is mine].

From UW website with info for student groups:
"Raffles are strictly regulated in the State of Washington under the Washington State Gambling Act. Only certain charitable or nonprofit organizations can conduct raffles without first obtaining a gambling license."

Because TAY is not a nonprofit or charitable organization, it looks like TAY would have to obtain a gambling license in order to lawfully conduct a raffle. This means that a raffle for the Trab skis is not going to work.

I like the modified lordhedgie auction that I described above. As far as I can figure, it would pretty much remove the issue of sniping from the auction process. I realize that it would prevent some (many?) people from participating compared to a raffle, but it seems like the only real way to get the skis to someone and cash to TAY.

I'd like to start getting an auction organized, but am still interested in opinions and possible alternatives.

Hmmm, after working on setting up a thread for this auction and trying to specify all of the details, I'm having some second thoughts about the "last chance" part of it. Adding this last chance extension adds considerable complexity, and all just to try to avoid last minute sniping, which people who have eBay experience should be used to by now.

With the last chance extension as I was imagining it (and described it above), I now see that the regular 7 day bidding period will not necessarily end with a price that gives good guidance for last chance bidders. That's because all someone has to do to qualify for a last chance bid is put in a bid at anytime during the 7 days. They don't have to keep coming back and upping their bid, which I think is what drives the price toward the limit of what the bidding population is willing to pay.

A way around this problem would be to offer the last chance bidding not to ALL previous bidders, but to only some top tier of them. For example, the top five bidders, or the top 25% of bidders, etc. This would force bidders to stay in the process if they wanted to make the cut and have a last chance, and seems like it would be more likely to result in a 7 day price that was a more accurate guide for what the final price might be. This arrangement, however, would then be likely to result in sniping to make the cut!

I can set up the auction with some kind of cut for last chance bidding, but I guess I'm wondering if this is really worth it versus just going with a straightforward auction and letting sniping occur?

I dunno Charles. I don't really think you're going to have to deal with malicious sniping activity here at TAY, we're all nice guys. I just worry about someone who isn't going to be around on the final day because, well, maybe it's snowing ;D. Left in the position of making a insanely high over-bid or just putting in a low bid and hoping to get lucky, I'd imagine most people would put in the low bid and just resign themselves to not winning. By giving people second chances, you're going to drive up the final price considerably.

I don't agree that eBay's made us all used to sniping -- if anything, eBay has greatly reduced my tolerance for it, since they've effectively made sniping pointless. While there is still occaisional sniping on eBay, it's idiotic. Place your maximum bid, and the computer does your bidding for you. If anyone complains that they got sniped, it's only because they were too dumb to read the instructions.

Alright, I've got a new idea... Run an auction eBay-style, where the winner pays one increment ($10) over the 2nd highest bid... But have bids placed privately through PM. Once a day you could post the current going price, which would give folks an idea of where bids ought to be, plus help drum up more interest in the bidding process.

I think that's the most fair way, although not the easiest. I can't think of any way to cheat by that method, and it seems like there is only a slight advantage to being around on the last day.

Mind you, my interest stems mostly from an interest in game theory. I love problems like this -- trying to find the fairest method of solving a complicated problem. Simplicity rarely enters my mind. Maybe an understanding of how many folks are bidding would help -- if only five TAY'ers plan to participate, then we may be able to rely on the good nature of TAY to just "be fair" about it. If we're going to have a hundred lurkers playing, well then, we might just see the worst half of a few of them. It only takes one stinker to ruin it...

* No offense to the lurkers intended -- many of them are great people. Just implying that a smaller closer-knit group is less likely to get upset at each other, or do things that might upset one another.

I appreciate all of your thoughts and suggestions on this question, lordhedgie. Your PM-based auction idea could work, but that means I have to be around every day, not just on the last day! And talk about the potential for cheating (not that I would ever participate in that, but the process wouldn't exactly be transparent). I'm leaning toward a traditional auction, mainly because I can't see any practical way around the sniping issue that can be worked out in a reasonable time (and I need to get this auction going).

When we are discussing eBay sniping, are we thinking about the same thing? Last time I was trying to get something on eBay was about 8 months ago. I'm pretty sure that automatic bidding (not sure the eBay term) had been in place for a while, and in my experience that has not eliminated sniping. In fact, my experience from participating in a number of auctions (with auto bidding in place) was that bids in the last minute always occurred, and I learned that if I wanted to be in the game I had to be online at the close and prepared to up my bid. It makes sense to me that there is an incentive to snipe. If my limit for an item is $200, and it looks like the winning bid is going to be $205, then by sniping I can get the item for just 5% more ($210) than I had originally targeted. For me, this is definitely within the range of value I can accurately assign to the item, so I'm inclined to up my bid a little beyond my target, win the auction, and be done.

I'm still not convinced that sniping is all that bad. Is sniping really "cheating"? It doesn't seem to break the auction rules. Sniping does necessitate that one be available at the end, but in a live auction the situation is pretty much the same, isn't it? Of course in a live auction there is no cutoff time, and that's where the "sniping" comes into play in an online auction.

You are right that there is no way to know how many people might bid on these skis, and also to know if new people might appear just to bid. I'm hoping that someone who's been around here for a while can score these skis (and I will be happy if they get a good deal) but there's no real way to make sure this is how things turn out.

You're right that online auctions created the sniping phenom, simply because a "real" auctioneer would just extend the auction.  I mentioned before you could emulate that in an on-line auction, but since all the potential buyers aren't logged in and bidding at the same time, the resulting auction would be lengthy, time-consuming (on your part), and complicated.

My view is that sniping is considered Harmful.  The goal of sniping is to get an item cheaper, ergo, sniping reduces the amount of money the auction generates.  In addition, sniping creates ill feelings on the part of bidders that lost auctions to snipers; they watch someone else buy something that they wanted, at a price they were willing to pay, simply because they were online at a later time.  When two snipers compete against each other, it turns into a coin flip to see who wins.

I'm not sure that I'm being clear on why I feel that eBay has "solved" sniping, since sniping obviously does occur on eBay still.  My view is simply that eBay has removed the incentive for sniping, and snipers are wasting thier efforts.  Those who are upset that they are sniped are simply not reading eBay's rules closely enough.  Here's why:

If you want to buy a used foo on eBay, you should decide how much you are willing to pay for that foo.  Let's say the foo is currently bidding for $40, but you know you can't buy that foo for less than $200 in the store.  So you decide you're willing to pay $150, and no more.  You should bid $150, and not less.

eBay will cast your bid as $41.  As other people bid up the price, eBay will automatically raise your bid to keep you as the highest bidder.  Let's say eBay bids you up to $100 going into the final seconds.  Your wife walks out in a teddy and demands you get off the computer, so you log off and head for the bedroom.

In the morning, you are shocked to discover that you didn't win.  Someone sniped you!  The only way a sniper could have won the auction, however, would have been to bid over $150.  So the sniper wins the foo for $155, and you end up empty handed.  But you shouldn't be upset, because to beat the sniper you would have had to pay $160 for a used foo, when you decided it was only worth $150.

So getting sniped may be a psychological shock when you discover you didn't win, but it means that either

(a) You bid less than you were willing to pay, which is provably a poor strategy on eBay, or
(b) Someone else was willing to pay more than you.

All of this goes way beyond the original point of the thread, but as long as Charles doesn't ban me, or at least tell me to shut up, I'll continue to interpret "Hot Air" and "Random Tracks" liberally.

lordhedgie, you won't be banned because you are on-topic for this thread, and I was the one who started this thread (and besides, this is not the kind of thing that starts me thinking about a ban).

Your sniping example is a good description of exactly what I've seen happen. But what if the "you" in the story declined his wife's invitation so that he could be ready to re-snipe at the last second? He sees the last minute bid come in at $155, and so with five seconds left he puts in his bid for $160 and wins the auction. He might look at things this way: paid 6.6% more than his original target, but didn't end up wasting all that time he invested in finding, researching, and pursuing the auction item. He's done - got what he wanted for a small premium over his original target. This is why I think there is a sort of built in incentive to snipe. Not that I like sniping, but I've seen it so much that it seems to be a standard part of the game now, and I view it as just another part of online auctions that has to be dealt with.

I'm not sure that I understand how the goal of sniping is to get an item cheaper. By definition sniping increases the price at the last minute, doesn't it? If sniping occurs but doesn't top the highest auto bid, it has still pushed up the final price. If the sniping does top the highest auto bid, then it has pushed the final price even higher. In your example, the seller got $155 rather than $150 (max auto bid), and in my re-snipe example, $160 rather than $150. I would think the seller would be happy that sniping occurred!

I suppose that a way to remove the most annoying aspect of sniping and make an online auction more like a live auction would be to have the end time automatically extended by a last minute bid. For example, "bidding closes at 1:30 pm or 15 minutes after the latest bid received later than 1:15 pm". A last second snipe would thus give everyone another 15 minutes to consider upping their bid. To stay in the game, one would have to be present at the end and keep at it until the extension expired, just like a live auction.

As a matter of fact, now that I think about it, this could work for the ski auction here, couldn't it? No admin action required, the bids are all public, and everyone can see if a bid made the time cutoff (every post is automatically time stamped when posted). There must be a flaw in this idea that I'm not seeing.

Charles, you're absolutely right that you could do a live auction as you describe. Thinking about it, it might be the best way to go in your situation. The only hassle then is picking a time good for everyone -- not many people will dedicate an afternoon to an auction of a single ski. A weeknight seems best -- weekends are ski days, Friday nights are drinking nights, and many folks can't watch a website at work. As long as the rules were clear, you wouldn't need to be present... A "15 minutes from last bid" might result in bids being placed 16 minutes after the last bid, but you could invalidate that after the fact. Again, this style will limit your potential audience further, but avoiding work seems to be a key decision factor for ya.

Oh, and I strongly recommend that any bid that is later edited is invalidated. You wouldn't want anyone bidding $2000 up front, then seconds before the auction ends changing the bid to $50.

On second thought, I would suggest that you did monitor it live in case anything unexpected happened, like someone accidently putting an extra zero in a bid, or making illegal bids less than the minimum increment (I raise your $200 to $200.01).

My point with the sniping example is if you think you would have been willing to pay $160, then you should have bid $160. If you got sniped by someone bidding $165, then you shouldn't be upset, because you thought the item was worth $165, not $175. If someone snipes you with a bid you would have been willing to place, you should have placed that bid. eBay will auto-respond to snipes up to the limit you tell it, so why would you set that limit lower than you are willing to pay?

From the point of the seller, you absolutely don't want to see sniping. If Steve snipes the auction at the last second and earns you an extra $5, you might be excited... Until you realize that Alice would have put in a counter-bid and raised the price had Steve bid in a reasonable timeframe, instead of sniping. You got a lower price than you should have because Alice was denied the opportunity to bid.

On eBay, the situation is different, assuming that everyone uses eBay's auto-bid feature. Should Steve put in a last-minute bid that is less than Alice's max bid, then the final selling price goes up, and the seller has no reason to complain. There's effectively no difference between that and an earlier bid by Steve, so it's not a big deal.

OK, I guess I see your point about the sniping and the final price. Given the complicated psychology involved, and the different mindsets of different participants, however, I find it hard to pin this down in a definite way.

You are right about editing bids. I am setting up the bidding thread so that bid posts can be neither edited nor deleted, so that should take care of this issue (I hope). There will still remain the "bid error" issue.

Yes, the question of picking a time. Contrary to logic (at least mine), as I recall the most active times on the forum do seem to be during working hours on weekdays. Definitely want to avoid Friday afternoon through Sunday for a closing time. Because I need to get this auction going, and want to avoid running into the Thanksgiving week, I'm thinking about starting the auction this Thursday and running for one week, ending on Thursday, 11/20. I will have to look at the stats to decide on an end time - afternoon or evening - trying to choose a time that will allow the most people to be present. It will not be possible to set up the "perfect" auction.

I will attach an image showing hourly stats (whole web site, but should reflect the forum as well).

It looks like the best sustained activity is late morning hours. In the evening things pick back up in the 8 to 9 pm period but then drop quickly. I'm inclined to go for something like 10 am for an official end time, which would be extended if there were last minute bids.