Does it seem as if the previous $15,000 bid by bidder 2 was removed as well as the $160,000 bid by bidder 1? Or just the bid time change after it was reinstated? The three pending bids had processed. The previous bid $15,000 bid said 6 days ago. Both by new members.
Also, the previous bid of $160,000 (which Flippa said the bidder meant $16,000) was from a new bidder. The current $16,000 bid is from a bidder with $4,45k in sales. I thought they would have simply replaced the bidders $160,000 bid with a bid of $16,000 bid rather than what the auction log is now showing. Maybe this is just technical glitches given the abnormality of this auction? Or are they new bids?
I am still very curious as to what the reserve is/was. I understand the possible mistake of entering an extra zero resulting in a $160,000 bid when it was meant to be a $16,000 bid. Though, at the same time, the concern with questionable bids under the reserve, is that if they are near the reserve, and as bidders aren't supposed to know the exact reserve, a bid near the reserve can sometimes validate another bidder into believing the domains value. Thus, it is important (for trickle down effects) that all bids are legit.
If the reserve price was no where near the $160,000 bid (say for instance the reserve was $300,000) then the $160,000 bid would look a lot less suspicious. Even though, there are practices such as lowering the reserve so the next bid meets reserve, which would in essence leverage the $160,000 bid to their advantage. ie bid minimum bid above the next highest bidder, and you will win this domain if no more bids! The difference being the bid below reserve is a "safe bid" and as such isn't binding. Still this is speculative. One would need to determine if the seller utilizes the lowering reserve practice to suggest that route. Thus, Flippa is in an obvious advantage position to investigate this, given they have access to the reserve price, sellers history, and other facts we don't have access to.