status-resolved starting auction bid with word "Start"

[alcy]

recently noticed a trend from moderators to void all auctions which begin with word "START" as first bid.. instead of numeric value. while I understand this is not as per rules.. it seems incorrect to void a whole auction, often many days after it started, and which has since gone way beyond the start bid.. just because the initial bidder said START.

not to mention that probably a good 50% of all past and present auctions, with only few of them voided, have began with START as first bid. so it all ended just fine as we all saw.

I hope there can be some consideration given to allowing the START bid. not because it is ideal, but because most people here do not seem to be aware of the rule, and having every auction voided because of this, is a highly counterproductive exercise.

thanks for considering!

 

[Eric Lyon]

To prevent confusion and avoid issues, we do not allow bidders to use the word "Start" in an auction.

Example
Auction starts at: $50
Auction bid increments: $10

Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
Bidder3 bids $70

In this example, Bidder1's bid is invalid and has caused bidders 2 and 3 to bid higher than they should have had to bid. We cannot adjust all the bids that came after "START" to exclude Bidder1's influence on the auction, and therefore, the easiest solution at the moment is to reset the auction and have it begin again.

All sellers should monitor their auctions and immediately:

• Report any bids that contain only "START" without a numeric value.
• Post in the auction to let everyone know to ignore the invalid bid.
• Contact the bidder who wrote "START" to inform them that all valid bids must use a numeric value.
• If your auction is reset, a NamePros moderator can provide you with a list of its bidders' usernames, upon request. You may send each previous bidder a single private message to let them know the auction has been reset and link them to the new auction.

All bidders should:

• Ignore any bids that show only "Start" (invalid bid) and place their bid as if the invalid bid does not exist. If the next bidder ignores the invalid bid, then the auction will not be interrupted.

Related: https://www.namepros.com/threads/abolish-start-as-a-bid-in-marketplace.898459/

 

[alcy]

what you just said does not hold, if you assume and conclude that everyone who says START to begin auction, means to begin exactly at listed starting price.. $50 in your example.

and as far as I am concerned, that is precisely the correct assumption to make for all who do this. because everyone who says START.. means seller's starting price.

thank you for your help.

 

[Eric Lyon]

what you just said does not hold, if you assume and conclude that everyone who says START to begin auction, means to begin exactly at listed starting price.. $50 in your example.

Please review the thread that I linked to in my response. "START" is not allowed because it has caused many problems over the years.

 

[alcy]

Please review the thread that I linked to in my response. "START" is invalid and has caused many problems over the years. It is not allowed.

I will do. and I thnk you kindly for explaining to me.

I am merely pointing out that it is continuing to make problems.

there are 60-80% of auctions ongoing now which began with word START.. how can members participate and bid, not knowing whether one day those will be voided or not, and their time participating invested for nothing.

 

[BrandClub.com]

recently noticed a trend from moderators to void all auctions which begin with word "START" as first bid.. instead of numeric value. while I understand this is not as per rules.. it seems incorrect to void a whole auction, often many days after it started, and which has since gone way beyond the start bid.. just because the initial bidder said START.

not to mention that probably a good 50% of all past and present auctions, with only few of them voided, have began with START as first bid. so it all ended just fine as we all saw.

I hope there can be some consideration given to allowing the START bid. not because it is ideal, but because most people here do not seem to be aware of the rule, and having every auction voided because of this, is a highly counterproductive exercise.

thanks for considering!

Imagine this situation:

Example
Auction starts at: $50
Auction increments: $10
Auction ends 96Hrs after the last bid.

I bid "START" (which should be $50)
Nobody else bids on that auction ...
96hrs later the seller change the start amount to $250
and contact me to pay $250 as I placed the winning BID ...

What do you think about ???
It´s possible ...

That´s why all auctions should always start with a numerical
value instead of the word START ...

 

[Eric Lyon]

@alcy -

Like you said, many members do not know that "START" is not allowed.

At the same time, many members do not realize that "START" means they're bound to a specific dollar amount as their bid. Some members think that it just means the auction will begin, as in the "timer starts" counting.

Both of these situations cause issues for sellers. Currently, the best solution is to enforce that everyone must use a numeric value if they want to bid.

 

[alcy]

alright then.

I see all points and they are valid.

but that still changes nothing to fact that a good 50% or more current auctions begin with word START. I find it uncomfortable to participate in such auctions only to discover that at any time, they could be voided.

 

[Eric Lyon]

I find it uncomfortable to participate in such auctions only to discover that at any time, they could be voided.

That's a fair point.

We're open to suggestions on how to handle them in a way that is fair to sellers and bidders.

 

[alcy]

That's a fair point.

We're open to suggestions on how to handle them in a way that is fair to sellers and bidders.

yes, thanks! I am happy you are open and have feedback forum!

I will try to come up with solutions as I am sure others will.

I have seen 2 auctions voided in such way in span of 24 horus yesterday. this is as close to urgency as things get imo.

 

[alcy]

Imagine this situation:

Example
Auction starts at: $50
Auction increments: $10
Auction ends 96Hrs after the last bid.

I bid "START" (which should be $50)
Nobody else bids on that auction ...
96hrs later the seller change the start amount to $250
and contact me to pay $250 as I placed the winning BID ...

What do you think about ???
It´s possible ...

That´s why all auctions should always start with a numerical
value instead of the word START ...

I'm pretty sure you just contact Eric and tell him the original bid was chnaged, and he has every means to retrace the slightest modifications made to a post.

but.. like you say, Eric would not need be troubled about that had all bids been made numerical. but they are not. and will continue not to be,. and auctions will continue to be closed and voided after many days of bidding, and bids going way past initial "START" bid.

I am sure a solution will be found sooner or later.

I thank you all for feedback.

good day.

 

[johnn]

Many members do not understand START means they are bidding on the auction.
Instead they think START means to bump and get the auction going.

I myself have 2 situations where I contacted the START "members" to ask for payment as no one else bid on the auction and they said they only posted START to help me.

Every bid in the auction is binding and what is wrong to say "START at $50" instead of just "START"?
In my case they are wasting my time because I can cancel the auction instead of waiting for 3 days and not getting the payment.

In my opinion "START" should not be allowed - The bid must come with a specific bid amount.

 

[alcy]

I understand your point.

perhaps in this case, at least as temp solution, it can be agreed among you the mods to never void an auction started with START, if and only if there were other bids made after it. and evryone seems to be perfectly happy and content with the way things are progressing.
DESPITE the initial "start" bid, and whatever known or unknown implications it may have meant to the person who made it.

in short: if someone said START to begin an auction, and then 10 more people were happy to bid more over it, does this really deserve to be voided?

 

[johnn]

If there is no other bids then the seller will waste his/her time waiting for days to see if there are more bid or not.

It simply does not not work.

 

[alcy]

If there is no other bids then the seller will waste his/her time waiting for days to see if there are more bid or not.

It simply does not not work.

I agree.

however, I have seen 2 auctons voided in last 24 hours (and that's only for ones I watched) where bidding has been going on for days, and # bidders reached 5+

then it got voided.

I am sorry, but I do not understand how this can be useful to the seller of those auctions, nor the bidders/winning bidder.

 

[johnn]

The solution is simple. You must post the amount that you want to bid either with "START" or without "START".

We want to be sure that the poster has an intention to buy and not just an intention to post.

 

[alcy]

The solution is simple. You must post the amount that you want to bid either with "START" or without "START".

We want to be sure that the poster has an intention to buy and not just an intention to post.

okay. I think I am seeing it form a different perspective. this matter does not appear to be as problematic as I seemed to suggest.

I withdraw my feedback suggestions for this. thank you for yoru time.

 

[21x20]

Perhaps we need an expanded auction function to solve the problem.

Aside from that, I'd suggest that if 2+ bids have occurred after "start", the bidders have accepted the pricing and it's OK to let the auction play out.

For example, an auction that's been reported with just
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
... could be cancelled.

While an auction with
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
Bidder3 bids $70
... should be allowed to continue as the 3rd bidder has made the informed decision to bid more than $60, regardless essentially of the first bid.

 

[Abdullah Abdullah]

It is true it causes problems. Just yesterday an auction was won which the first bid was Start.. Of course mods cannot monitor each auction.

Also, an auction which I bid $60 was made Void almost hours when I was the highest bidder then another bidder added $2 to my bid. It was said the first bidder said Start.

Proper checking and tracking of all auctions ia needed as some go under the rader and end...like the auction I mentioned which ended yesterday with winner.

It is also the seller's respobsibility to monitor his or her auctions and to maybe add a note saying please stsrt auction with numeric value not the word start

 

[Abdullah Abdullah]

Perhaps we need an expanded auction function to solve the problem.

Aside from that, I'd suggest that if 2+ bids have occurred after "start", the bidders have accepted the pricing and it's OK to let the auction play out.

For example, an auction that's been reported with just
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
... could be cancelled.

While an auction with
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
Bidder3 bids $70
... should be allowed to continue as the 3rd bidder has made the informed decision to bid more than $60, regardless essentially of the first bid.

So it should be handled case by case basis. I agree with this

 

[Axc]

didnt realise posting start could void the bid
thanks for bringing it to attention @alcy

 

[-EM-]

It does not make any sense to cancel the auction once there is at last one bidder after the first bid as start. Based on the example, if the starting bid is $50 and is posted as start and the other comes with $60 doesn't mean it is against the rules (the second bidder). I can bid directly $60 and overpass the starting bid from the beginning. Also what it is even worse done is cancelling an auction with many bids, even if the starting bid is null.
I do agree with the rule if there is only one bid as "start", but I think you are overreacting here

 

[Eric Lyon]

It's a temporary issue until everyone learns that "START" is not allowed. There is currently a big red notice that appears on all auctions stating it is not allowed. The problem shouldn't exist much longer, either way.

In a week or two, if anyone continues to use "START" as a bid, it will be a blatant rule violation that we will take action against. Hopefully it won't come to that.

 

[Apprich]

To prevent confusion and avoid issues, we do not allow bidders to use the word "Start" in an auction.

Example
Auction starts at: $50
Auction bid increments: $10

Maybe word "Start" confuse people. Could we use some other words as a seller?

Auction begins at: $50
Initial Bid:$50
First Bid:$50

 

[UXela]

Aside from that, I'd suggest that if 2+ bids have occurred after "start", the bidders have accepted the pricing and it's OK to let the auction play out.

For example, an auction that's been reported with just
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
... could be cancelled.

While an auction with
Bidder1 bids "START"
Bidder2 bids $60
Bidder3 bids $70
... should be allowed to continue as the 3rd bidder has made the informed decision to bid more than $60, regardless essentially of the first bid.

I second that.
Having auctions cancelled when reaching $100 starting from $1 with multiple bids is a waste of everybody's time.
In my opinion this canceling should stop when there is a third bid. After that it is crystal clear for the bidder and if they're bidding they're making a very informed decision.

And about notifying bidders that their "start" bid is not valid:
We're not on this forum 24/7 ... some of us do have a life (or like to think so at least).
Last night I had like 4 bids in under 1h. If the first one just bid "start" and I was doing ... other activities ... what was I supposed to do?
"Hold on babe, put your panties back on, I have a bidder who doesn't read all 1000 rules and I need to notify him about rule 999".