SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : eBay - Superb Internet Business Model -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Cap_Loss_Cfwd who wrote (4964)8/20/1999 3:25:00 PM
From: JP Jouver  Respond to of 7772
 
Agree, this happens to me all the time. I do not understand how the requirement for starting bids being at least 25% of the reserve price helps them, however.

Personally, I think it is just another way for them to crack down on the dishonest sellers (the ones with a really high reserve and no intent to complete the sale on Ebay). With high-priced merchandise, the $1.00 extra fee isn't much of a deterrent. But now a seller can look at your minimum and know that the reserve is set at a max of 4x that amount. It just gives the buyer a little more info.

I sell items in the $600 range, and I will usually set an opening bid of $300-400, with a reserve of $500-600. But I know many other sellers who start at $1 with a reserve of $700-800! This is ridiculous! The only reason to set a lower opening bid is to get people interested. But a dollar! Where else can you sell something and start with an opening price that has absolutely no relation to what you actually want? Anyone ever try and sell their $3500 used car and ask the buyer to start at a dollar?
$1? No.
$2? No.
$3? No. But you're getting warmer.....

The only people I see getting hurt by this are the sellers whose items are small and less valuable. Anything under $30 is hurt by the extra $1 fee (but then again, why do you need a reserve on a $30 item....?).

All IMHO (as an Ebay buyer and seller).

Jape