The Rule That Is Ruining PRO Auctions

[Popinsmoke]

it can be so easy tho... everyone has a price in mind they want at least for their pokemon. If the rule would just be start an auction with the price you want everything is solved... now you keep having auctions where you as buyer have absolutly zero power and as seller all the power. If you bid on a pokemon with an auction of 5 days you are saving the money if you have the best offer. other stuff will pass by which might be interesting but as seller you are never allowed to take back your offer because it will be seen as fake offering. thats how stupid this whole rule is. its keeping people away from auctions because these days you just know they will cancel if no one insta buys it. 2 snivy in a row for example and the goomy on silver will most likely follow. if this rule is meant to stay make it at least fair for a buyer too instead of letting us waste 5 days on an offer thats gonna be canceled.

[Teerav]

(Yes, I suck with the quoting option so I just did this instead).

Off topic tip, if you highlight text then hover your mouse over it, click the "Reply" option to quote that specific text. I normally keep two tabs open, one for copying quotes and another to prepare my post.

 

A: This rule can be repeated infinitely. If this is what this rule implies, auctions for high and really wanted pokémon can be extended forever if there's no insta (since insta is optional, can be added later into the auction, and depending on the type of auctioneer, some might want it to extend as much as possible to gain absurd amounts of money since they're not in a rush to obtain this money.

This is how I intend my suggestion to work. Each time a bid is made with x time left in the auction, x time is added to minimize sniping.

 

This is a fair concern. Without an insta or an artificial insta (like 100m), then it is technically possible an auction turns into a patience battle between buyers. However, with a proper minimum raise rule in place, the winner in this patience battle is the seller. If it gets ridiculous and the seller wants to just end the auction sooner, perhaps it could be allowed for the seller to adjust the minimum raise. Keep in mind with high end auctions, minimum raise is close to 200k. 6 raises of 200k over 24 hours is 1.2m. I dont think any seller would be disappointed in waiting 24 hours for an extra 1.2m.

 

A where the seller is not happy with just the starting bid and has gotten a better offer, but this offering person does not want to involve themselves in the auction (since they would be sniped). Thus, the seller just waits and if he's not convinced, he cancels it and sells it to the other bidder.

Hmm, this an interesting situation that I have personally found myself in. Essentially the seller is offered a bid that is inbetween min and insta, but the bidder does not want to participate in the auction and leverages the inactivity of the auction to force the seller to accept their price NOW instead of waiting to only get the min bid LATER out of fear of this particular bidder "sniping". This is certainly an aggressive buying tactic that would be lost to buyers if sellers are not allowed to cancel auctions. It is a dynamic style of bartering. However, I argue with the implementation of my suggestion, the fear of sniping is removed and forces these aggressive buyers to compete. This will ultimately benefit the seller.

 

the poke is 100% in the hands of the seller and he should have 100% control of it as long as he follows rules.

I believe once a seller chooses to start an auction, he accepts that if his min bid is met, he must sell. Yes, this puts risk on the seller, but again the seller accepts this risk when he begins the auction. If he doesnt want to accept this risk, then he doesnt need to start an auction.

[Heroofthestreet]

Since nothing will be changed about this (as usually), there is actually a pretty simple sollution to it, which is; to boycott such sellers and their auctions. Of course, in order to make this work, we all should be united and everyone should keep away from such people and their "auctions". A lot of people are already doing it (including myself), but i'm certainly aware it's nearly impossible to achieve this as there will always be that person that won't care or that will want to make profit out of the situation (if others are already not participating).

One other thing. Except the proposal of others for the auctioneer to use the lowest price he wants to get for the mon as a start bid, i'd also add that those kind of people who want to cancel auctions just because the final price hasn't met their expectations, shouldn't even lead an auction in the first place, then just put an insta price for the poke and regularly sell it if someone offered that much

[Teerav]

Since nothing will be changed about this (as usually), there is actually a pretty simple sollution to it, which is; to boycott such sellers and their auctions.

If most people do it, then these seller will not have profitable auctions causing them to cancel. This will eventually lead the few that do bid to get frustrated with the rule and sellers will follow suit.

[Heroofthestreet]

If most people do it, then these seller will not have profitable auctions causing them to cancel. This will eventually lead the few that do bid to get frustrated with the rule and sellers will follow suit.

In theory, that would also prevent them from holding auctions with that ridiculous rule or even keep them away from doing any auctions (of course unless they would eventually start selling their mons for lower than they have imagined which would sort of mean they have adjusted)

[Lantherion]

I believe once a seller chooses to start an auction, he accepts that if his min bid is met, he must sell. Yes, this puts risk on the seller, but again the seller accepts this risk when he begins the auction. If he doesnt want to accept this risk, then he doesnt need to start an auction.

 

This is how it should work period.