Question About Shill Bidders And Second Chance Offers

[blackbeardstreasurechest]

I was recently the second highest bidder on an auction that was won by a bidder with zero feedback. Their bid for the item was $275.00, while my maximum bid was $270.00, and the third highest bid was $165.00. This bidder also had never placed a bid on anything before this winning bid, and therefore had 100% bidding activity with the seller. Barely two days after the auction ended, I received a second chance offer for my maximum bid of $270.00 from the seller. 

To me, this sounded a little suspicious, and I thought it might have been a case where the seller used a shill bidder (either their own account with different eBay usernames, or asked a friend/relative to bid on it) to drive the auction price up and then conviently back out after it was over. I contacted ebay with my concerns about this and was told that the buyer was from Mexico and was not directly associated with the seller, and that the seller was unable to get in contact with the buyer. Not even two full days had passed since the end of the auction, and that seems like an incredibly short amount of time to ascertain that the high bidder is not going to pay and to make a Second Chance Offer.

While I highly suspect that the winner of the auction was a shill bidder, I don't understand eBay's policy about Second Chance Offers. To me, since the high bidder for whatever reason will not be paying for the auction item, then why is their bid still valid in the auction? If the high bidder was taken out of the equation, I would have won the auction for  $167.50, which would be the next highest bid increment above the third highest bidder's maximum bid.

While this would not even be an issue in an auction where all the bids were very close to each other, in this case, the difference is about $100 between my maximum bid and what my winning bid would have been if this non-paying high bidder had never placed a bid on this item at all. While I know I have a choice to choose to accept the Second Chance Offer or not, I was curious if anyone else has ran into a similar situation. Does this sound like a case of shill bidding, and am I wrong in my logic that the Second Chance Offer should be based on the next highest bidder's lowest winning bid increment instead of their maximum bid?

[divwido]

While the last thing I want to do right now is debate shill bidding-did you win the item for a price you were willing to pay?  That should be all that matters.

[bonjourami]

Well the seller can file an uid forty eight hours after the auction ends..and maybe he doesnt ship to Mexico,so he filed and offered it to you.because the bidder didnt pay has nothing to do with the ending price on the item....

[dakotasmoke]

Shill bidders generally dont bid to win...

[jackson25314]

I have contacted ebay numerous times in the last couple of weeks about sellers from India.  It is obvious that it is shill bidding buy yet they do nothing about my problem.  Actually I had one representative to laugh at me for being upset and told me that I needed to contact the police or my local law authorities.  I ask would someone contact me andthey advised me maybe by email.  The seller continues to sell and the actual purchasers keeps on bidding and canceling his bids (bidders to and vi).  I was restricted from the seller but the ones that were involved in helping the seller run up bids were never restricted.  Ebay seems to be OK with the practice because just in my case was able to get an extra $200 or $300 in sales.  It might not be a large for some but it is to me.  I have been buying off of ebay and have a 100% ebay rating.  Maybe my totals purchases in 10 years might only be $6,000 to $8,000 but if this continues to happen to other buyers ebay will continue to lose buuyers.  I will find another source of purchasing what I need.  I hope other buyers will see this and leave ebay as I have.

[jackson25314]

When I realized I wasn't the top bidder I went on to leave more bids.  Most people are on a budget.  When I knew I wasn't the winner I bid on the same exact item.  Then to find that I get an ebay "Change ebay bid notice" on 10 of the same item.  It wasn't that I wasn't OK with my top bid just not 10 of them.

[takikawa4]

Your bid is good until the auction ends. Never bid on another item if it's the same thing until then.

[7606dennis]

Actually, a second chance offer is always going to be at the level of your highest bid since that is the amount you said you were willing to pay for the item by placing your bid.  The seller isn't asking you to pay one cent over what you already bid.

Of course, you are totally free to decline the SCO.

The seller may have decided to accept a cancellation request from the original winning bidder, in which case he would be free to make the SCO or he may have a duplicate of the same item.  Of course, if he had to file a UID on the original bidder, he would be well advised to wait until it is closed before making a SCO.

Again, you are under no obligation to accept a SCO.  If you're skeptical, simply decline the offer.

[myboardid]

It is actually quite unlikely that it was shill bidding.  Shillers bid to be lower than other bidders highest bids.  They don't want to win, they want to drive up the price and let the legitimate bidder win. 

There are tons of new eBay members every day.  Some are sport bidding, meaning they have no intention of ever actually buying what they win.  That sounds to me like the winning bidder on your auction.  The timing of the Offer seems to support my theory. 

You have every right to decline a second Chance Offer, for any reason whatsoever.  There is no way to prove what you believe happened, or what I believe is more likely.  Do what you are most comfortable with. 

[rolenboy01]

This is why many sellers don't bother with second chance offers they always get falsely accused of shill bidding when in reality some idiot snipes the item and then doesn't pay and now we are stuck with an unsold item and getting accused of something we didn't do.

[mudshark61369]

@blackbeardstreasurechest,

"To me, this sounded a little suspicious, and I thought it might have been a case where the seller used a shill bidder (either their own account with different eBay usernames, or asked a friend/relative to bid on it) to drive the auction price up and then conviently back out after it was over".

A seller cannot use their own account with different names to bid on an item, without being caught. A shill ID/account would have to be completely separate from their selling account, no shared banking info, different posstal address, and a different IP address.  The idea behind shill bidding is to run the price up usually in the early or middle stages of an auction, not by sniping at the end and possibly winning.

  Even if a seller had a friend working with them, a dead give away would be the same person(s) winning over and over, then canceling. eBay makes money off of sales that are completed, so auctions not completed do them no good, and they know what shill bidding will do to their reputation.

"I contacted ebay with my concerns about this and was told that the buyer was from Mexico and was not directly associated with the seller, and that the seller was unable to get in contact with the buyer".

Since an ebay rep can look at auctions and see whole IDs, the one you spoke to was most likely right about the info they gave you.  It is not unusual for new members to not have verified PayPal accounts, or to set them up to pay in the proper currency when paying, if they are from other countries. Because many new users sign up using phones or other portable devices, they may not have set communication preferences to forward messages to their regular eMail address, or noticed they had messages. Sellers do not like to deal with (0) feedback buyers for those and many other reasons. 

No one is going to say that shill bidding does not happen on ebay, but it does not happen as often as many believe.  It is also not as easy to accomplish as one might think.  There are other bidding behaviors that give the impression of shill bidding, but are not.  There are sport bidders, who never intend to pay if they win, and new members who do not know that bidding just to uncover another member's Max bid then retract their bids, is against the rules.  Legitimate sellers are as upset about people who do those things as you are, since it hurts the reputation of the site, costs them sales, and the time to go through the cancelation process during which the item is in limbo. 

[pf9000]

I wish ebay would change their policy in this regard. It seems to me that someone else bids up the price, rather than allowing the auction to determine the price. The 'Second Chance Offer' should be the lowest amount the buyer has bid, and NOT the highest amount someone else had bid.

[castlemagicmemories]

All buyers have 100% rating.

Buyers can no longer get negative or neutral feedback and it has been this way since 2008.

Thus the most flagrant scammer has a profile that does not differ from the most conscientious, responsible, sincere buyer.

Just the way it is.

[myboardid]

---

@pf9000 wrote:

I wish ebay would change their policy in this regard. It seems to me that someone else bids up the price, rather than allowing the auction to determine the price. The 'Second Chance Offer' should be the lowest amount the buyer has bid, and NOT the highest amount someone else had bid.

---

The Second Chance Offer is given at the highest price THAT bidder has entered, not the highest price some other bidder made.  And no, it shouldn't be at the lowest price they bid.  No seller would ever make a SCO if they could only get the lowest bid for the item. 

[7606dennis]

---

@pf9000 wrote:

I wish ebay would change their policy in this regard. It seems to me that someone else bids up the price, rather than allowing the auction to determine the price. The 'Second Chance Offer' should be the lowest amount the buyer has bid, and NOT the highest amount someone else had bid.

---

Actually, that would result in no sellers offering a second chance offer.  If they have duplicates of the item, while it may be reasonable for them to sell to an interested bidder if they were willing to accept what that bidder had already bid, even though it was less than the winning bidder, to avoid having to list the item again, it would not be reasonable to expect them to accept that bidder's lowest bid.

In the case of an item that is somewhat hard to find, a collector may appreciate the chance to purchase an item that they were outbid on if the original winning bidder fails to complete the transaction.  Forcing a seller to accept the under bidder's lowest bid would be unreasonable and simply eliminate the second chance offer in all likelihood.

Already most seller's refrain from offering a SCO because of the unsubstantiated accusations of shilling.