One cent bids

[plagueguy]

Hi,

I had an auction close with many bids by the same person in one-cent increments. How is this possible?

Thanks!

[montanatiki]

It used to be if you started your auction low - the person could have their bids from .01 to I believe .99 go on a penny basis, then it went to a nickel and a quarter and up through a certain amount it is a $1. If a person bid .50 and someone bid .51 then the original buyer might have a higher amount on that item - say he max. bid $2.00, so his bid could raise the bid by a penny into .52, until another buyer bid .53 and so on. One person can't have bids in sequence without another bidder bidding on it and the bidder with the higher or EARLIER Bid will be seen after a bid is placed.

[soh.maryl]

Can you show us an item #?

[takikawa4]

Did you have a reserve on the auction?

[buyselljack2016]

Did not know that it was possible, but I see it, so I must believe it.

[partial*eclipse]

If a bidder is already in the lead, then IIRC their next bid must be a full bid increment higher, but then after that they can add bids in 1-cent increments.

EDIT: ALL that nibbling, only to be defeated by a 2-second snipe!  I guess this is some strong evidence that sniping is a better strategy than intimidation nibbling.

[plagueguy]

No reserve set.

[stonevintage]

Normally... the co-bidder would jump up the bid.  What you have is 2 bidders that are resellers etc.  They don't care if they win or lose your item.  They're competators that routinely bid against each other and unfortunately - your item got caught up in their petty bidding war.

Unfortunately, this is the best you can hope for on listing auction style here anymore:(.

[the*dog*ate*my*tablecloth]

What makes you think they were resellers? That list showed three bidders not two. The winner placed one bid.

the bidstacker didn't win so in this case the strategy did nothing

[partial*eclipse]

I wouldn't call it a "bidding war" when only one of the bidders placed more than one bid.