Talk:Auction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help!

Join in | Fix a red link | Add content | Weigh in
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high-importance within game theory.

Contents

[edit] Split:Auction and auction theory

These is some tension in this article between the purely economic concept of an auction, and the idea of an auction as thought of by famous auction houses, and things like that. That article should serve as an introduction to the general phenomenon of auctions.

The second article can house the material on how auctions are formally classified (first price, second price, Vickrey, and so on,) strategies for auctions, collusion, bid shading, reserve prices, secondary markets, and all sorts of other technical material. All this is important, but there's no need for it to be cluttering the main article, as most people looking for information on auctions won't want that level of detail. Isomorphic 04:45, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Regarding auctions and auction theory, it may also be inaccurate for this article to claim that "in economic theory, an auction is a method for determining the value of a commodity..." Only a small class of truth-revealing auctions (such as the second price "Vickrey" auction) will give bidders an incentive to bid their true values. The purpose of an auction is not to determine values but to allocate resources efficiently (to the highest valued participants). UA6 07:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm with Isomorphic, this needs splitting into Auction and Auction theory. Cretog8 (talk)

d'accord. caert go leor. hear, hear! about blanking time!(all of the preceding to be construed as a vote in favour of one or more splits.)Toyokuni3 (talk)
OK, I'm dopey, and removing the split recommendation. There is already an Auction theory article. It may be that some content from this page should move there, but obviously splitting is unnecessary. Cretog8 (talk)

[edit] Minumum price and reserve auction and ebay

The ebay site has some definitions that distinguish between a minimum price auction and a reserve auction, which this article does not do. I suggest the author review this article for possible clarification of defintions of auction types. 24.238.146.129 00:05, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

How about mentioning the existence of Ebay (and online auctions in general) in the article? It is quite astounding that there is no mention of on-line auctions here, given than the vast majority of auctions which take place in the world today are presumably taking place on line??!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.118.205.39 (talk • contribs)
From the article: "Internet auctions, such as eBay and eBid have become very popular with the prevalence of Internet. Other websites display live auction listings from auctioneers nationwide". --Van helsing (talk) 15:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UK TV competition

I want to include something but I don't know if this article is the place, or how to do so without falling into speculation or primary research. The UK television station Hits runs a competition where viewers send a premium-rate SMS with a bid (in pennies) for a high-priced consumer item (usually stereo equipment, though last week they had a car). The lowest unique bidder wins - the person who bids the lowest amount of money that nobody else has bid. It seems to me that in practice this only works for the company where there are likely to be a large number of bidders, and from their perspective it's much like a lottery - they make their money from the SMS, rather than the winner bidder who will typically only end up paying a couple of pounds.

But from the bidders' perspective there are some interesting game theoretical issues about bidding. Probably lots of people will try bidding just a few pence, so if you bid too low you're unlikely to be a unique bidder. But bid too high and there's likely to be a lower unique bidder. The optimum bid depends on the value of the prize, the number of other bidders, and crucially, an aseessment of the state of knowledge of the other bidders. You might assess, based on the number of bidders and the value of the prize, that 350p is the optimum level to bid at. But if you think that other people have done the same analysis, then you have to change your bid, because they'll be bidding at the same level and you won't be a unique bidder. And if you think that everyone else has done the same analysis, they might all decide that a very low bid is useless, and so you might win with a bid of a penny. Unless they've thought of that as well... --ALargeElk | Talk 17:07, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

That is indeed an interesting game. The equilibrium will involve each player randomizing over a bunch of numbers. If I had more time, it'd be interesting to work out the actual distribution. However, I would say that despite the use of the word "bid," this isn't an auction. An auction is a kind of market in which the players are trying to find an efficient allocation by expressing information about their value. In your game, a player's value for the prize don't enter into his strategy at all. Isomorphic 00:55, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Values must enter the player's strategies, since no agent would bid above their value. Also, lotteries themselves may be considered "all-pay" auctions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.48.134.223 (talk) 07:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] "Cheap auctions"

Is there any truth to those so-called free/cheap auctions that are held by government/other agencies? One sees such things in spam and eBay auctions very often, and usually there is a kernel of truth attached to them. 204.60.171.230 11:40, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to, but I think there's at least a kernel of truth there. The government does auction off, for example, confiscated property. Sometimes few people know about them and actually show up to bid, so the prices can be cheap. Isomorphic 19:54, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
If that is the case, where can one find these 'cheap' auctions? (Same person as original poster) 01:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I really wouldn't know. Try the reference desk. Isomorphic 02:58, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Commercials

I find it inappropriate for individuals and/or businesses to place commercial references to themeselves within a definition. Usayinpa 22:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)I concur the section regarding notable auctioneers violates the spirit of wikipedia as an encyclopedia site. UsayinpaUsayinpa 22:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

i disagree. by that rationale, we should eliminate all references to contemporary entertainers, pro sports franchises, and who knows what else. i note that there are articles on general motors and exxonmobil, boeing, general mills and mcdonald's. need i go on?Toyokuni3 (talk) 21:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 100 Million Dollars

by the proposed 100 Million Dollars Wiki(pedia) should creadte an auction platform --83.171.183.131 16:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC) Chrisglub (Germany)

[edit] Amerikanische Versteigerung (American Auction)

In fundraising events in Germany you can often see a bidding style called Amerikanische Versteigerung (i.e. American Auction in German). Here, bidding is much like in a regular auction, but every bidder immediately pays the difference between his bid and the previous. In the end, the last bidder wins the auction, even if his contribution is very small. Technically speaking, this is not an auction, because the actual value of the object to be sold is irrelevant, it might well be e.g. an old and ugly teapot. The sum of all bids usually far exceeds the value (which is the point of a fund-raising auction), because everybody can contribute even without a big purse. I can't find anything similar to this in the article, but I might have overlooked something. Maybe it should be added (even if it is not really an auction)? I have no clue why this is called American Auction. Does the English-speaking world know of such a thing at all? --Dr. Hok 14:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] french revolution / 17th century

um, wasn't the french revolution at the end of the 18th century?


"During the 17th century, soon after the French Revolution, auctions came to be held in taverns and coffeehouses to sell art. Such auctions were held daily, and catalogs were printed to announce available items" —Preceding unsigned comment added by XMCHx (talk • contribs) 19:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Date auction

What is a date auction? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.163.1 (talk) 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It's simply an auction where the "item" you are bidding on is a date with some (presumably desirable) person. As far as I know it can be of any format. --WayneMokane (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Whereas most auctions require only seconds or minutes from the moment that the first bid is revealed until the final bid has become a binding agreement between buyer and seller there are types of auctions that last much longer, days or weeks, usually some kind of on-line auctions. If a fixed date is set, after which time no more bids will be accepted, that is a date auction. Max7437 (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Digital art auction: Promotion?

As far as I can tell from googling, the digital art auction is a concept (see here). I didn't see any mention of auction houses (online or otherwise) actually holding such auctions. Can anyone confirm or deny this? -Dmh (talk) 02:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] A Mess

i am as cognizant as anyone of the need to be civil, but sometimes that is superceded by the need to be frank. this is a mess. it needs to be divided into at least 2 separate articles: one on the concept of auction in game theory, the other on auctions as a method for selling goods. there are no end of terms and ideas pertaining to the latter that aren't covered here, e.g., hammer price and buyer's premium. auctions are among the most fun you can have with your clothes on, but many people are intimidated by the idea. this article does nothing to dispel that.Toyokuni3 (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Please note that professor Milgrom's 384-page book and professor Klemperer's 256-page book were up-to-date in 2004. That is no longer quite the case. This field is growing at a furious pace. Theory and practice are closely intertwined. As long as the Wikipedia article is just a brief summary of the vast available knowledge within this field it is questionable if anything at all can be gained by having two separate articles about auctions.Max7437 (talk) 15:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

i disagree entirely, and i speak from personal experience. i doubt seriously if the higher-ups at christie's, sotheby's, butterfield or skinner have more than a passing familiarity with game theory.almost (?) without exception, these people's background is in art history. i regularly attend a very successful auction on the eastern shore of maryland, and i assure you they have very little familiarity with (or interest in) professor milgrom's book, or even the cambridge university press. very few of the buyers have either.moreover, and i have not read milgrom, i doubt he deals with any number of real world auction phenomena. e.g., the simplest and most common type of collusion: 2 real friends, who know each other's similar tastes and needs.'i won't bid on a, if you won't bid on b.'or the reverse: running up someone who has pissed you off.(a dangerous game of chicken).or auctioneers creating phantom bids.this is known as 'bidding against the clock', the implication being that the clock on the back wall is placing bids. i am not contending the correctness of the theory. what i am saying is that, where the rubber meets the road, the theory is more commonly descriptive.there is an article on auctioneering. perhaps that is where a more practical description belongs. i stand by my position, civilly.Toyokuni3 (talk) 16:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Toyokuni3 is quite welcome to make additions to the article, preferably together with people from that Maryland auction company. Afterwards we can all join in and try to rearrange the material in such a way that the general public gets the most relevant information in the first few chapters, leaving the rest for those who want more information in depth. But it is not all that simple to fit the contents of 640 pages into six pages or so. But one can try. By the way, the two professors are very much concerned about collusion and they suggest what steps can be taken to keep real-life auctions nice and honest.Max7437 (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

i just realized that my 'i speak from personal experience' is subject to misinterpretation. i meant it as a statement of fact and to some degree as a disclaimer.( personal experience is by definition anecdotal.) my intent here, as no doubt is yours is to improve the article. but my only experience with auctions, although it spans many years, is as a buyer and very occasional consignor. i will be happy to make what inputs are felt helpful.if you are the original author and my initial statement gave offense, i apologize. but i do feel that the organization needs re-doing, and apparently, wikipedia agrees.Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Please read the "Split instruction" page, which says that when an article reaches the 40 to 100 KB size it may possibly become a candidate for splitting. But this article is still only 32 KB and growing slowly. So please come back in two or three years, when perhaps this article is twice the present size. Then we can talk. - Also please note that under the headings "See also", "Types of auctions", "Famous Auction Houses" and "Other topics" there is a list of 31 topics treated in more depth elsewhere. So in a sense the splt has occured already and not only in two or three parts. Whoever wishes an Auction article without the Theory part is free to start creating his own article on his private talk page for possible later unveiling and discussion before it becomes an official article. Right now we know what we have but not what we might get. The article is pretty good as it stands. Please do not spoil it by splitting it! At least not now!Max7437 (talk) 19:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Please compare this article with the article about Golf, 56 KB. In no way is that article a candidate for splitting. Quite the opposite! The Auction article is not either a candidate for splitting! Max7437 (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stealing

in spite of the weasel words, 'what some would compare to stealing'Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC) seems to express a pov.

[edit] Auction terms

Could terms such as dummy bid and vendors bid etc be included? Cgoodwin (talk) 01:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)