|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
OK, this is basically a research project that could net anyone who participates some cheap electronic goodies (if we get the right results.)
There's this site called http://www.swoopo.com that is basically a scam site. They promise cheap electronics to whoever wins their auctions. Catch is, each bid costs the bidder $0.75 to make and bid increments are only 15 cents. Also, each bid adds 15-20 seconds onto the clock Go to the site and watch an auction to see why this site is really bad for the buyer and good for the seller.
Now, we looked at this site in Game Theory class to illustrate an example of an escalating game, a type of game you don't want to get involved in. The idea came up that perhaps we could gather data and see if there were an optimal time to bid, a time that would yield you a profit.
This is where Team Liquid comes in. I want to see if there's any interest in doing a research project to beat this site. If you volunteered, you'd probably only have to commit 10-15 minutes every day.
Let me explain how it would work. I would ask people to cover certain auctions in a category, such as video games/dvds, during a certain time period. Every minute, those people would copy down the bidding history. In this way we can see if there are any timing cues that would point to the item being about to be sold.
So if I were assigned to an auction, I would wait until the last 20 seconds of the auction and then start the clock. In the next minute, bids would appear in the bid history. At the end of the minute, I would copy the bids that had appeared and would just repeat that until the auction ended.
So, does anyone want to do this? Remember, if we beat the system, we get guaranteed cheap electronic stuff! If no one else volunteers, I'll just do it myself, but it would be really nice to have someone else to cover the times when I'm asleep/can't come to the computer.
EDIT: OOPS, I didn't actually say how I was going to beat the system. Well, after I get all the data, I'll see if there are any situations in which it would always be profitable to bid, like at a certain ratio of the retail price, or after bidding tapers off, or something. And by "beating the system" I mean "beating other bidders."
|
Do you mind to elaborate more about how u plan to beat the system?
Of course the crucial time of the bidding is when it hits its regular price.
Wouldn't beating the system mean u profit more than the company?
but with them getting .75 for every bid, they can't really lose.
that is unless the bidding stops at a really low price but that won't happen unless the item is a really crappy thing that has really low demand.
So if we assume that the bidders bid up to at least when it hit the item's regular price then the company already bank in 5 times profit already. given that for every 15 cents, they make 75 cents.
|
Burned Toast
Canada2040 Posts
Am I the only one thinking that the site has an "autobid" system with fake names ? Yeah, call me a conspirationist.
|
Man this is the kind of stuff I'm going be studying in college (game theory and decision sciences to be specific). Sounds interesting and good luck. I'll join in later if there is absolutely no one else that volunteers.
|
I don't understand why this is a scam though? A scam would be them willingly scamming you out of real money for either not the real product or no product at all. If you can inevitably get the same, non-dysfunctional product cheaper than you would at a retailer, how is this being scammed?
edit: oh so, each time you make a bid, it costs 75 cents (assuming you win the product?) So if you ended up winning a product for 5 bucks but it took you 20 bids to get there you'd end up paying 5 + .75 * 20?
|
On March 20 2009 06:28 PanoRaMa wrote:
I don't understand why this is a scam though? A scam would be them willingly scamming you out of real money for either not the real product or no product at all. If you can inevitably get the same, non-dysfunctional product cheaper than you would at a retailer, how is this being scammed?
edit: oh so, each time you make a bid, it costs 75 cents (assuming you win the product?) So if you ended up winning a product for 5 bucks but it took you 20 bids to get there you'd end up paying 5 + .75 * 20?
We had this in romania some years ago, has been a big scandal with it. It's a scam because practically bids close when they want (with the time incremention) and only the winner gets a product and the bid never closes before the sum of all bids (who are lost when bid). And it's usually "one of theirs" that ends the bid  .
|
It's impossible to beat them buddy. Those electronics don't even exist in reality.
|
On March 20 2009 06:28 PanoRaMa wrote:
I don't understand why this is a scam though? A scam would be them willingly scamming you out of real money for either not the real product or no product at all. If you can inevitably get the same, non-dysfunctional product cheaper than you would at a retailer, how is this being scammed?
edit: oh so, each time you make a bid, it costs 75 cents (assuming you win the product?) So if you ended up winning a product for 5 bucks but it took you 20 bids to get there you'd end up paying 5 + .75 * 20?
I think even if you lose the auction, you still pay 75 cents per bid on that item. That's why it's such a bad thing to get involved with. People will be more likely to continue bidding since they already sunk some money into the auction.
|
Ah ok, thanks for the explanations guys
|
On March 20 2009 06:41 Pika Chu wrote:
It's impossible to beat them buddy. Those electronics don't even exist in reality.
My thoughts exactly. I was wondering if the OP's being naive or if I'm just too paranoid/skeptical
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
Even if it is impossible to beat them, I would still like to get data on the site. If it turns out there is a statistically significant point at which one can make profit, and we bid at those points and never win anything, then that's clearly evidence of fraud. I think it would be pretty satisfying to expose a company for fraud, even if we had to pay a little bit of money to do it.
EDIT: and lol at asking if i'm naive. I called it a scam site didn't I?
|
lol, "if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is."
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On March 20 2009 06:52 CharlieMurphy wrote:
lol, "if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is."
Not if we do research beforehand. Fuck, I knew I'd get a bunch of people telling me not even to bother.
|
On March 20 2009 06:53 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:52 CharlieMurphy wrote:
lol, "if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is." Not if we do research beforehand. Fuck, I knew I'd get a bunch of people telling me not even to bother.
Mate read my posts and you will understand why.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On March 20 2009 06:55 Pika Chu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:53 motbob wrote:On March 20 2009 06:52 CharlieMurphy wrote:
lol, "if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is." Not if we do research beforehand. Fuck, I knew I'd get a bunch of people telling me not even to bother. Mate read my posts and you will understand why.
Why don't you read mine, instead. I already responded to you.
|
Sorry then.
But anyway, what's the point of proving this is a scam? We already know, that's why we don't get tricked into playing and loosing our money in it.
|
|
|
On March 20 2009 06:51 motbob wrote:
Even if it is impossible to beat them, I would still like to get data on the site.
What I really don't get, is why are you asking this of us? I mean, can't you really get some people from your classes to go with it? TeamLiquid is known for beating the internet, but only when it's about competition and fun. Gathering boring data is neither (especially that even TL can't "beat" it, ffs, you don't even have to do anything, just watch and write down numbers...).
Tell me the truth. Is this "project" a homework of yours and you need somene to do all the hard work for you?
And why won't you just read some more about it first?
... frequently seen when parties engage in a bidding war; the bidders can end up paying much more than the object is worth to justify the initial expenses associated with bidding (such as research), as well as part of a competitive instinct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_escalation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_auction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost
The only way to beat it is to not take part in it.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On March 20 2009 07:13 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2009 06:51 motbob wrote:
Even if it is impossible to beat them, I would still like to get data on the site. What I really don't get, is why are you asking this of us? I mean, can't you really get some people from your classes to go with it? TeamLiquid is known for beating the internet, but only when it's about competition and fun. Gathering boring data is neither (especially that even TL can't "beat" it, ffs, you don't even have to do anything, just watch and write down numbers...). Tell me the truth. Is this "project" a homework of yours and you need somene to do all the hard work for you? And why won't you just read some more about it first? Show nested quote +
... frequently seen when parties engage in a bidding war; the bidders can end up paying much more than the object is worth to justify the initial expenses associated with bidding (such as research), as well as part of a competitive instinct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_escalationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_auctionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costThe only way to beat it is to not take part in it.
Yeah, I think the concept of the sunk cost is what loses a lot of people money. After someone bids, that money is gone forever, so they shouldn't base their future bids on what they did earlier. But the "irrational escalation" link, along with the "dollar auction," isn't the same game as Swoopo is. In the "dollar auction" example, both the high bidder and the second highest bidder pay. That was the game tree that we first plotted out in class. It is true that the only way to beat that game is to not take part in it. But, again, Swoopo is not that game.
I have indeed thought about the structure of this game, and whether it is possible to be beaten at all. It's impossible to know without empirical data.
I am surprised that after I posted something that could have been a group effort that would benefit anyone who took part in it, I am now getting accusations that I am pushing the hard work onto other Team Liquid members. That is quite possibly the most insulting thing you could have accused me of. The final project for my class is a group project, so if I were to do this subject, I would have other members of the class to help me.
EDIT: Maybe the best indication that I'm not opposed to doing menial copying and pasting myself is the fact that I'm maintaining the MSL [R&S] thread 
|
On March 20 2009 07:25 motbob wrote:
But the "irrational escalation" link, along with the "dollar auction," isn't the same game as Swoopo is. In the "dollar auction" example, both the high bidder and the second highest bidder pay. That was the game tree that we first plotted out in class. It is true that the only way to beat that game is to not take part in it. But, again, Swoopo is not that game.
Oh, really?
http://www.metafilter.com/75306/The-Dollar-Auction-and-Swoopo
On March 20 2009 07:25 motbob wrote:
I am surprised that after I posted something that could have been a group effort that would benefit anyone who took part in it, I am now getting accusations that I am pushing the hard work onto other Team Liquid members. That is quite possibly the most insulting thing you could have accused me of. The final project for my class is a group project, so if I were to do this subject, I would have other members of the class to help me.
I did not accuse you of anything, merely asked a question (you never know...). I'm sorry if you took it that way and I apologize.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
