[17-11-2009|20:00] weaving mill 14000sq.m 1pcs

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:34 pm

so it seems that i won it with buy it now.
plese send the contract to Xapkib

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:29 am

Regarding rules the winner is Xapkib.

All who want weaver of 13200sq.m check auction regular.
I'll put it to auction soon.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:20 pm

● Buy-It-Now - You may choose to set a 'buy it now' price in which a person can pay that amount to buy the items without actively bidding. Do be aware however if the actual bids come within 15% of this price the option automatically becomes invalid.

For example if the BIN price is 1,000,000 cT if the bids exceed 850,000 then the BIN option becomes invalid.
Similarly this applies to amounts per item. If a BIN price is 100 cT per item then bids must not exceed 85 cT before the option becomes invalid.

This must be stated in the first post however; the option may be added later but only if there have been no bids.

my interpretation of this rule is that unless someone posts at least a bid of 500 million - 15%, i.e., 425 million, the buy it now option is still available. Which seems to have been exercised.
THe way he worded his bid is a bit ambiguous as he simply says "i will buy it for 500mil. please send contract to Xapkib"

Which can be construed as a simple 500 million bid too as the bidder is placing a bid for 500 million and naming the city for his bid to be proper and valid. I wish people were just a tiny bit clearer.

Best option in my mind is to leave it up to the auctioneer to decide which way they want it going since there is nothing wrong with the further bids per se. My advice is to monitor your auctions and demand clear declarations of intent. Abmbiguous bids can be recognised only by the auctioneer and then only if they clearly state that in a post.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:37 pm

I don't think that the wording was ambiguous at all (I agree with Windy).

Xapkib did not say "I will BID 500 million", he said "I will BUY it for 500 million (the word BUY was clearly stated as was the original BIN price) the wording was appropriate as was the amount Bought for. The two matched.

I do not see [/i] AT ALL how I "BUY" or I "BID" can be confused for one another. The two words are as different as night and day

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:51 pm

BP, thats what I call borderline ambiguous.

See, what if I placed a bid of lets say 480 million, but worded thus:

I will buy it for 480 million, please send it to xxxxx

Now that is a bid! isn't it...... I'm not disclaiming that the guy wanted to put in a BIN offer, I'm just saying he could have been clearer and might have saved some trouble. There are way too many ways to interpret things. That is why I leave it to the auctioneer to recognise what he/she recognises as valid. Also, this is only if someone asks me to referee (I haven't been), if I was, I would have a problem seeing his wording as a strict "Buy it Now" offer. I like things clear as a summer sky. So, they ahve 2 options, Windy can make up his mind or ask me to decide, I'm afraid I'm not 100% inclined either way and I'd need to think more.

The other part of my advice is simple, if you want to be heard, speak a language that the relevant person can understand and we stick by any fair interpretation made by the auctioneer. If you aren't happy with that then you should have tried to follow the rules even more closely to have that on your side.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:53 pm

no worries!

Just felt like it was an interesting discussion

lol

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:13 pm

I can see what PK is saying that there is some mild ambiguity in the way it was worded. However, I also dont think that any reasonable interpretation of the Auction guidelines as first posted, and the buy post which is being disputed, could be construed as any thing other than a BIN offer.

This is just my opinion/interpretation of what happened, and is not meant to belittle anyone's thoughts on this matter. To avoid any other future misunderstandings, I think, as PK suggested, that all bids and bins be clearly and precisely stated.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:22 pm

I think, better is to use simple rule in the future. BIN is available if no bid presents. That's all.
It is more interesting. if you see auction with two very nice price one is very low and bin not to high you should decide or go risky way (set bid and wait for luck that nobody sees this auction) or use buy it now option.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:50 am

I will change it back to that rule:

BIN is available only if no previous bid.

I never realised the revised rule until too late too.... I'd given up on auctions myself! I put in clear rules on mine and rcv no bids

I'm no expert in setting them