Evil Business Models: Turning The Dollar Auction Into A Profit Center
from the human-psychology-at-work dept
On my very first day of econ 101 as a freshman in college many, many years ago, my professor played a "game" with two students in the class in order to demonstrate how incentives can lead to bad outcomes for everyone. He held up a dollar, and told each student that they were competing to "buy" the dollar. However, rather than a standard auction, both parties had to pay whatever their final bid was. Thus, even the loser has to pay. This leads to screwed up incentives, where things quickly spiral out of control. At first, one student will bid a penny, and of course the other student will bid 2 pennies. In both of their minds, it makes sense to bid up to $1 to get $1 back. Except... once you hit $1, the other student doesn't want to lose, knowing he's going to pay out without getting anything back -- so the bidding zooms past $1, with both participants knowing that they're going to lose money, but wanting to "win" in order to make sure they don't lose as much as the other one. In the end, the only one who makes out well is the econ professor who collects the money from both students and only has to pay back one dollar. I think in my year, he ended up making $3 or $4 before the students gave up, realizing things were only going to get worse. This is apparently a popular exercise in a number of econ classes, called the Dollar Auction.However, it looks like some enterprising or evil students who played (or observed) that game have decided to build a startup on the same principle, where they (of course) play the role of the econ professor, and everyone else becomes the suckers who are eventually forced to overbid to minimize their losses. Tom sends in a link to a description of how swoopo works, and it sounds very much like the dollar auction. Basically, you purchase "bids" and each bid you place increases the purchase price of an auction and extends the auction a little longer. In other words, everyone keeps paying, hoping that they'll eventually get the "good" offered for sale at lower than face price. But, of course, like the dollar auction, because of the competition, the incentives get set so that people are likely to keep spending to get something back for their bids, rather than nothing at all. Swoopo is slightly more insidious in that the "price" of the item increases at less than the cost per bid, such that the price of the item stays lower than its list price for a long time, even though many people bid on it. That creates a scenario, as described in the post, where users of the site end up shelling out a grand total of $1,125.90 to the company, for an 8GB iPod Touch that lists at $229. Most of the bidders end up with nothing... and only one got the Touch for $187.65 plus whatever money he spent on bids.
While you have to be impressed with the sheer obnoxiousness of the business model, you have to wonder how long it can last, once people start to realize that the only winner is the company itself, and most of the "buyers" turn out to be big, big losers. The dollar auction works great if you play it once... or if you can keep finding suckers. If the suckers recognize that they're suckers, things dry up quickly.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, dollar auction, economics
Companies: swoopo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If suckers realized they were suckers, casinos wouldn't continue to be tourist venues.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i don't get it...
is there anything to stop me from offering my "competitor" a deal upfront? I won't bid against you in exchange for a 60/40 split. You bid a penny, i fold, we both turn over a penny, take the dollar and you give me 40 cents. we win, prof loses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: i don't get it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: i don't get it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: i don't get it...
Besides, this goes back to prisoners dilemma a bit...
Try this exercise, it is a variation on dollar auction..
I have 100 dollars to give you, or I can give you and a friend 150 to split between you... how will you split it?... rationally, it reaches 149.99 for you and 1 cent for your friend because they're happy to get something instead of nothing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legalized Internet Gambling
P.T. Barnum said it best...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not quite the dollar auction
And since it's not described as a game of chance, I'll make a totally uneducated guess that it's actually legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite the dollar auction
I'm not defending the business model, but you often have to pay to attend an auction. Watching the front page is actually quite addicting also not all the auctions seem to be as lopsided as the one mentioned in the article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite the dollar auction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not quite the dollar auction
I was quoting Petréa Mitchell: "In the dollar auction, the motivation comes from having to pay your entire bid even if you don't get the dollar. That doesn't come into play here. This looks more like a cleverly disguised lottery with 75-cent tickets."
My response, which got cut off:
Each bid costs 75 cents, whether you win or lose. If a player makes enough bids he stands to lose out on all of the bidding-cost money even if he doesn't win the auction item. So the incentive is the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To 'win' you need to be the guy to place the LAST bid -- if you make the winning bid on your first try, that's ideal. The game is made trickier, though, by the fact that each bid prolongs the auction, so the would-be-sniper could be sniped! Thre fact that each bid costs money incentivises people to do just that because they've already 'paid' for the item.
Concievably it would also discourage some people from making further bids, but I'm not sure how that would play out in reality (people tend not to be rational).
I think it's actually quite brilliant, and I wouldn't really compare it to the Dollar Auction per se, though I do concede the similarities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
just use your head!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i'll just watch for now thank you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]