Comments on: How to Solve Auction Submission Bias with Financial Incentives

By: Sam Nunez

Sam Nunez — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:45:06 +0000

Yeah, and I like the refundable piece too…. but they still need to approve of the auction though…

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:33:46 +0000

Sam – good point, and that’s what Bido is doing now.

By: Sam Nunez

Sam Nunez — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:32:46 +0000

Wouldn’t it be better to charge a fee as a % of the reserve price? That way you create an incentive for sellers to keep the reserve price low, which should benefit anyone. You can still have a minimum as well to limit junk submissions….

By: Domain Name Wire » News » Changes in Store for Bido Auction Platform - The Domain Industry's News Source

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:55:29 +0000

[...] The third change warrants more attention. How do you get sellers to submit quality domain names and not have to wade through thousands of worth(less) domains? I’ve written before about seller submission bias and how to solve it with economic penalties (see How to Solve Auction Submission Bias with Financial Incentives). [...]

By: Sergio

Sergio — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:35:31 +0000

Great idea!

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:19:43 +0000

I don’t have a problem with the silent auction as long as it’s small. No more than 500-1000 domains. Otherwise it’s too much to sift through.

By: Steve M

Steve M — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:23:47 +0000

This is an excellent idea, Andrew.

I’d be happy to pay a fee for submissions and/or for those actually included.

The auction cos are regularly buried in 10,000-100,000+ submissions for each auction.

Make it $10/name submitted with a limit of 10-20 names, and 80%+ of all the junk would immediately disappear.

I would, however, keep the silent auction/s, as some buyers prefer that acquisition path/option.