Gunbroker lunacy

Just to be correct, the lack of a reserve in no way means there is no minimum at all. I've seen LOTS of auctions on there advertising "no reserve", only to get a message that I had not bid the minimum asking price. I honestly don't know why they even bother using the term "reserve" on that site at all if they fully plan on ignoring it as a statement of whether or not there is a minimum.
Click to expand...
This simply isn't true. You may have bid an amount that was less than the allowed increment, i.e., the current bid was $100 and you bid $101 but the minimum acceptable increment was $5 so you would have to bid at least $105.

Usually the Buy Now price is also the minimum they'll take, by the way.
Click to expand...

Again, no. From the Gunbroker FAQ:

The BuyNow! price is not like a Starting Bid nor a Reserve Price in that the BuyNow! price does not affect the minimum amount an item can be won for. If you want to guarantee that you will get a certain amount for an item you must use a Starting Bid or Reserve Price.
Click to expand...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Support/SupportFAQView.aspx?faqid=1088
 
Last edited:
Nope, you're wrong. I've been the very first bid on multiple items that had no reserve and was told I had not met the minimum.
You can copy and past the party line all you want, but I know from repeat experience that no reserve does NOT mean no minimum. and generally, that not advertised minimum is generally the "buy it now" price, if there is one listed.
 
There's an easy way to settle this.

One of the "Reserve = Buy Now" people, put up your favorite gun and open the bidding at $1, with no reserve but a Buy Now of $10,000. Stick an extra zero on there, if you must. Post the link so we can all see what happens.

I've never seen the software tell me "There's no reserve but you haven't met the minimum", but a couple sellers have emailed me after the fact to do so. That's just shady, so I forward the email to GunBroker for their attention and make a note not to do business with the seller again.

It's annoying, but not that big a deal in the long run.
 
I've bought a number of guns that were "customized" by previous owners or missed small parts. Exterior cosmetic things like carving a stock poorly or painting something a weird color. Great shooters at great prices.
 
It has a $100 minimum starting bid. You can bid under this, and it will give you a message that you bid under the minimum.
Click to expand...

Re-read your own sentence and you'll see the problem. $100 is the MINIMUM starting bid. Yes, if you try to bid under that it will give you an error because the seller has clearly stated that that's the minimum he'll take. That's what the starting bid is for.

However, this has nothing to do with the Buy Now price. The STARTING bid is the minimum on every auction.

A Starting Bid is the least amount a bidder is allowed to bid in an auction. As the name implies, it is where bidding starts. No bidder can place a bid lower than the Starting Bid. If an auction has a Starting Bid and no Reserve Price, the high bidder on the item will win the item at auction close. Every auction has a Starting Bid, even if the Starting Bid is $.01.
Click to expand...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Support/SupportFAQView.aspx?faqid=1087



You can copy and past the party line all you want, but I know from repeat experience that no reserve does NOT mean no minimum. and generally, that not advertised minimum is generally the "buy it now" price, if there is one listed.
Click to expand...

I'm not just quoting the party line, I'm telling you how the auctions work. Not surprisingly, it's the way Gunbroker's documentation explains it.

I'm going to say this as politely as I can. You have misunderstood the way the auction works.

There is a starting price set by the seller. You can't bid less than the starting price on any auction. Period.

There is an increment. The first bid is always shown as the starting price. Every bid after that has to be greater than the current bid by at least the increment. The amount of the increment varies according to the price.

There can be a reserve. Unless there is, the auction will be won by the highest bid at or over the starting price.

There can be a Buy Now price. On Gunbroker, unlike some other sites, the Buy Now price will stay even if there is a bid. If the Buy Now price is met, the auction is over at that price. However, if the buy now price is not met the auction is still won by the highest bid over the starting price and over the reserve, if there is one.

It's slightly more complicated than that, but that's the gist.
 
Last edited:
Search through the auction prices for different things and you will see a lot of items that have sold for less than the "buy it now" price.

Gunbroker is still a site that can be used to determine current prices for guns and gun parts.
 
Shill bidding happens. You just need to assume it can happen on any auction. I am very strict about only bidding the amount you want to pay for something. I don't think I've ever seen one gun that I've regretted losing in an auction that I couldn't find again. And, this includes 1st gen SAA Colts, Lugers, Sig AMT's, 1911's, Pythons, Fal's, Hac-7's etc.

Even shills want to sell their guns. There's nothing that prevents them from contacting you if their "high bidder" falls through.
 
The statement was that a reserve meant there was a minimum and those without a reserve had no minimum. I provided a clear example that showed this was not the case. It had no reserve and a clearly stated minimum. Actually the term they use is "Starting bid". They set the minimum starting bid they will sell to. You can bid under it all day long and it does not reset the minimum to your bid.

I've just been looking through the listings. They used to have lots of ads with an unadvertised minimum starting bid. It looks like that has changed now. The term "Reserve" is pretty much a waste of time because almost every auction has an advertised "Starting Bid" assigned dollar value that is their minimum. What is the point of having a reserve minimum value if you have a minimum starting bid value that functions in EXACTLY the same way as a reserve?
 
Blozinski, you said,
Andy Blozinski said:
Just to be correct, the lack of a reserve in no way means there is no minimum at all. I've seen LOTS of auctions on there advertising "no reserve", only to get a message that I had not bid the minimum asking price. I honestly don't know why they even bother using the term "reserve" on that site at all if they fully plan on ignoring it as a statement of whether or not there is a minimum. Usually the Buy Now price is also the minimum they'll take, by the way.
Click to expand...

And those sellers are being exactly honest - no reserve means that the minimum bid listed is the minimum they'll take, no hidden numbers games, that's it. Were you being deliberately obtuse, or do you really think sellers on GunBroker should let anything walk for a buck if nobody else is interested that week? I've heard some pretty silly ideas today, but that one takes a big slice of cake.

There are plenty of sellers who won't actually take less than their Buy Now prices, but they're generally different from the ones advertising no reserves.

There are a few good reasons to set a reserve, and a few sketchy ones. For example, if you have something rare and special, but don't have a really good idea of what a fair price is, you can use a high reserve price to feel it out. You open with a low minimum, set your reserve where you'll be happy even if you leave some money on the table, and if you list a few times without selling, well, you adjust your estimates accordingly.

You can use it to offer a lower starting bid and drum up a little bidding momentum, to make sure you attract the attention of a couple bidders who can fight it out, or one really dedicated buyer. This is actually very common in higher-end collectibles, fine art, and so on.

It used to be that eBay charged you a listing fee that was a certain percentage of your "minimum", and a reserve price fee which was a noticeably lower percentage. If you were listing something that might take a while to sell, you could save a few bucks by listing it for $1, with the reserve price at whatever your real minimum was. Fortunately that sort of stupidity isn't common anymore (and GunBroker doesn't charge listing fees at all), so there's no excuse for that.

I know a couple guys who use reserve prices to protect their collections. Their wives have insisted they pare down, so they list their guns and hide stupidly high reserves. Then they can tell their wives, "Honey, I've listed it every week for the past six months, and nobody's buying!" I think that'll blow up eventually, but do as you will, I guess.
 
The statement was that a reserve meant there was a minimum and those without a reserve had no minimum. I provided a clear example that showed this was not the case. It had no reserve and a clearly stated minimum. Actually the term they use is "Starting bid". They set the minimum starting bid they will sell to. You can bid under it all day long and it does not reset the minimum to your bid.
Click to expand...

I've tried to be patient and polite with you, but this is just too much. I don't know what part of "Minimum Starting Bid" is too complex for you to grasp, but it's a pretty simple concept that has been explained to you several times.

Again, every single Gunbroker auction has a minimum starting bid and if you try to bid under it and expect it to work, then you will indeed be disappointed. I don't know how anyone could fail to understand the meaning of the word "minimum" so thoroughly.

min·i·mum
[min-uh-muhm]
noun, plural min·i·mums, min·i·ma [min-uh-muh]
1.
the least quantity or amount possible, assignable, allowable, or the like.
Click to expand...

I suggest before you start telling people that they are wrong and are "repeating the party line" that you do a little homework first.
 
Last edited:
Here's the deal on reserves. Of course, first off, buy it now ain't a reserve.

But there are two kinds of reserves. Official reserves, which aren't stated, and you don't know until you start bidding and keep bidding til you hit it. So official reserves are hidden reserves.

Then there are unofficial or "de facto" reserves - this is extremely common - it happens when there is no official reserve, but the "starting bid" is some minimum that the seller sets even if there has been no bids at all yet. So the de facto reserve is a known reserve (which frankly, is appreciated by buyers - you WANT to know what the reserve is).

Sometimes (not very common) there is both - an actual hidden reserve and a minimum starting bid - but in the case of both, there isn't really a de facto reserve, because the official hidden reserve is higher than the starting bid, so the starting bid is not the de facto reserve.

When a seller sets up (in the software) his/her auction as a "No reserve", yet has a minimum starting bid (de facto reserve), this is disingenuous IMO, and shouldn't be allowed by GB (can't believe they allow it). But I don't consider it to be ACTUAL fraud unless they actually go so far as to put the words "no reserve" or "NR" in the description itself.... where there really is a de facto reserve. It's just a simple outright lie - there is a reserve but the seller claims that there's not a reserve. Just calling the reserve a "starting bid" and making it known doesn't stop it from actually being a reserve, which is a price below which the item cannot sell.

So I have a problem with sellers who put that ("NR") IN the description unless it is truly a no reserve auction. I won't deal with such sellers as a result (there aren't very many that do this, thankfully). If they just put a starting bid (de facto reserve), but don't put "NR" in the description, I'm OK with that, because they're not trying to hook in the people specifically searching for "NR" auctions with what really amounts to a fraud of sorts (albeit fairly harmless; just a slight time waster; I doubt you could prove any damages if you went to court).
 
Last edited:
The auctions on gunbroker I distrust the most are the "penny start" no reserve auctions. I often suspect shill bidding on these auctions. Personally, I don't mind reserve auctions. They get less attention by bidders and if I bid a fair price and the seller really wants to sell the gun, he can just lower the reserve.
 
Then there are unofficial or "de facto" reserves - this is extremely common - it happens when there is no official reserve, but the "starting bid" is some minimum that the seller sets even if there has been no bids at all yet. So the de facto reserve is a known reserve (which frankly, is appreciated by buyers - you WANT to know what the reserve is).

Sometimes (not very common) there is both - an actual hidden reserve and a minimum starting bid - but in the case of both, there isn't really a de facto reserve, because the official hidden reserve is higher than the starting bid, so the starting bid is not the de facto reserve.

When a seller sets up (in the software) his/her auction as a "No reserve", yet has a minimum starting bid (de facto reserve), this is disingenuous IMO, and shouldn't be allowed by GB (can't believe they allow it). But I don't consider it to be ACTUAL fraud unless they actually go so far as to put the words "no reserve" or "NR" in the description itself.... where there really is a de facto reserve. It's just a simple outright lie - there is a reserve but the seller claims that there's not a reserve. Just calling the reserve a "starting bid" and making it known doesn't stop it from actually being a reserve, which is a price below which the item cannot sell.
Click to expand...

There is nothing unofficial or underhanded about a starting bid. It's out there in the open, it's perfectly reasonable and it's covered in detail in the Gunbroker rules, so it's "de jure", not just "de facto".

You have attached a different meaning to the term "reserve" than Gunbroker does, hence the confusion. I realize that "reserve" is sometimes used in the way you describe, but to Gunbroker (and eBay) a "reserve" is a minimum above and beyond the clearly visible starting bid which is hidden from the bidder. In Gunbroker's terminology a "no reserve" auction means that there is no such HIDDEN minimum, even though there may be a starting bid. So in GB speak it is perfectly fair to call an auction with a starting bid and no hidden minimum a "No Reserve" auction, even if that's not consistent with YOUR terminology.

I don't like Reserve auctions, because I feel it is unfair for the bidder to have to guess how much the seller wants and the highest bid should win the auction. Gunbroker advises against them, I never use them and rarely bid on auctions that do.

I think the problem here is that a lot of guys want to make up their own set of rules and terminology and impose it on Gunbroker, then complain when it doesn't fit.

If you took the time to read the clearly documented rules and understand them, you'll find it's well thought out and very fair.
 
I don't think that anyone has complained that Gunbroker itself is unfair; just how people use it. Really, it works just like a good live auction. In live auctions, sellers often use reserves and minimums. The only real difference is the 15 minute rule. I suppose this is there to prevent bid sniping, and to be fair, bid sniping doesn't really happen in live auctions only ebay auctions. So, maybe it's not a bad counter to bid sniping.

I've gone to several Rock Island auctions. Even there, folks would complain about the "phone bidders" and claim that wasn't fair. Some folks want to see who they are bidding against. The Rock Island Auction is one of the finest I've ever attended. Gunbroker is actually about as fair as an internet auction can be.

If you want to know how an unscrupulous auction is really run, I'll tell you. Some local auctioneer is commissioned to run a live auction to auction off an estate with some substantial personal property, some vehicles and perhaps some real estate.

1) The auctioneer promises to inventory all of the personal property before he carts it off to be auctioned. What he really does is inventory about 1/2 of what is there and many items simply disappear, with no record of what was ever in the house - who knows where this stuff ends up.

2) Then he lumps valuable things with not-so-valuable things and separates them into "lots". Not necessarily unethical, unless you have a crook running the auction. Even good auction houses sell items in lots, but the good ones make an honest attempt to group things in a manner to net the most money to the owner.

3) Then the auctioneer uses his wife to bid on lots where he knows the goodies are hidden, or just has her bid on them directly, and stops the bids before anyone else has a chance to bid on it.

So, you folks who complain about reserves and minimum bids, and even shills (yes, I do complain about shills too), perhaps you have never seen what happens at a real crooked auction. It's real ugly.
 
Last edited:
Unlicensed Dremel said:
When a seller sets up (in the software) his/her auction as a "No reserve", yet has a minimum starting bid (de facto reserve), this is disingenuous IMO, and shouldn't be allowed by GB (can't believe they allow it). But I don't consider it to be ACTUAL fraud unless they actually go so far as to put the words "no reserve" or "NR" in the description itself.... where there really is a de facto reserve. It's just a simple outright lie - there is a reserve but the seller claims that there's not a reserve. Just calling the reserve a "starting bid" and making it known doesn't stop it from actually being a reserve, which is a price below which the item cannot sell.

So I have a problem with sellers who put that ("NR") IN the description unless it is truly a no reserve auction. I won't deal with such sellers as a result (there aren't very many that do this, thankfully). If they just put a starting bid (de facto reserve), but don't put "NR" in the description, I'm OK with that, because they're not trying to hook in the people specifically searching for "NR" auctions with what really amounts to a fraud of sorts (albeit fairly harmless; just a slight time waster; I doubt you could prove any damages if you went to court).
Click to expand...

Let's say for a moment that someone is selling a classic, numbers-matching, all-original, late-60s Shelby GT-somethingsomething, and lists it somewhere for "$100,000 O.B.O.". That's not a totally unfair price for a car like that, but it's a lot of money and nobody bites right away. A guy calls him and says "I'll give you five hundred bucks for it." The owner laughs it off. Two weeks later, he still hasn't received any takers, and he gets another call. It's the same guy, and he asks if anyone has bought the car yet. The owner says no, he's had a few questions about the car but nobody has made an offer yet.

The "buyer" says he offered $500 two weeks ago, so the car should be his! He'll even pay for the crating and transport.

The seller declines.

The "buyer" then throws a fit, saying that the listing said "Or Best Offer" and that his was the best offer, so the seller is being disingenuous and he can't believe the listing site allows that.

Guess what? You're That Guy. "Or Best Offer" means the seller's willing to haggle, not that he's going to sell no matter what. "No Reserve" means that the numbers you see are numbers the seller is willing to take.
 
Gunbroker is actually about as fair as an internet auction can be.
Click to expand...

Which hardly means it's fair. Nobody can convince me that there aren't shill bids and shill A+ ratings as a common occurrence. I'm positive that people do this as a second job. I'm waiting till I catch a gun on there bouncing between three shill accounts so I can swear off the broker for good
 
I've made a few purchases through gunbroker and always been satisfied with the cost and condition of the items.

But on occasion I'm almost stunned at the prices some items go for. :confused:
 
But on occasion I'm almost stunned at the prices some items go for.
Click to expand...

That's just it, skoro: The gun that sold for 200% of what you'd expect it to sell for wasn't sold at all. Some seller simply logged into gunbroker under another account and 'bought it' at an inflated price, then gave himself, the 'seller', an A + rating. I can't think of a scheme to get rid of this aspect of gunbroker. Can anyone?

What I'd love to know is - have any of you seen a gun go for an inflated price and then seen the same gun on there again; essentially as a 'do-over' under another account?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top