6 ms·

I don't see a problem there. He still has to pay the ebay fees and everything, so he will loose anyway. And he won't bid on the item himself if he thinks it's

• mustpax 16y ago
  That's what reserve prices are for. To claim that there's no reserve price and then place shill bids to reach a certain minimum is deceptive.
• hugh3 16y ago
  The problem is that dummy bids by the vendor in an attempt to artificially drive up the price are against the rules of eBay's auction model. Buyers and sellers both agree to abide by certain rules, and one of those rules is that the seller only gets to make one "bid", the reserve, which is secret until it's reached and known when it's surpassed. Now, you could equally well have a different auction model, whereby the seller gets to make as many bids as he likes. But this model would be much less attractive to buyers, since I know even if I'm the only buyer the seller is just going to keep increasing the price until he thinks he's got to the maximum I'm possibly going to spend. So as a buyer I'm much more inclined to buy on the single-reserve system than on the multiple-seller-bid system. Dummy bids are a problem as old as auctions themselves, but it's good to see people being prosecuted when they're caught.
• Daniel_Newby 16y ago
  Winning with a shill bid defrauds the next highest bidder, to whom you had an obligation to sell.