3 ms·

You know how they could help charities more? By charging what their time is actually worth and then donating that to charity. edit: Auctions don't mean it 'aut

by jgmmo 15y ago

You know how they could help charities more? By charging what their time is actually worth and then donating that to charity. edit: Auctions don't mean it 'automatically' goes up. It means it 'should' go up, so long as the site has enough bidders and sellers such that it generally resembles an 'efficient market'. You could argue that Ebay has an efficient market and that prices generally gravitate towards their 'real world value' (whatever that is) but I think that case is far from being made for this website and it's auctions.

chrischen 15y ago
That's why it's an auction system, the price automatically goes up to what it's actually worth. EDIT in response to EDIT: I'm confused by what point you're trying to make here. "It means it 'should' go up, so long as the site has enough bidders and sellers..." So is that the point you're trying to make? Are you saying the site does not have enough bidders to bring it to market price? If that's the case, then charging 'market value' still wouldn't work, would it? If it still wouldn't work, then can you elaborate on the point you were trying to make with your original comment? How would your proposed method help charities more?
- jgmmo 15y ago
  "If that's the case, then charging 'market value' still wouldn't work, would it?" That is not true. If a price is set at a certain point at the start, then it doesn't take hundreds or thousands of bids from users in order to reach the market value. I'm sure Alexis's time is worth north of 500 an hour - wouldn't it be interesting if he could charge that much and give to charity? instead of hoping that thousands of HN readers will bid some quarters and maybe muster a grand total of 50 dollars for a whopping hour of donated time for charity. If all the losers bids were still collected, penny auction style, then maybe there is a way it can net more than the 'set value' method of pricing. Otherwise it seems like charities would be losing a lot of money, atleast for the time being while the markets are inefficient and you can hire tech gurus for $1 a minute.
  - chrischen 15y ago
    But what about helping scrappy entrepreneurs? Why is donating $500 to charity better than say Alexis donating $500 worth of time to entrepreneurs and $50 to charity? I mean this service is mainly about connecting entrepreneurs, and not a necessarily about fundraising for charity, right? Also, to reach $500, you would only need two people bidding on one time slot who are willing to pay that much and it will reach that value.

by jgmmo 15y ago

chrischen 15y ago

That's why it's an auction system, the price automatically goes up to what it's actually worth. EDIT in response to EDIT: I'm confused by what point you're trying to make here. "It means it 'should' go up, so long as the site has enough bidders and sellers..." So is that the point you're trying to make? Are you saying the site does not have enough bidders to bring it to market price? If that's the case, then charging 'market value' still wouldn't work, would it? If it still wouldn't work, then can you elaborate on the point you were trying to make with your original comment? How would your proposed method help charities more?

jgmmo 15y ago
"If that's the case, then charging 'market value' still wouldn't work, would it?" That is not true. If a price is set at a certain point at the start, then it doesn't take hundreds or thousands of bids from users in order to reach the market value. I'm sure Alexis's time is worth north of 500 an hour - wouldn't it be interesting if he could charge that much and give to charity? instead of hoping that thousands of HN readers will bid some quarters and maybe muster a grand total of 50 dollars for a whopping hour of donated time for charity. If all the losers bids were still collected, penny auction style, then maybe there is a way it can net more than the 'set value' method of pricing. Otherwise it seems like charities would be losing a lot of money, atleast for the time being while the markets are inefficient and you can hire tech gurus for $1 a minute.
- chrischen 15y ago
  But what about helping scrappy entrepreneurs? Why is donating $500 to charity better than say Alexis donating $500 worth of time to entrepreneurs and $50 to charity? I mean this service is mainly about connecting entrepreneurs, and not a necessarily about fundraising for charity, right? Also, to reach $500, you would only need two people bidding on one time slot who are willing to pay that much and it will reach that value.