Author: Bob Minge
Date: 20:22:01 03/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 20, 2005 at 22:41:19, Mike Byrne wrote: >On March 20, 2005 at 22:31:42, Steve B wrote: > >>>congrats , that was good price, >> >> >>i was not a bidder on this auction >>another member here won it >> >> >> >> >> we do know for sure that the winning bid relected the top bids for both >>>bidders -> they both bid the exact same amount -- winnings bid that are tied >>>reflect the top bids from both bidders...230.03 would have won here by either >>>bidder ... >> >>not exactly.. >>if the earlier bid was $250 with a MAX bid of say $300 and the later bid was a >>max of $250 then we will only see the two $250 bids >>the winning bidder could have had a higher max but it was not invoked because >>the second place bidder only maxed at $250 >>we would not see the winning bidders max as this would mean he would have to pay >>that amount to the seller >>and noone pushed him higher then $250 >> >>Best Steve > >you are mistaken, if some had bid $250, we would have one bid at 230 and the >next bid at $231 (or whatever the was next increment was)... in this auction >they both had bid $230 -- there is no doubt ... whenever a auction ends in a >tie, they bod had bid the exact same amouunt and the earlier bidder wins... > > >Ebay 101 ;>) Regards, > >Michael It only would have gone to $231.00 if the 2nd bidder had bid $230.01 or higher. As long as the bid is less or *the same but made at a later time* the original or winning bid does not have to go higher because it is still the winning bid. So we do not know if the winner had a higher max bid or not.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.