IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitdm/v03y2004i04ns0219622004001239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shill Bidding In Online English Auctions With A Random Number Of Bidders

Author

Listed:
  • JUN MA

    (School of Management, University of International Business and Economics, Beijing 100029, China)

  • SHOUYANG WANG

    (Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100080, China;
    College of Business Administration, Hunan University, Changsha, Hunan 410082, China)

  • K. K. LAI

    (Department of Management Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China)

Abstract

Shill bidding has increased substantially with the explosion in the number of online auctions. For English auctions with conventional intermediation fee schedules and a continuous increment of the bid, sellers may profit from shill bidding, which is illegal. To deter shill bidding, Wanget al.31designed a mechanism — the shill-deterrent fee schedule (SDFS) which makes shill bidding unprofitable. This paper analyzes the feasibility of applying SDFS rules to both single round and multi-round English auctions in a framework of independent private value (IPV) with a random number of bidders. It is shown that most of the results in Wanget al.31remain true at our cases. In addition, we also propose an approach for sellers to reset the subsequent reserves in multi-round English auctions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jun Ma & Shouyang Wang & K. K. Lai, 2004. "Shill Bidding In Online English Auctions With A Random Number Of Bidders," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(04), pages 539-562.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:03:y:2004:i:04:n:s0219622004001239
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219622004001239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219622004001239
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219622004001239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Indranil Chakraborty & Georgia Kosmopoulou, 2004. "Auctions with shill bidding," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(2), pages 271-287, August.
    2. Alvin E. Roth & Axel Ockenfels, 2000. "Last Minute Bidding and the Rules for Ending Second-Price Auctions: Theory and Evidence from a Natural Experiment on the Internet," NBER Working Papers 7729, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhen Li & Ching-Chung Kuo, 2013. "Design of discrete Dutch auctions with an uncertain number of bidders," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 255-272, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Flavio Menezes & Matthew J. Ryan, 2006. "Auctions with options to re‐auction," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 2(1), pages 17-39, March.
    3. Rasmusen Eric Bennett, 2006. "Strategic Implications of Uncertainty over One's Own Private Value in Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-24, November.
    4. Ravi Bapna & Paulo Goes & Alok Gupta, 2003. "Analysis and Design of Business-to-Consumer Online Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(1), pages 85-101, January.
    5. Andrew Komo & Scott Duke Kominers & Tim Roughgarden, 2024. "Shill-Proof Auctions," Papers 2404.00475, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.
    6. SHINOZAKI, Hiroki, 2024. "Shill-proof rules in object allocation problems with money," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-137, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.
    7. Chen, Kong-Pin & Lai, Hung-pin & Yu, Ya-Ting, 2018. "The seller's listing strategy in online auctions: Evidence from eBay," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 107-144.
    8. Péter Esö & Lucy White, 2004. "Precautionary Bidding in Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 77-92, January.
    9. Barbaro, Salvatore & Bracht, Bernd, 2021. "Shilling, Squeezing, Sniping. A further explanation for late bidding in online second-price auctions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    10. McAdams, David & Schwarz, Michael, 2007. "Who pays when auction rules are bent?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 1144-1157, October.
    11. Peters, Michael & Severinov, Sergei, 2006. "Internet auctions with many traders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 220-245, September.
    12. Ingebretsen Carlson, Jim & Wu, Tingting, 2022. "Shill bidding and information in eBay auctions: A Laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 341-360.
    13. Ronald M. Harstad & Aleksandar Saša Pekeč, 2008. "Relevance to Practice and Auction Theory: A Memorial Essay for Michael Rothkopf," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 367-380, October.
    14. Müller, R.J., 2001. "Auctions : the big winner among trading mechanisms for the Internet economy," Research Memorandum 016, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Lamy, Laurent, 2009. "The Shill Bidding Effect versus the Linkage Principle," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 390-413, January.
    16. Maria Garvalova, 2001. "Game Modeling of the Auctions in Internet," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 119-125.
    17. Vasilis Syrgkanis & David Kempe & Eva Tardos, 2019. "Information Asymmetries in Common-Value Auctions with Discrete Signals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 1450-1476, November.
    18. Nikitkov, Alexey & Bay, Darlene, 2015. "Shill bidding: Empirical evidence of its effectiveness and likelihood of detection in online auction systems," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 42-54.
    19. Alex Nikitkov & Darlene Bay, 2008. "Online Auction Fraud: Ethical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 235-244, May.
    20. Michael H. Rothkopf & Sunju Park, 2001. "An Elementary Introduction to Auctions," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 83-97, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:03:y:2004:i:04:n:s0219622004001239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm/ijitdm.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.