I find this to be unusual. It seems that sometime between July 23rd 2011 or later and May 31st 2012, ebay quietly changed it’s shill bidding policy from this:
What are the guidelines?
Restricted
Using Buy It Now or a fixed price format to buy an item from someone you know, as long as you don’t violate our Feedback manipulation or search and browse manipulation policies
Not allowed
To this (the current verbiage.)
What are the guidelines?
Restricted
Buying an item from someone you know, as long as you don’t intend to artificially increase its price or desirability or violate our Feedback manipulation or search and browse manipulation policies
Not allowed
Bidding on your own items with another account
As you can see, those are quite substantial changes.
I have searched the ebaY announcements and forums extensively now, finding nothing announcing or referring to this alteration.
June 9, 2012:
To update a bit here.
I’ve located indication the shill bidding policy existed in it’s former state here in September 2011.
Also this search on Blekko, which is for exact, partial verbiage of the former policy language, indicates that the page was likely changed much much later than that, however long since Blekko’s last crawl. Note that I captured this on June 3rd, 2012. That is very telling.
(click thumbnails to enlarge in a new tab or window)
Furthermore, I’ve examined the shill bidding policy or corresponding page of each and every English language ebaY site on the planet and found that nowhere else was language regarding employees bidding on their employer’s auctions removed other than the USA. Try it yourself.
Here is an example. Ebay India Shill Bidding Policy page. You’ll notice the language regarding employees bidding, with basically only the names in the examples changed.
Very curious to say the least. The implications are huge.
To complicate matters, ebay still has shill bidding tutorials in place which contain the language regarding employees disallowed to bid on their employer’s items. Those pages are nearly identical worldwide.
Update 06-12-2012: It seems the shill bidding tutorials for the USA have been altered as well. Learn more.
As far as the USA, there is some blatantly conflicting info being is being dispensed on ebay’s pages: the shill bidding policy Vs shill bidding tutuorial.
This discovery also comes on the heels of a full blown scandal involving VH1′s “House of Consignment” TV reality star, ebay seller and edropoff owner Corri McFadden, who is accused of shill bidding and now being criticized for censorship and abuse of both critics and the court system, with an attempt to silence her critics with a SLAPP.
The changes to the policy would make it very easy for ebaY to claim the alleged shill bidder was acting within the rules. So finding exactly when that policy was changed may be a crucial fact with regards to that matter.
I’m wondering whether ebay may make a statement as to when and why this policy was changed?
See this update:
ebaY’s Secret Shill Bidding Policy and Tutorial Changes Revisited
June 4, 2012 at 6:50 am
eBay’s policy on shill bidding is irrelevant. Throughout the civilized world, shill bidding, no matter who actually does it, is considered to be criminal fraud, and it is as plain as the noses on our faces that habitual and rampant shill bidding wire fraud is (still) occurring on eDropOff’s auctions.
The only question that still remains unanswered is, when is a Federal prosecutor finally going to take up the matter of eBay’s blatant ongoing facilitation of such rampant wire fraud?
June 5, 2012 at 4:53 pm
I’m don’t know how to read a spreadsheet and am not a shill bidding or ebay aficionado. How does your spreadsheet at: http://bit.ly/MJlM6b prove to me and the people who don’t read spreadsheets or know every tiny detail about ebay that there is any shill bidding going on? Is there some other form you can present that in to make the info more easily understandable and palatable? Put another way, if this were a trial and you were a lawyer, would you just thrown an elephant folio volume at the jury and tell them the proof is in there somewhere?
June 5, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Corrie McFadden, Is that you??
June 6, 2012 at 6:51 pm
Without some type of breakdown, whatever is listed in that file isn’t even worth opening.
Do you have any facts written in plain english from your data you can share with the world?
Can you tell us how the data was collected?
Is/was it compared to any test or control groups?
Can you quantify the problem.
How many victims were there?
How many shills were there?
What are the dollar amounts involved?
How many items are being won by alleged shill bidders as opposed to the legitimate bidders??
What actually happens to the items “won” by the shills?
Are they relisted on ebay? – If so, how many/what percentage?
Pointing to a big pile of rocks doesn’t amount to giving away gold nuggets.
June 6, 2012 at 7:16 pm
Corrie McFadden, Is that you, again?
June 6, 2012 at 8:07 pm
@Philip Charles Cohen
No. Absolutely not. I have no connection to that person or any of her interests.
Now, are you going to answer the questions?
Or will you just deflect with another misdirected ad hominem response?
June 6, 2012 at 8:23 pm
I have no urge to debate issues with a person who is clearly incapable of seeing the forest for the trees, nor is capable of reading a spreadsheet; now go away Corri.
June 6, 2012 at 8:46 pm
Thank you for sharing your master debater skills with us Mr. Cohen.
Your spreadsheet is meaningless without interpretation and/or adherence to accepted scientific methodologies.
June 6, 2012 at 8:59 pm
And you cannot even read a spreadsheet, so you say …
Buzz off troll, stop wasting our time …
June 6, 2012 at 11:58 pm
If anyone knows an up and coming federal or states’ attorney that would like to make a name for him/herself then this matter surely is a gift; I can see the headline now:
“eBay Guilty of Rampant Wire Fraud
“Found to be the greatest criminal facilitator of massive wire fraud on consumers the world over.
“The penalty phase is to follow; penalties are expected to be in the billions of dollars.
CA could use that sort of money, I hear …
April 21, 2013 at 7:02 am
I see you’ve already been asked :
Can you tell us how the data was collected?
Is/was it compared to any test or control groups?
Can you quantify the problem.
How many victims were there?
How many shills were there?
What are the dollar amounts involved?
How many items are being won by alleged shill bidders as opposed to the legitimate bidders??
What actually happens to the items “won” by the shills?
Are they relisted on ebay? – If so, how many/what percentage?
Do you have a reply to these questions?
What kind of researcher refuses to gives the parameters of the research? What kind of researcher are you? Tell us.
The only headline I see is
“Philip Cohen, troll, spammer, assclown”
June 8, 2012 at 7:24 pm
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.[1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories.
A field, practice, or body of knowledge can reasonably be called pseudoscientific when it is presented as consistent with the norms of scientific research, but it demonstrably fails to meet these norms.[2] Science is also distinguishable from revelation, theology, or spirituality in that it offers insight into the physical world obtained by empirical research and testing.[3] Commonly held beliefs in popular science may not meet the criteria of science.[4] “Pop” science may blur the divide between science and pseudoscience among the general public, and may also involve science fiction.[4] Pseudoscientific beliefs are widespread, even among public school science teachers and newspaper reporters.[5]
The demarcation problem between science and pseudoscience has ethical political implications, as well as philosphical and scientific issues.[6] Differentiating science from pseudoscience has practical implications in the case of health care, expert testimony, environmental policies, and science education.[7] Distinguishing scientific facts and theories from pseudoscientific beliefs such as those found in astrology, medical quackery, and occult beliefs combined with scientific concepts, is part of science education and scientific literacy.[8]
The term “pseudoscience” is often considered inherently pejorative, because it suggests something is being inaccurately or even deceptively portrayed as science.[9] Accordingly, those labeled as practicing or advocating pseudoscience normally dispute the characterization.[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
Good day, Sir
June 8, 2012 at 8:38 pm
Yeah, now back to your eBay cubicle, shill …
June 12, 2012 at 10:40 pm
The forum where I post my detailed criticisms of eBay has recently changed its name from auctionbytes.com to ecommercebytes.com so that all the hyperlinks thereto that I have ever posted all over the internet in the past four–five years are now broken.
If you have a weekend with nothing better to do, or you simply want to know just how unscrupulous organisations like eBay and its ugly adopted daughter, PayPal, can be, here are some selected links, primarily to do with the scourge of eBay: rampant shill bidding fraud …
eBay introduces absolute anonymity for (shill) bidders
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=21894
eBay-Facilitated Shill Bidding Fraud on eBay Auctions: Case Study #1
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=22659
eBay-Facilitated Shill Bidding Fraud on eBay Auctions: Case Study #2
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=22904
eBay-Facilitated Shill Bidding Fraud on eBay Auctions: Case Study #3
A Study of Two eBay-Touted Power Sellers
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=22986
eBay-Facilitated Shill Bidding Fraud on eBay Auctions: Case Study #4
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=23540
PreyPal: The New Way To Pay In-Store
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=24611
When Do We Start Calling eBay A [Failed] Payments Company?
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=24590
Some Statute Law on (Shill Bidding) Fraud
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=22923
And from along the way a compilation of (mostly inane) quotes from eBay executives:
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/forums/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=24159
June 25, 2012 at 2:08 am
Obvious troll is obvious: replying to his own spam with more spam. can’t or won’t answer neutral questions, resorts to name calling and insults because reasonable replies would reveal his errors.
Most of all, the new no shill bidding policy means no shill bidding “experts”. Your internet presence became meaningless with one policy change.
Good day. :-)
June 25, 2012 at 3:11 am
Are you truly so “thick”, Ben? Regardless, what can I say, other than, again …
“… back to your eBay cubicle, eBay shill …”
June 27, 2012 at 12:44 am
@ Phillip Cohen. I’ve never seen someone say so little with so many words, as in your never-ending omnipresent cut and paste spam on the evils of shill bidding, or say so much with so few as your shill-cubicle replies to simple, valid questions.
December 21, 2012 at 12:19 pm
Auction laws in all 50 states allow bidders to bid on their own items. Ebay did at one time..until they started charging to have a reserve. Then they had to ban it because it could be used to do the same thing as a reserve without paying ther fees. So they used for an example a seller charged with selling fake artwork who also created fake accounts to make it seem famous museums were bidding on the items — to make it seem the wire fraud charges were for shill bidding rather than selling fake artwork!
The ebay old shill bidding polkicy created problems for people who are bidding on items from trusted local sellers, or those who perhaps cared enough to inspect an item in person before bidding. (Do they now “know” the seller? Do they now have more knowledge than other bidders and must disqualify themselves?) Ebay drop-off stores were forced to watch their consignor’s items sell for less than their true value if an employee wanted to bid on them — hurting the consignor, who gets less for his item, and both ebay and the drop-off store, who make less commissions. The new policy is fair to all parties.
December 21, 2012 at 2:13 pm
Can you quote chapter and verse as to which “auction laws” specify that it’s OK to bid on your own items? (remember, ebay policies are NOT laws, and even they state that shill bidding is unlawful)
If the new shill bidding policy is all that, why did they change it secretly? Why no announcement? And whenever it was briefly posted to ebay forums, they deleted the post in record time.
Look, I think we all know it’s cheating and dishonest, except for the bizzarro world where a neutral is a negative because it’s not a positive, a 5 star rating system is used as a Binary scale, where no communication is 5 star communication etc…
BTW, the coin world is sure a fraud filled cluster, and I sure wouldn’t advise anyone to go near sleazebay for their coin collecting needs.
December 21, 2012 at 4:49 pm
From the State of Kentucky government website, for example.
http://auctioneers.ky.gov/terminology.html
“The seller, or someone acting on the seller’s behalf, may bid, provided that full disclosure has been made that liberty for such bidding is retained. A licensee shall not knowingly receive such a bid without this full disclosure.”
So it’s legal if disclosed…and in the USA, it’s almost ALWAYS disclosed in the fine print of the “terms and conditions” , with wording such as “consignor may participate” which is, of course, deliberately worded so as to not sound as offensive as “sellers are allowed to run up the bids,” but that is exactly what it means.
Whatever the laws are in the EU or Australia are, eBay is a USA based company, and their “shill bidding” rules are just that – rules — and Ebay can suspend violators, but thank God there are no prison sentences for violating a company policy.
Mr Cohen, an Australia-based retiree if I understand correctly, tries to mix up his own country’s determination of auction laws, with USA laws on wire fraud (that’s generally hacking a bank account online and draining it of at least $10,000, or using the telephone to sell people worthless stocks)
December 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm
So… such licenses, which were not crafted for online auctions, which ebay sellers do not possess, are not required to possess, nor operate under their terms, and the likes of which ebay lobbied against, even while the ‘community’ presented vociferous opposition to, contain provisions which allow ebay sellers to cheat people in a cyber wild west carnival sideshow price rigging stooge style scam?
Although that notion seems to be purely made of red herring flavored pettifoggery, it brings up more reasons to avoid ebay like the plague. Being completely unregulated and unlicensed, ebay users have no idea who is on the other end, and what may occur as a result of using ebay. Here’s a great example. http://bit.ly/102KEwi
Readers here can clearly see the mindset of ebay sellers. It closely resembles that of ebay. Profit at all costs. Profit above rights, above honesty…. Profits above all. As a matter of policy, you will get shilled and cheated.
There are so many other good reasons to avoid ebay, the shill bidding problem is comparatively small.
December 29, 2012 at 10:17 pm
My God, how thick can be an apparently mature adult? “Shill” bidding is UN-disclosed vendor bidding, NOT disclosed vendor bidder—sheesh …
Indeed, unless you are yourself such a shyster, you should understand that “disclosure” means disclosure at the moment the bid is made, not simply in the “fine print” on the wall … If it works any way other than by actual disclosure at the time the vendor bid is made then that is effectively fraud … and I’m not interested in hearing about what the norm is at the crooked, off-line auctions that you frequent …
Regardless, eBay auctions are online and any such fraud thereon is considered “wire” fraud; “wire fraud” is proscribed by a federal stature and therefore online fraud, such as eBay can be demonstrated as knowingly and calculatedly facilitating, is a crime in every state of the Union …
I suggest all eBay shills/employees should acquaint themselves with the definition of “fraud”, particularly that for “wire fraud”: US Criminal Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 63, §1343, “Fraud by wire, radio, or television”, viz
“Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. …”
Are you truly so thick that you are unable to comprehend that an un-disclosed vendor bid is considered to be a fraudulent pretense?
Now, those of you that are simply simple, do some reading or get some professional advice; for those of you that are simply eBay shills, go back to you eBay cubicles …
December 26, 2012 at 6:06 pm
I just ran across this:
Bill Mastro still buying cards, former collectibles king making purchases on eBay
http://nydn.us/WGW2cF
“… Mastro’s empire collapsed in 2009, when he shut down his Mastro Auctions in the midst of an FBI investigation into fraud and shill bidding, but the disgraced memorabilia king is still bidding on baseball cards on eBay, a tipster tells us. The man can’t get enough of trading cards – even though he has been charged with a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison….”
Does it really look like shill bidding is legal? Does it really look like shill bidding is *not* a federal crime?
December 28, 2012 at 2:27 pm
The Consumerist has now posted a blog regarding this issue, with a poll. Pease read it and vote.
Should Sellers’ Friends & Family Be Allowed To Place Bids On eBay Items? – http://wp.me/p2L7Ik-Grlk
December 29, 2012 at 10:42 pm
LoLz! To whom it may concern. No one posting here came from an ebay IP. They are free to do so though. If that ever was to occur they would be expected to identify themselves.
Carry on. ;p
December 29, 2012 at 11:08 pm
If we look at the “Rate This” stats, it’s pretty obvious that there has been more supporters of shill bidding, than not, at least perusing this blog; could the eBafia Don have instructed his “made men” to do their commenting from home? Or, maybe, they are simply major eBay sellers, like Corri McFadden …
Would you believe I have had a James Foster from PayPal, San Jose, California, ask to be a “friend” of mine on facebook? Possibly he forgot that his request carried his employer’s identity …
Regardless, what could he possibly learn by being a friend of mine on facebook that he has not already leant from my criticism of PreyPal at http://bit.ly/NFqjmp
eBay / PayPal / Donahoe: Dead Men Walking
December 31, 2012 at 1:22 pm
Maybe you (or anyone else reading this) could alert the ebay community on the bidding, buyer central, policies/user agreement and ‘Trust & Safety’ forums? Wouldn’t those would be the places where folks should know of this news?
January 11, 2013 at 8:22 pm
There is a seller on ebay who is using an additional account to shill. It was brought to the attention of ebay’s Answer Center from a bidder who noticed it. I checked the coin seller and sure enough, they are shill bidding. The shill account doesn’t retraction like most would. The seller is smart. He cancels the bid instead of retracting but when he is not outbid, he leaves feedback that either praises the bogus bidder or chastises them for bidding. When the seller cancels the bids, their reasons are “various”, “stop bidding” an other bogus reasons yet the seller never blocks the bidder. I’ve been tempted to ask the seller why they haven’t blocked the bidder if they don’t want them to bid but I’m afraid ebay would sanction me for transaction interence.
I’ve reported several auctions in which the shilling is going on and the feedback manipulation. So far nothing has happended but I will not give up. I will continue to report as the seller list new items and keeps using the shill account.
I wish some of the people who won would notice the shilling and state it in the feedback. That is what happened to a seller about 3 years ago. Several of the buyers noticed it and mentioned the shilling in the feedback. The seller eventually got shut down.
January 23, 2013 at 2:10 am
267philly67 is a coin seller who is using william.h1981 to shill bid.
January 25, 2013 at 3:56 am
Thank you for pointing this out.. There is a big seller of LCD’s/ LED’s Tv’s using ebay. They list many tv’s per day. I became obsessed with getting a good deal and would watch the auctions to see what day and time was best to buy.
I started watching the bidders and after about a week I started to see patterns just like the one’s you have documented in your spreadsheet. I noticed the same 3 and 4 id’s would bid the price up fairly early on in the auctions but would never win. They would have multiple bids on the auction as well as bids on many of the sellers other LCD’s. The strange patterns were up to 3 ebay bidder ids for 3 to 4 lines of LCD’s. Then I could group another 3 to 4 LCD’s lines in another group and noticed 2 to 3 ebay ids who continuously always bid on these tv’s but never won. I recall making a mental note of about 60% of the ebay id’s having zero up to 3 feedback’s. I could not believe this seller had so many new ebay buyers signing up. Then I would look and these zero feedback id’s would have at least 10 to 15 bids out on this seller at the same time. If you have not studied the 1/2 hidden ebay bidding info closely then the above may not make sense. But if you are familiar with the patterns then you will know what I am talking about.
After 3 weeks I got tired of the games and never bought a tv from this seller.
February 9, 2013 at 1:21 am
Shill bidding/sniping/relisting is rampant on eBay–and they couldn’t care less because it is practiced by almost all their big money makers in electronics and collectibles. Indisputable proof of shill bidding is when some mysterious bidder comes out of nowhere and bids up the price many-fold, snipes the auction, and then the item reappears a couple days to two weeks later. Just like steroids, all the big names do it and lie about it. I stopped counting the scumbags on eBay because it became tiresome.
Do what I do: when some scumbag seller shills his own stuff, let him be an idiot and waste his time buying his own items. When he relists, bid the last price minus 5%. I did this a lot and the smarter ones eventually cave.
The only reason these scumbags are still in business is because they’re not reporting their income or inventory to tax collectors, so there’s no loss cheating people. Screw the imaginary corporate veil–the government should come down hard on sleazeBay’s senior management and board, and make them publish seller business and tax information. Businessmen have to make this information public everywhere else–but not in sleazeBay fantasy land? Then when some sleazeBay criminal triple-posts, manipulates, bait-and-switches and/or shipping-skims for profit, the victim can report him to the authorities and have his inventory and records audited. Dollars to donuts if one of these scumbags has to actually pay the tax he’s legally required to pay on his inventory, that **** is gone to the lowest bidder!
April 9, 2013 at 4:13 am
24 March 2013
Corri McFadden eDrop Off v. Midley Cases 2:12-cv-04095-GW-FMO and 1:12-cv-03632
EventHorizon1984
http://bit.ly/Y9y4Km
May 10, 2013 at 9:22 pm
Little off topic but may well be very important to people concerned about risks associated with ebay-paypal use.