Talk:Dutch auction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Talk related content[edit]

All talk related content must remain at the talk level. Some IDIOT posted this on the main page and I have removed it: The claim that a Dutch auction is a form of first degree price discrimination is nonsense submitted by an amateur. More specifically, it does not constitute a Nash equilibrium. It is clear to see that the above strategy guarantees zero profits to the bidder who employs it. Why not use a strategy that will give you positive profits, even if you don't win as often? I suggest you read Auction Theory by Vijay Krishna. If it is reworded it may be acceptable posted back.Kendirangu 10:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I've learned in an auction theory class that the strategy here should be the same one as applied in a Vickrey auction (each bidder bids his/her value), not first-price sealed (each bidder will bid N/(N-1) * his/her value, where N is the number of participants in the auction). Can anyone confirm that the page is incorrect when it says the strategy of a dutch auction is the same as the strategy of a first-price sealed bid auction?

Sorry, but that is incorrect. There are equivalences in optimal symmetric bidding strategies between the Dutch and the first-price sealed-bid auction on the one hand and the Vickrey and the English auction on the other hand. Bidding one's private value in a Dutch auction has an expected profit of 0, the expected profit of bidding slightly less is positive so bidding the private value cannot be a best-response. RoyalTS 18:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I can clarify the above: optimal strategy in Vickrey is to bid your value. Optimal strategy in both first-price sealed-bid and in Dutch (IF the values are drawn from a common-knowledge U[0,1] distribution -- an enormous "if") is to bid (N-1)/N times your value where N is the total number of bidders. --Daniel Reeves (PegArmPaul) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PegArmPaul (talkcontribs) 17:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Dutch auction in Dutch[edit]

The article says:

(...) in the Netherlands this type of auction is actually known as a "Chinese auction". Another Dutch word for it is: "afmijnen" literally "Mining off" because the actual bid is often called out by the buyer, who says: "Mine!"

I never heard anyone in the Netherlands refer to a Dutch auction as a Chinese auction or as afmijnen. We call it veiling or veiling bij afslag. If it is known as afmijnen (which it might be; I'm not at all well versed in auction terminology), I very much doubt it originated in using the word mijn (mine) when calling the bid. Can someone verify either of these points? If not, I suggest they are removed. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 12:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

In Ralph Cassady, Jr.'s Auctions and Auctioneering (1967) Cassady indicates that buyers bid by shouting "Mine!" to stop the price and claim all or part of the lot for sale; however, Cassady does not connect this term to "Mining off." MP (talk) 08:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm clearing out the "Chinese auction" bit, and its (presumably meant as jokes) offspring. Near as I can tell, not speaking Dutch, the references for it are blog/message board posts. Cretog8 (talk) 07:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

T-Bill Dutch-Auctions[edit]

From the example given in this part of the article text, it would appear that the discount rate is actually the average of the blind or sealed bids, each based on a major commercial bank's own portfolio rate-of-return requirements. This suggests the irrationalist or market quality of the process and alludes to a degree of watering of the currency. The economist, Joseph Budish, had mentioned this in an older article.Castilloactualidada 07:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Disagreement with terms used. The auction method used by the US Government to auction T-Bills and T-Notes is more properly termed the single-price auction format.--Puckslider (talk) 17:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Does 'Dutch' always descend?[edit]

A Dutch auction with buyers competing for an item (or lot) descends, but a Dutch auction with sellers competing for a fixed demand would increase: the defining characteristic for Dutch is that the price moves favorable for the bidders (decreasing for buyers; increasing for sellers); the reverse is true for an English auction (the price would increase for buyers and decrease for sellers). For references on Dutch and English designs for buyers and sellers see:

1. Designing Call Auction Institutions: Is Double Dutch The Best? Kevin A. McCabe. Stephen J. Rassenti. Vernon L. Smith. The Economic Journal

2. Auction Institutional Design: Theory and Behavior of Simultaneous Multiple-Unit Generalizations of the Dutch and English Auctions KA McCabe, SJ Rassenti, VL Smith - The American Economic Review, 1990

MP (talk) 08:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

example that could be added[edit]

an example of selling a house by dutch auction http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/7523088.stm --194.36.2.209 (talk) 16:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

It's interesting, I'm grateful for the link myself, but I don't think one case merits inclusion in the article. Cretog8 (talk) 16:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Another example that could be added to the page is http://www.pricefalls.com - A dutch online auction platform. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.67.214 (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That looks unnecessary. CRETOG8(t/c) 20:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


Huh?[edit]

How does the procedure described in the section "Public Offerings" have anything to do with the procedure described in the introduction? e.g. The introduction says there "a sale never requires more than one bid", but there are 7 bid in the example. 70.211.27.43 (talk) 23:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

There are seven sales. Jasen betts (talk) 10:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

The section about "Public Offerings" seems to be an example of a "second price auction" which as that section states is sometimes also called a Dutch auction. In my opinion the "Public Offerings" section is an example that has no place on the page of Dutch auctions and only causes further confusion. 212.159.196.72 (talk) 11:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Multiple items in a single auction should lead to near zero prices[edit]

I don't understand. If there are three cars for sale in my opinion all three cars would get sold at prices near zero. As the article points out:Since one car is still available, the price continues to be lowered. At this point, the bidders would begin to get anxious since only one car is left. Before the second to last car is sold, there is no incentive to bid at all because you can always make a winning bid immediately after the second bid. There is a big incentive to wait for someone else to move, so everyone waits until the price is a few dimes. Joepnl (talk) 13:35, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello? Joepnl (talk) 23:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The first bidder might want three cars.Jasen betts (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Second Item Auction[edit]

Second Item Auction more accurately "second highest or lowest bid acution" With regard to the example of the Second Item Auction, it is unclear to me why the $20 bid is the successful bid, as the first sentence of the main description made it clear this auction type is not to be confused with the second price auction, which in this case the $20 bid is the "second price", as well as being the second highest bid and the second lowest bid; can anyone explain? 184.12.82.103 (talk) 05:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)vwh

  • The winning price is $20 because that is the lowest price at which all the available items would sell. The guy who bid $21 gets first dibs since he had originally bid higher, so the guy who only bid $20 gets what's left. If there was one fewer item, he would get none and the price would be $21. If there was one more item, that guy would get both and it would still be $20. If there was yet another, the price sold to everyone would drop to the next highest bidder and "C" would get just one and everyone would pay $18. --50.79.32.34 (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


  • The second price auction section is completely incorrect right now. A second price auction (see even the linked article on a Vickery Auction in the current text) is an auction where a single item is sold, and the winner pays the price of the second highest bid (i.e. the second price). I am not even sure why the (incorrect) example is needed, since it does not illustrate how a Dutch auction works, only how the (related, but distinct) second price auction works. I propose removal of the example.129.97.60.218 (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

another type[edit]

This is generally true, but not always: "A Dutch auction is a type of auction in which the auctioneer begins with a high asking price which is lowered until some participant is willing to accept the auctioneer's price". Currently, the Greek government is 'auctioning' bonds. Those who own them already will only be paid a fraction of the face value, between 30% and 40%. Obviously, the auction will start low and go up, the reverse of the usual process. Shouldn't we mention this alternate version? Malick78 (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

This article doesn't make any sense[edit]

The introduction defines a Dutch auction as one thing (start with very high price, count down, first bid wins) and makes a point that a Dutch auction is *not* a second-price auction. Then, later sections talk extensively about second-price auctions, and the term "Dutch auction" is used to alternatively refer to both types of auctions throughout.

This article is a complete mess, and sorely needs a domain expert to make some deep and fundamental changes.

129.215.5.255 (talk) 16:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

The correct definition of a Dutch auction[edit]

History: The Dutch auction originated in the vegetable trade. A number of different growers would offer their crops in the open air in public to the professional buyers. To save time in the price negotiations they appointed one person who would take a lead in this. He would start each lotat a high price and lower that price at regular intervals. The buyer who wants to buy at that specific price would shout “Mijn” translated mine. Short for this lot is mine.

Definition: These elements are vital for a Dutch auction: 1 You start at a high price and it will go down. 2 The price goes down at regular intervals in time. 3 A bidder has only one change per lot to place a bid. 4 When a bid has placed the lot is closed. Dutch auctions are usually organised in auctions where many lots have to be processed in a short time and where the buyers are professionals. New auction concepts on the internet are using the Dutch auction setup for many different purposes.

Less is More[edit]

I think the best bet here would be to remove the sections "Public offerings" and "Dutch auction share repurchases." This will remove the inherent contradictions, while leaving a reference to second-price (Vikrey) auctions. Other reference sources are split in terms of nomenclature, so I do think a domain expert's opinion would be good. The US Treasury does not refer to bond auctions as being 'Dutch' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keddie (talkcontribs) 18:32, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, right[edit]

"In a Dutch auction, the item being sold is initially offered at a very high price […] The price is lowered in decrements until a bidder accepts the current price. That bidder wins the auction and pays that price for the item. […] Dutch auctions are a competitive alternative to a traditional auction in which bids of increasing value are made until a final selling price is reached, because, due to ever-decreasing bids, buyers must act decisively to name their price or risk losing to a lower offer."
— i call bullshit on the last sentence : how can one lose to a "lower offer" when the first offer wins ? --Jerome Potts (talk) 22:37, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Seems like a poor choice of wording. How about "...or risk losing to another bidder"? --Ronz (talk) 22:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)