CigarSniper Beta is open to all this weekend - Page 3

Originally Posted by Bageland2000:
I don't understand why people jump to defend retailers that partake in this type of thing. I clearly understand that an intelligent person can utilize this service without much risk and can walk away without really any loss. The point is though is that they're trying to avoid talking about the fact that many people will "lose $100 before they see the light." Not because they're motivated by greed or avarice. They'll lose it because they didn't understand going into the auction how much money they stood to loose. Call them stupid if you will, I say that the rules of the penny auction game are rigged to take people's money away before they realize what they are getting themselves into. Call it cigar gambling and I'll hush up, call it anything else (an AUCTION? No.) and you're exploiting people by taking their hard earned money and giving them NOTHING.

First off, all the posts are making me confused. I have used Famous lots of times and still plan to do so. I am not on any sides and not trying to get caught up in the middles of this just trying to understand.

As Scott said, it does not appear that this site is set up to be the scam that other penny auction sites are. If you spend $60 in bids and don't win than the $60 of bids you spent can still go toward the buy it now price after the "auction" is over. Its not as though the $ spend on bids just goes to site and the bidder gets nothing. If this is incorrect that I appologize but that is my understadning from the above posts.

I am missing why this is so bad for the bidders? Yea you might have to pay MSRP or whatever the buy it now price is, but i can't tell you how many items on Cbid I see go for more than MSRP.
[Reply]

Great way to put it Scott. At this point, no one's gambled anything but FSS.

That post deserves a rep bump.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by shilala:
I see where you're coming from, Andrew. I just don't subscribe to the "people are being lead off a cliff by an evil giant" slant, or at least not so much. I believe in people taking responsibility for their own actions, and I don't accept ignorance as an excuse. It never worked for me. :-)
Is it right for people to take advantage of people's ignorance? No.
Has it happened since the dawn of time? Yes.
Will it continue forever? Yes.
Do I choose to take advantage of people? Absolutely not.

Every lesson I have ever learned in my life has come at some expense, many straight through my wallet. I've never succumbed to this particular "evil", but I've submitted myself to countless others, and by doing so I learned valuable lessons. I'm employing one of those lessons regarding this auction model. That lesson says "Don't mess with it, you know better."
I think of these types of things as opportunities to learn. When I pray for patience, God doesn't just grant me patience. He grants me a trying situation where I can learn to exercise patience.
Here lies one of those situations where people can benefit and learn, even if it costs them money, and even if someone else benefits by taking it, and even if it's morally distasteful if not outright wrong. They'll get stung smart.

I think it's a crazy gamble for Famous, and why they'd even bother with something as gray-area as this, I have no idea. (Okay, I do have an idea. Money.) It can only serve to hurt their reputation, which it already has in lots of guy's eyes here, including my own.

To go one step further, I think it's important to allow these types of things to go on. It goes to protecting freedom and liberty. I have no desire for some greater good to watch over me and "protect" me by telling me what I can or can't do. I choose to reserve my right to not wear a helmet, give live birth to a walrus, not read the directions, lose hard-earned money gambling, get an STD from a toothless hooker, run with scissors, and stand under a piano that's hanging in the air.
In order to preserve my rights, I'm more than willing to accept an off-color cigar auction.

And yes, it's cigar gambling, plain and simple. Why they call any of the penny auctions "auctions" is beyond me. Probably the same reason they call free online poker "free online poker". :-)

I understand everything you're saying. TBH I think if I respond anymore than we are getting dangerously close to a political discussion and I want to avoid that (In the interest of following the forum rules.) I think we both have stated our points to the extent that is necessary on this forum. I see this as something that is set up with the sole purpose of exploiting people, you see it as similar but state that it should be allowed in order to maintain our American freedoms. I'll choose to stop the discussion here in the interest of keeping the spirit of the forums intact (and choose to never order from Famous again.)
[Reply]

Originally Posted by T.G:
Fine. It's cigar gambling.

I agree. It's a joke. I tried this once on another site for electronics ... and I lost about $50 before I came to my senses.

Seriously ... it is nothing more than a scam to get your money.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Bageland2000:
I understand everything you're saying. TBH I think if I respond anymore than we are getting dangerously close to a political discussion and I want to avoid that (In the interest of following the forum rules.) I think we both have stated our points to the extent that is necessary on this forum. I see this as something that is set up with the sole purpose of exploiting people, you see it as similar but state that it should be allowed in order to maintain our American freedoms. I'll choose to stop the discussion here in the interest of keeping the spirit of the forums intact (and choose to never order from Famous again.)

Andrew, I don't think we're very far apart on this at all. There's not a point you've made that I disagree with. I'd love to continue the conversation by pm, if you like. Regardless whether we agree completely, I already respect and admire your thoughts on this.
Bottom line, I'd like to not see any of it happening, but I lump it in with all sorts of other business practices I'd like to see go away.
My guess is that once tried in court, penny auctions will be classed as gambling, as they should. Once that happens, that should be the end of it until...
That's where I have to stop before I wax politico. :-)
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
The 'Buy Now' feature is designed to be used only after the auction is over for losing bidders and only for 'paid bids' used. Free bids cannot be used for a buy now purchase but will be returned to you if you end up buying the item your were bidding on.

In the event you lose a bidding war on something we have no more inventory on, you will be given 'buy now' options for comparable items.

You shouldn't be auctioning items that you don't possess.

:-) "Buy Now" options on "comparable" items make it sound like a bait and switch. If you draw someone in with the expectation of a fair shot at winning a particular lot, they commit a sum of money and you don't even possess that lot; what does it sound like to you?

:-)
[Reply]

I look forward to someone here showing what a deal they got. I will not be that someone. Like many I just see the penny bid sites as a big waste of time and money. I appreciate that the retailer is trying to find some new ways to promote business but I think this particular practice is unethical. Sure seems to be alot of grey area in the specifics on where you can use your bids if you do not win a product. I like the idea of a live auction. But when I go to an auction I do not think I have ever been charged based on the amount of times I put my paddle up.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Subvet642:
You shouldn't be auctioning items that you don't possess. :-) "Buy Now" options on "comparable" items make it sound like a bait and switch. If you draw someone in with the expectation of a fair shot at winning a particular lot, they commit a sum of money and you don't even possess that lot; what does it sound like to you? :-)

Allow me to rephrase.. All items on the auction block are in our possession. Yet, if there is only one of them, any losing bidders for that lot will be offered something comparable to purchase.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
Allow me to rephrase.. All items on the auction block are in our possession. Yet, if there is only one of them, any losing bidders for that lot will be offered something comparable to purchase.

If a losing bidder were able to wait until "their" item is back in stock, a rain-check if you will, I think that would go a long way toward dispelling any appearance of impropriety.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Subvet642:
If a losing bidder were able to wait until "their" item is back in stock, a rain-check if you will, I think that would go a long way toward dispelling any appearance of impropriety.

I spoke with the developers. We have not applied that logic to the current version of the site. But it will be considered for future versions. Thanks for the suggestion.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
Allow me to rephrase.. All items on the auction block are in our possession. Yet, if there is only one of them, any losing bidders for that lot will be offered something comparable to purchase.

How is it determined what is comparable? And will multiple comparable items be offered to pick from, or just one? As I hope you realize, what one person thinks is comparable might not be what the next person thinks is comparable.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
I spoke with the developers. We have not applied that logic to the current version of the site. But it will be considered for future versions. Thanks for the suggestion.

My pleasure! :-)
[Reply]

Originally Posted by T.G:
How is it determined what is comparable? And will multiple comparable items be offered to pick from, or just one? As I hope you realize, what one person thinks is comparable might not be what the next person thinks is comparable.

Comparisons are offered using several variables. I'm not sure how the algorithms are configured but the models we've used so far are pretty spot on. Currently, there are three options to choose from should the original lot be unavailable for losing bidders. I'm sure users won't be disappointed. If so, I'm just as sure we'll hear about it and repair it in short order.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
I spoke with the developers. We have not applied that logic to the current version of the site. But it will be considered for future versions. Thanks for the suggestion.

Perhaps change the word "comparable" to "anything at our site"?
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Cigahs:
Comparisons are offered using several variables. I'm not sure how the algorithms are configured but the models we've used so far are pretty spot on. Currently, there are three options to choose from should the original lot be unavailable for losing bidders. I'm sure users won't be disappointed. If so, I'm just as sure we'll hear about it and repair it in short order.

Thanks Humberto. I think with the three options to pick from, then most should be able to find something acceptable.
[Reply]

Well IMHO, I take the opinion of the forum and it's individuals with serious consideration and yet still try to use some of my own opinion and logic too. It seems like this
Cigarsn!p@r thing at first glance seem/appears like it could be a way to get some stix at great price but after reviewing the math it is not so. So thanks to those that math inclined folks that pointed it out. If you like the gambling/game thing it may be ok, I do not but maybe others do.
BTW I hate the sound effects also.
[Reply]

i received an email from ya'll today but i don't remember signing up for anything
[Reply]

Originally Posted by loki:
i received an email from ya'll today but i don't remember signing up for anything

I think its because you went to the site. Exact same thing happened to me. went to the site, then a day later had an email from them.

:-)

:-)
[Reply]

i don't even remember going to the site till today. :dunno:
[Reply]

Maybe famous sent it to their email list? Cause I got an invite to beta with never going to site or nuttin.
[Reply]