Study: The right strategy doesn't guarantee advantage in auctions, real estate or stock market

March 16, 2012, Northwestern University

Who wouldn't pay a penny for a sports car? That's the mentality some popular online auctions take advantage of -- the opportunity to get an expensive item for very little money.

In a study of hundreds of lowest unique bid auctions, Northwestern University researchers asked a different question: Who wins these auctions, the strategic or the lucky one? The answer is the lucky. But, ironically, it's a lucky person using a winning strategy.

The researchers found that all players intuitively use the right strategy, and that turns the into a of pure chance. The findings, published by the journal , provide insight into playing the , real estate market and other gambles.

"There are many contexts in which we think we are smart and at an advantage, such as buying real estate as prices start moving up," said Luís Amaral, an author of the paper. "But we don't realize we are competing against people doing the same thing. The advantage is gone, and it becomes a game of chance. So you better enjoy the process."

Amaral is a professor of chemical and biological engineering in the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science and an Early Career Scientist with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

He and colleagues Filippo Radicchi and Andrea Baronchelli studied public data on 600 online auctions in Australia and Europe, played by 10,000 different auction participants with a total of 200,000 individual bids. (Lowest unique bid auctions occur all around the world, including in the U.S.) The data allowed the researchers to analyze in a systematic way what is going on in each auction.

The work of Nobel Laureate John Nash on game theory is very relevant to these auctions, Amaral said. An online auction is a classic game -- you have some information and you try to guess what other people are doing, and, based on that guess, you try to define your best strategy.

In a lowest unique bid auction, participants place bids for a relatively valuable item, such as a car or boat, in an attempt to have the lowest unmatched bid at the time the auction ends. The lowest bid is one cent, and the participant pays a fee, often a dollar, for each bid. After placing a bid, the participant is told if his or her bid currently is winning. If not, many bid again. Hundreds of times. On average, the auctioneer earns double the cost of the item being auctioned while participants can pay hundreds of dollars to lose.

The researchers conducted a computer simulation and identified what the optimal strategy is in lowest unique bid auctions. They found the strategy is a "bursty" one: consecutive bid values initially are close to each other, and then there is a "long jump" to another area of the bid space where more bid values are placed close to each other. And the pattern is repeated.

For example, an auction participant might place a bid, say of 8 cents. Then he places a number of nearby bids, 5, 6 and 7 cents, as well as 9, 10 and 11 cents. Then he makes a large leap to a different area, placing a bid of 47 cents and also placing several bids around that number. (Remember, every time he places a bid, he pays a fee.)

This mixed strategy combines exploitation (taking small steps in one area) and exploration (taking a big step to a new area). It is a smart strategy that gives you a better chance of winning, but the researchers discovered all the other participants have figured it out, too, wiping out any advantage to individuals.

"We couldn't identify a single person who was not using this strategy," Amaral said.

The "bursty" optimal strategy, he said, is similar to what an animal foraging for scarce food employs. An albatross, for example, has a vast ocean to explore, so it focuses its fishing in a small area for a time and then moves a great distance to try another area. Then it repeats this pattern.

In lowest unique bid auctions, people like to win and become overly optimistic about the amount of they will lose. They rationally enter the auction to try to win a valuable item for a low price, but then they go on to irrationally stay in the auction -- which is just a game of chance -- and bid too much.

"At some point people will stop playing these online auctions," Amaral said. "Humans are smart about recognizing the deck is stacked against them."

The title of the PLoS One paper authored by Amaral, Radicchi and Baronchelli is "Rationality, Irrationality and Escalating Behavior in Lowest Unique Auctions." Radicchi is a former postdoctoral fellow in Amaral's lab who now is at the University Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain. Baronchelli is with the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain.

Explore further: You can look -- but don't touch

Related Stories

You can look -- but don't touch

January 7, 2009

Consumers are often told that if they break an item, they buy it. But a new study suggests that if they just touch an item for more than a few seconds, they may also end up buying it.

eBay Mind Games

December 11, 2009

Psychologists have long known that when two people haggle over a price, it pays for the seller to start high.

Recommended for you

Study sheds new light on ancient human-turkey relationship

January 17, 2018

For the first time, research has uncovered the origins of the earliest domestic turkeys in ancient Mexico. The study also suggests turkeys weren't only prized for their meat—with demand for the birds soaring with the Mayans ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Mar 16, 2012
Somehow, I don't think eBay got the message. The failure of the model herein is that it assumes that everyone turns into a gamer in the auction process - which isn't the case. When more experienced buyers set limits for their highest bids in advance and don't alter them - this entire theory crashes - though clearly for the less experienced bidders it is descriptive.
not rated yet Mar 17, 2012
eBay doesn't operate by lowest unique. It is the highest bid at the end of the auction.
not rated yet Mar 17, 2012
If there was a effective strategy, it would not be gambling.
This is another example of the failure of central planning and why free market prices are the best feedback mechanism in the economy.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.