Skip to main content
Log in

“No sale” items in auctions: do they really matter?

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research interest in auctions has grown steadily in nearly every business discipline because of the distinctive constructs and processes that the data analyses yield. Auction data present researchers with a particular challenge because of the presence of no sale items. Researchers have varied in their accommodation of no sale items and the analysis technique, which may lead to biases in the analyses. The first question is how should no sale items be treated? To address this, the type of data generated by auctions must be examined, since various methods handle no sale items differently. Additional questions are: What analysis technique is preferred for this type of data? What is the effect of using other analysis techniques? The results suggest that including no sale items improves estimation accuracy. Also, we found that using ordinary least squares with censored data provides results that are much better than using truncated data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Graphs illustrating the simulation equations are available from the authors upon request.

References

  • Bajari, P., & Hortacsu, A. (2003). The winner’s curse, reserve prices, and endogenous entry: empirical insights from eBay auctions. The Rand Journal of Economics, 34, 329–355. Summer.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (1986). Econometric models based on count data: comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests. Journal of Applied Economics, 1, 29–54 (January).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2005). Microeconometrics: methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cheema, A., Chakravarti, D., & Sinha, A. R. (2012). Bidding behavior in descending and ascending auctions. Marketing Science, 31, 779–800. Sep/Oct.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dholakia, U. M., & Soltysinski, K. (2001). Coveted or overlooked? The psychology of bidding for comparable listings in digital auctions. Marketing Letters, 12, 225–237 (August).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dholakia, U. M., Basuroy, S., & Soltysinski, K. (2002). Auction or agent (or both)? A study of moderators of the herding bias in digital auctions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilley, O. W., & Karels, G. V. (1981). The competitive effect in bonus bidding: new evidence. The Bell Journal of Economics, 12, 637–648. Autumn.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourieroux, C., Monfort, A., & Trognon, A. (1984). Pseudo maximum likelihood methods: applications to Poisson models. Econometrica, 52, 701–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (4th ed.). Saddle Ridge, New Jersey: Prentice Hall (Chapter 22).

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenleaf, E. (2004). Reserves, regret, and rejoicing in open English auctions. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 264–273. September.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haruvy, E., & Leszczyc, P. T. L. P. (2010). Search and choice in online consumer auctions. Marketing Science, 29, 1152–1164. Nov/Dec.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häubl, G., & Leszczyc, P. T. L. P. (2003). Minimum prices and product valuations in auctions. Marketing Science Institute Reports, 3(03-117), 115–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hou, J., & Blodgett, J. (2012). Do bidders compensate for shipping fees in online auctions? Journal of Services Marketing, 26(1), 435–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jap, S. D. (2003). An exploratory study of the introduction of online reverse auctions. The Journal of Marketing, 67, 96–107. July.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamins, M. A., Dreze, X., & Folkes, V. S. (2004). Effects of seller-supplied prices on buyers’ product evaluations: reference prices in an internet auction context. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 622–628. March.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leszczyc, P. T. L. P., & Häubl, G. (2010). To bundle or not to bundle: determinants of the profitability of multi-item auctions. The Journal of Marketing, 74, 110–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S., Srinivasan, K., & Sun, B. (2009). Internet auction features as quality signals. The Journal of Marketing, 73, 75–92. Jan.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massad, V. J., & Tucker, J. M. (2000). Comparing bidding and pricing between in-person and online auctions. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(5), 325–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, K. E., Gilkeson, J. H., & Niedrich, R. W. (2009). The influence of seller strategy on the winning price in online auctions: a moderated mediation model. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 22–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, A. R., & Greenleaf, E. A. (2000). The impact of discrete bidding and bidder aggressiveness on sellers’ strategies in open English auctions: reserves and covert shilling. Marketing Science, 19, 244–265. Summer.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Standifird, S. S. (2001). Reputation and e-commerce: eBay auctions and the asymmetrical impact of positive and negative ratings. Journal of Management, 27, 279–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walley, M. J. C., & Fortin, D. R. (2005). Behavioral outcomes from online auctions: reserve price, reserve disclosure, and initial bidding influences in the decision process. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1409–1418. Oct.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, B. D., & Davis, L. (2005). Exploring the WOW in online-auction feedback. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1609–1621 (Nov).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, R. T. (2000). Experts and amateurs: the role of experience in internet auctions. Marketing Letters, 11, 363–374. Nov.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruce L. Alford.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alford, B.L., Gilley, O.W., Wood, C.M. et al. “No sale” items in auctions: do they really matter?. Mark Lett 28, 155–168 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-015-9398-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-015-9398-2

Keywords

Navigation