User talk:DJE911

This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines.

All of your contributions have been systematically deleted, specifically those to Uniform price auction and Auction pages because they violated the five pillars of Wikipedia. Specifically, the first pillar: "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory." And the second: "Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view." Further, Wikipedia frowns upon original research.

Nonetheless, considerable thought was given to your derivative auction. It appears that the basis for the "Emanuel Uniform Price Auction" is increased revenue for the auctioneer via increased expressiveness in the bidding language. For example, suppose the auctioneer wants to sell 6 units (for which he has no reserve price) to three buyers. You are the first buyer with values for up to 10 units; you value the ith unit at 11 - i dollars: {$10, $9, $8, $7, $6, $5, $4, $3, $2, $1}. Your opponents values don't really matter; one of them bids for 1 unit at $4, two other opponents bid for 1 unit each at $3. You choose to bid for 4 items at $6 and 4 items at $2 (because this type of chunking of bids is normal - nobody buys 99 units of something!). So the bids, in all, are {6, 6, 6, 6, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2}.

The standard uniform price auction (with the price set at the first excluded buyer) designates the price of $3 (i.e. the 7th largest bid), so the revenue is $3 * 6 units = $18. Your total profit is the marginal profit from each unit minus the cost for each unit: ($10 + $9 + $8 + $7) - ($3 + $3 + $3 + $3) = $22.

But now we apply our "Emanuel" decomposability rule: You were willing to pay an aggregate amount of $24 ($6 * 4 units = $24), so you should also be "happy" to get 6 units for $4. What a deal!! Now the bids are {4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2}. The price is $4, so revenue increases to $24. So, your assertion that decomposability of bids leads to an increase of the price is at least somewhat correct. But what about for the you, the buyer? Well, now you have 6 units at $4, a total profit of ($10 + $9 + $8 + $7 + $6 + $5) - ($4 + $4 + $4 + $4 + $4 + $4) = $21. That is, your profit decreased because while the number of units you bought increased, so did the price (and in fact the aggregate price you ultimately paid, rather to the aggregate price you were willing to pay).

This example wasn't specifically contrived to show that such auctions are theoretically biased against buyers, but it does show that it is possible. Further, this doesn't consider the game-theoretical aspects of bid-shading. If you really wanted to optimize your profit as a buyer, you'd submit 5 bids at $3 and win 5 units at a uniform price of $3, for profit of $25. And this is ignoring many behavioral aspects of risk aversion, price discovery, collusion, etc.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlob (talk • contribs) 08:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)