or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Members - Page 1399

post #20971 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by TehBunny View Post

Should I, measured my meerkats shoes they are same sole width and length and these seem to be marked as 'ff' which I'm assuming is really wide (perfect for me)?
C&J Wing-tips 

Bunny,

Whilst the uppers appear to be in good condition, these have clearly seen quite a lot of use as the insoles look pretty hammered and they've been resoled (and seen plenty more use since the last resole, too.

Given the amount of wear that they've had, I think that the asking price is pretty high. Then again, I don't know how often smaller sizes in wider fittings come up on the 'Bay, so they might be worth a bit more because of that.
post #20972 of 57821

BTW just caught up on the thread and within minutes of losing my bid I had given up and 'gixened' another jacket (albeit not quite as new as the one I was after) :).

Opinions on the C&J, though I'm having second thoughts as if I win the barbour I will have spent $120 on luxire, $150 or so on the barbour and then another $200 for the C&J's, thinking of leaving the C&J's till Jan and grabbing some Superga's instead (heating up here).

C&J (ID if you can) their $200 BIN (with shipping)

EDIT: 

Just saw JM's post ^ Think I'll leave them and go for the superga's :) (my wife's also getting pissed that I'm spending more money on clothes than her :P)

post #20973 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by lachyzee View Post


It's not stupid though, because almost everyone else exhibits the same behaviour (not placing their max bid if at all possible). Meaning that you will be the stupid one if you place your max bid straight away (as opposed to in the last 30s using a sniper).
Sure, as more and more people use snipers, it becomes less and less advantageous.

No, I won't ever be stupid if I do this. I cannot comprehend how this is difficult to see. I will put into eBay's system the maximum price I am happy with. I will be happy if I win for anything less than this price. Indeed if I do win, because of the incremental eBay bidding system, I will likely win for less than my maximum bid. Anyone who wants to pay more than me will do so. It is inconsequential whether I lose during the normal bidding stages or during the final seconds, because I have place my max bid and this is the highest that I will pay.

 

Assuming I'm bidding on a popular item and there are plenty of bidders it simply does not matter whether they are sniping or not. They will bid up to their maximum using a sniping tool and eBay's system will outbid this amount up to my max bid.

 

EVERYONE PLACES THEIR MAX BID AT SOME POINT. IT CAN BE NORMALLY, OR THROUGH A SNIPER. THE PERSON WITH THE HIGHEST MAX BID WINS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHEN THE BID IS PLACED.

 

I am clearly hogging this thread and will retire for some time. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by azif View Post


I think the point is that its much easier for sellers to shill bid online. So to avoid this everyone just puts in their max bids in the final few seconds (apart from the few people who fail to comprehend the above).

No one said this, though it is interesting. But couldn't I just shill bid with a sniping tool? Again, it would be inconsequential.

post #20974 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie's Wardrobe View Post

House of lies - with Don Cheadle and the hot chick off Veronica Mars, awesome. It's on tonight I think actually.

I'm terribly conflicted with this show. On one hand it is not an accurate portrayal of Management Consulting (bar the "buzz" words") as it pseudo claims to be. On the other, I highly enjoy seeing Kristen Bell semi naked in every episode.
post #20975 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by DartagnanRed View Post

EVERYONE PLACES THEIR MAX BID AT SOME POINT. IT CAN BE NORMALLY, OR THROUGH A SNIPER. THE PERSON WITH THE HIGHEST MAX BID WINS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHEN THE BID IS PLACED.

They don't. That's where your theory falls down. If everyone did place their max bid at some point, then sure, you would never be disadvantaged by placing yours at the start. But they don't.
post #20976 of 57821
Quote:
EVERYONE PLACES THEIR MAX BID AT SOME POINT. IT CAN BE NORMALLY, OR THROUGH A SNIPER. THE PERSON WITH THE HIGHEST MAX BID WINS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHEN THE BID IS PLACED.

My only contribution to this, only because I'm sick of reading the same thing over and over with the point being missed. DR is wrong, as was made clear much earlier on. Who wins may not be affected but HOW MUCH THE WINNER HAS TO PAY most definitely can be, due to the way some bidders behave.
post #20977 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ernesto View Post

Bored to Death is also a great show, or shoe.

I know. I was disappointed when it was cancelled.
post #20978 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by lachyzee View Post


They don't. That's where your theory falls down. If everyone did place their max bid at some point, then sure, you would never be disadvantaged by placing yours at the start. But they don't.

Breaking my promise not to comment, but just can't let this go.

 

Three scenarios:

 

1) People place their maximum bid, see my point earlier. Either they win or I do.

2) People don't place their maximum bid, mine is higher, they lose.

3) People don't place their maximum bid, but their bid is still higher than mine and I lose.

 

These are the only scenarios that can occur. Whether the other bidders and rational or irrational in their approach does not affect me, because I have placed the maximum amount of money that I want to.

post #20979 of 57821
I just bought burgundy tassel loafers.

Word.
post #20980 of 57821
Brownman

I don't watch much TV - just get dvd out of library for series or borrow them off friends. Ms fxh watched Dexter series - I couldn't get into it at all. Watched the "original:" Killing series on DVD, great, alos the original swedish Wallander series.

For clothes you cant beat Max & 99 on dvd - you can pause and go back and zoom on clothes etc, MidSommers Murders is great for sticking to the original UK meaning/signals/signifiers of clothes and indicating character plot etc. by clothing. Theres a great episode where whatsisname the main bloke goes to a the tailor. Inspector George Gently is an underrated series - and good for clothes - set at the changes in society in the 60s it confronts social issues, such as abortion, changing womens issues, in an intelligent and entertaining way - Gently himself dresses well if conservative and his youthful sidekick is a Mod for want of a better description. The characters are against type as Gently is progressive whilst his youthful mate is a conservative both big C and small c.
post #20981 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by lennier View Post

My only contribution to this, only because I'm sick of reading the same thing over and over with the point being missed. DR is wrong, as was made clear much earlier on. Who wins may not be affected but HOW MUCH THE WINNER HAS TO PAY most definitely can be, due to the way some bidders behave.

Precisely. Thank you for stating the point so cogently and concisely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DartagnanRed View Post

Breaking my promise not to comment, but just can't let this go.

Three scenarios:

1) People place their maximum bid, see my point earlier. Either they win or I do.
2) People don't place their maximum bid, mine is higher, they lose.
3) People don't place their maximum bid, but their bid is still higher than mine and I lose.

These are the only scenarios that can occur. Whether the other bidders and rational or irrational in their approach does not affect me, because I have placed the maximum amount of money that I want to.

DR, you may be prepared to spent up to, say, $100 on an item, but do you want to pay that much for the item if you do not have to? That is, really, the purpose of the discussion that we have been having.

As a related example, you may be prepared to bid up to $500 000 on an apartment at auction - but you would, presumably, be happy if you could get away with only bidding $450 000 for it instead and still winning the auction.

It's the same with eBay bidding and it is the reason that people don't place their max bid right at the beginning of the auction - because even though they are prepared to pay up to the max bid amount, they would prefer to pay less if at all possible and so they act in a way that maximises the chances of paying less. Therefore, I would argue that their actions are rational.
post #20982 of 57821
Oh if you can find "The Edge of Darkness" dvd TV series - its oldish but still magnificent.
post #20983 of 57821
I think I'd like to nominate tehbunny as our typical , and possibly favourite, ebay bidder.

See bunnie's post above (if anyone can translate it - including bunny - so I can understand - it would be appreciated) - all other arguments above are redundant
post #20984 of 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post


Precisely. Thank you for stating the point so cogently and concisely.
DR, you may be prepared to spent up to, say, $100 on an item, but do you want to pay that much for the item if you do not have to? That is, really, the purpose of the discussion that we have been having.
As a related example, you may be prepared to bid up to $500 000 on an apartment at auction - but you would, presumably, be happy if you could get away with only bidding $450 000 for it instead and still winning the auction.
It's the same with eBay bidding and it is the reason that people don't place their max bid right at the beginning of the auction - because even though they are prepared to pay up to the max bid amount, they would prefer to pay less if at all possible and so they act in a way that maximises the chances of paying less. Therefore, I would argue that their actions are rational.

Thank you for having the patience and thought to attempt to explain why I am wrong, unlike some.

 

I agree, this is the discussion we have been having all along, and certainly the one I intended to have. Of course I would want to pay the minimum amount that is more than anyone else will pay. My entire argument is that it doesn't matter how hard I try, or what strategy I use, I will get the same result. If I am willing to pay $1,000 more than anyone else, it doesn't matter whether I put my bid in early or late, unless everyone else is a technological luddite who hasn't heard of sniping and who hasn't been rationally bidding up front in the first place. Snipers will snipe up to the point that is $1,000 less than mine. 

 

The price differential between my winning bid and the next losing one will be unchanged except in the case where irrational bidders re-assess their price based on seeing mine and have less time to do so where most/all bidders are sniping. The extent to which they do this is not clear.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post

I think I'd like to nominate tehbunny as our typical , and possibly favourite, ebay bidder.
See bunnie's post above (if anyone can translate it - including bunny - so I can understand - it would be appreciated) - all other arguments above are redundant

 

Admittedly, Bunny's post forced me to reconsider my rational markets approach.

post #20985 of 57821
Yes DR I'm sorry but I think you just need to think about how this all operates in real life for a while...

Anyway back on topic:

is your shoulder measurement for a shirt generally the same as your shoulder measurement for a jacket? Or is the jacket a slightyly smaller or larger measurement? Or should I be tryng to keep these the same?

Secondly, do jackets with higher armholes generally suit those with square shoulders, while sloped shoulders suit lower armholed jackets?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members