Jim, ah, you're an attorney! It's nice knowing that we can argue about things that are important to us, without the other taking things personally. I always think in terms of the readers of these threads, and I think there's a need for some good knock-down drag-out arguments every now and then.

Since you're a legal guy and I am not, I hereby voluntarily roll over on every opinion I've expressed about the legalities of contracts and so forth on eBay. I'm a layman, you're a professional, and I would not presume to argue points of law with an attorney. The eBay rules about when a contract is created are quite clear to me, but you must know things I don't, if it's so clear to you that merely placing a bid creates a contract.

Perhaps you will give me the same courtesy, as a professional buyer and seller on eBay, and recognize that I may know things, and have experience, that you don't?

Regarding bid retractions, when I said a "decent" reason, I was merely trying to mix up my adjectives to make my posts more readable. I should have said "valid" reason, or "allowable" reason, and I think we both agree that eBay is quite clear on what those reasons are.

Retracting a bid because of a typo, or because you discover the description is fraudulent, or because you have valid questions about a sellers identity or integrity is a "valid" reason. For instance, at the time I placed my bid the seller showed a flawless feedback rating, 5 days later he has 12 negatives from buyers claiming they paid for items and never received them, I can retract, right?

Retracting a bid because you found the same item cheaper somewhere else, or because you simply don't want the item any more, is not allowable, and I can't imagine anyone saying it is.

I did not intentionally set up a "straw man" argument, any more than I think you do the same to me. The question, as I understood it, was, should sellers be allowed to cancel bids and end an auction early. Clearly, we agree that there are many cases where they should be able to. We disagree about whether it should be allowable if the seller receives a better offer elsewhere. It currently is allowable, well within the rules, but you think that sucks. Fine. Take it up with eBay if you feel that strongly.

As some additional background, part of the reason why that rule exists is because eBay specifically sought out brick and morter store owners to list inventory on eBay, to give bidders a better selection. Many store owners were reluctant, asking "but what if someone walks into my store and offers me my full asking price, do I have to wait for the auction to end to sell it to my local customer?"

Another reason for the rule is because many sellers wanted to link to retail sites, and bring items selectively into eBay, without giving up the option of selling directly online. This results in a much broader range of items offered on eBay, by generally more "professional" sellers, less likely to be inept or unethical.

Now, by allowing sellers to withdraw their auctions when they've received a better offer elsewhere, we have many more sellers willing to list on eBay, and generally a better class of seller at that. I would guess that fewer than one auction out of 1,000 is actually ended early as a result of that policy, and when it does occur, most buyers respond reasonably, accepting the rules as they are, not getting their undies in a bunch just because the seller changes his mind.

The upside is that the other 99 auctions are there because sellers are not shackled to eBay.

Of course, any given seller might "abuse" that rule on a given day, but that is not a reason to change the rule, when it is gnerally beneficial to both buyers and sellers otherwise.

So, fire away!