"Roger Millin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>David suggested:
>> Surely the point of the exercise (if you believe in it) is that ALL
>> tenders are acceptable.
In principle, all bids are usually acceptable. However it is common
practice to add provisos such as a minimum ("reserve") bid price.
Reserve prices do not alter the market-clearing price. If they are
set above that price, there simply won't be any bids.
>>The process is, after all, intended to
>> establish a market price for the moorings. Whether that market price is
>> the same as, above or below what BW would otherwise have charged for
>> that mooring is for the market to decide.
>
>Perhaps it's just the cynic in me but my feeling is that they're only
>interested in establishing a market price if it's above the existing
>price. ;-)))
>Of course this tends to shoot down someone's much expounded theory
>about true market pricing but, hey, we can't all be right can we?
>Roger
If BW wants to establish the market price, it shouldn't use sealed
bids, as this process is highly likely to produce final bids which are
well below, or well above, the market-clearing price. But it didn't
want to be told.
Perhaps now it is starting to realise at last that it should have
stuck with open auctions (which *do* reveal the market-clearing
prices) after all.
"There is none so blind ..."
Adrian
Adrian Stott
07956-299966
