Talk:MadBid

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

[Untitled][edit]

MadBid appears to be in administration now. When going to MadBid.com, an administrators message comes up, stating that Cork Gully have been appointed administrators as of 27th June 2018. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:3300:FF00:1CF0:5776:58:450F (talk) 21:24, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've gutted this because it was a promotional puff piece[edit]

In my opinion it is complete swindle, I wonder why anybody would try to describe the activities of this "company" in neutral terms. A simple example of the "auction" of a "Macbook Pro 13" met Retina display", worth € 1.272 retail advised customer selling price, learns that MadBid earns, at a "bid" of € 250, already € 15.000, apart from what the "winner" wil pay if the auction comes to an ending. Why consider this as a decent firm, and describe it likewise? I would think we have better and more serious items to discuss. Wikipedia should not cover suspected activities like this one, without clearly stating that it is suspected. Do we have to prove that?? --Xela46 (talk) 13:41, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect this is being watched by a paid shill of the company (user:Caibo901 appears to be a single purpose account), so here are the edits I've made summarised so specific disagreements can be discussed:

Deleted claim about savings from lede, as this was promotional and based on a primary source (PDF document hosted on Madbid website).

Altered the following phrases from being written like advertisements to a more encyclopaedic tone:

"Credit packages range in price from £14.99 to £374.99, and individual credits can cost as little as 10p"

"The "Earned Discount" feature converts money spent on bids that don't win into a discount that can be applied towards purchases on a variety of products across the MadBid website."

Removed the following extraneous pieces which seemed almost entirely promotional:

"In some auctions the winner may opt to convert the auction value into MadBid credits instead of purchasing the auctioned item."

"Instead of losing bids resulting in losing money, with the "Earned Discount" feature, every credit spent in auctions gets saved so that the value can be used to purchase one item or multiple items."

"MadBid has also created "rookie auctions" for new users to familiarise themselves with the website. Rookie auctions only allow users who have never won an auction before to participate. If a new user purchases credits and does not win in any of the MadBid auctions in their first day, the credits from their first purchase (up to 500 credits) are automatically recredited within 24 hours."

"as well as exploring future use of commercial data for market research purposes."

"Auctions in which high value goods have sold for a fraction of their recommended retail price have brought MadBid extensive media coverage. A 2008 auction saw a Mini One automobile, valued at £12,135, sold for £6.83. These auctions have also been covered in the media, from the Mini auction being featured in the Sunday Times, to £500 Tesco voucher’s going for 1p covered in Woman's Own magazine and MoneyWeek"

Removed the following section as it contradicts an early sourced claim, and repeats a description of the mechanics:

"While bids cost between 0.20p to 0.80p, and every bid increases the product price by 1p,"

I've left the ad banner on because I'm still note entirely happy it's an encyclopedic piece and it could probably do with further attention SkepticalNumber (talk) 23:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree the article has been pretty much whitewashed, stuffing in peacock terms etc. Although the much earlier version was a long way from perfect I'd be tempted to revert to that. --86.2.216.5 (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to German laws[edit]

This section is poorly translated into English and should be proofread by a native speaker, e.g. "control" for "kontrollieren" ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.250.109 (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I believe the section is nonsensical and does not provide enough relevant info nor enough independent research to warrant its place in the article. If the claims are reviewed by a native speaker and validated through verifiable sources then the claims should be added again to the article. Cada mori (talk) 22:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SCAM ALERT =[edit]

German here! This website is a total SCAM! They buy ads on prominent websites in Germany and try to get users to buy "bids", but you can't actually get anything cheap there. Would be nice if the article here reflected this, sounds waaaay too legitimate today.. 2601:600:8200:95F:4D18:4F10:A81:7B8F (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:11, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

Ref.5 http://webellion.net/Madbid_Review.pdf has died and gone to 404 heaven. I don't know how to add a dead link flag. Centrepull (talk) 10:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MadBid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]