Source: http://www.google.com/patents/US6216114?dq=patent:7240290
Timestamp: 2018-01-17 06:12:36
Document Index: 766850208

Matched Legal Cases: ['application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09', 'application No. 09']

Patent US6216114 - Method and system for controlling the initiation and duration of overtime ... - Google Patents
A method and system for conducting electronic auctions is described. A mic lot closing extension feature avoids collisions in closing times of multiple lots by dynamically extending the closing time of a subsequent lot if a preceding lot's closing time is extended to be too close to the subsequent lot's...http://www.google.com/patents/US6216114?utm_source=gb-gplus-sharePatent US6216114 - Method and system for controlling the initiation and duration of overtime intervals in electronic auctions
Publication number US6216114 B1
Application number US 09/311,557
Also published as CA2344253A1, EP1114384A1, US6199050, US6223167, US6230146, US6230147, US6408283, US6499018, US7813966, US20080071672, US20080162330, US20080162332, WO2000017797A1, WO2000017797A9
Publication number 09311557, 311557, US 6216114 B1, US 6216114B1, US-B1-6216114, US6216114 B1, US6216114B1
Patent Citations (37), Non-Patent Citations (46), Referenced by (161), Classifications (13), Legal Events (11)
US 6216114 B1
A method and system for conducting electronic auctions is described. A mic lot closing extension feature avoids collisions in closing times of multiple lots by dynamically extending the closing time of a subsequent lot if a preceding lot's closing time is extended to be too close to the subsequent lot's then-currently can be extended with a flexible overtime feature, in which the properties of the event triggering the extension and the of the overtime period(s) can be tailored to a particular auction, particular lots of products within an auction, and to the particular time within an auction process. t can be set to a “pending” status after the nominal closing time for submission of bids to allow bidders to alert the auction coordinator of technical problems in submission of bids. This allows the possibility for a lot to be return to bidding by all bidders. The auction may be paused by the auction coordinator to correct technical, market and miscellaneous problems that may arise during the course of an auction. Individual bid ceilings can be set for each e required to bid lower than certain thresholds determined in advance of the auction. Failsafe error detection is performed to prevent erroneous bids from entering the auction. The auction coordinator has the ability to override any ent prejudice to the auction.
1. A computer program product for enabling a processor in a computer system to control overtime in an electronic auction, said computer program product comprising:
a computer usable medium having computer readable program code means embodied in said medium for causing an application program to execute on the computer system, said computer readable program code means comprising:
a first computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to offer a plurality of lots, defined at least in part by a buyer, to a plurality of potential sellers, each of said plurality of lots having at least one product;
a second computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to define a closing time for each of said plurality of lots, wherein a closing time for a lot defines a time before which bids for the lot are to be submitted by a potential seller;
a third computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to define an overtime extension parameter for each of said plurality of lots, said overtime extension parameter indicating a length of an overtime period for an associated lot, wherein an overtime extension parameter for a lot is based upon characteristics of one or more items in the lot;
a fourth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to determine whether an overtime period is triggered in one of said plurality of lots; and
a fifth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to extend the auction for said one of said plurality of lots by an amount of time defined by said overtime extension parameter associated with said one of said plurality of lots, if an overtime period is triggered in said one of said plurality of lots.
2. The computer program product of claim 1, further comprising computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to store overtime extension parameters for each of said plurality of lots.
3. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein said fifth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to add the value of an overtime extension parameter with a market closing time for a lot.
4. The computer program product of claim 1, further comprising computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to dynamically vary an overtime extension parameter associated with a lot during an auction for the lot.
5. A system to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
means for offering a plurality of lots, defined at least in part by a buyer, to a plurality of potential sellers, each of said plurality of lots having at least one product;
means for defining a closing time for each of said plurality of lots, wherein a closing time for a lot defines a time before which bids for the lot are to be submitted by a potential seller;
means for defining an overtime extension parameter for each of said plurality of lots, said overtime extension parameter indicating a length of an overtime period for an associated lot, wherein an overtime extension parameter for a lot is based upon characteristics of one or more items in the lot;
means for determining whether an overtime period is triggered in one of said plurality of lots; and
means for extending the auction for said one of said plurality of lots by an amount of time defined by said overtime extension parameter associated with said one of said plurality of lots, if an overtime period is triggered in said one of said plurality of lots.
6. The system of claim 5, further comprising means for storing overtime extension parameters for each of said plurality of lots.
7. The system of claim 5, wherein said means for extending the auction adds the value of an overtime extension parameter with a market closing time for a lot.
8. The system of claim 5, further comprising means for dynamically varying an overtime extension parameter associated with a lot during an auction for the lot.
9. A computer program product for enabling a processor in a computer system to control overtime in an electronic auction, said computer program product comprising:
a first computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to offer a lot, defined at least in part by a buyer, to a plurality of potential sellers, said lot having at least one product;
a second computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to define a closing time for said lot, wherein said closing time for said lot defines a time before which bids for the lot are to be submitted by a potential seller;
a third computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to receive a first bid from a potential seller for said lot;
a fourth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to identify said first bid as a current best bid;
a fifth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to compare each successively received bid to said current best bid, and identify said successive bid as said current best bid if said successive bid is better than said current best bid; and
a sixth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to determine whether a received bid is better than said current best bid; and if said received bid is better than said current best bid, identify said received bid as current best bid and extend said closing time for said first lot by a second time interval; and if said received bid is not better than said current best bid, determine whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria and if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria, extend said closing time for said first lot by a third time interval.
10. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said second time interval is equal to said third time interval.
11. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said sixth computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is received within a fourth time interval of said closing time.
12. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said sixth computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
13. The computer program product of claim 12, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for storing a percentage parameter in memory.
14. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said sixth computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
15. The computer program product of claim 14, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for storing a price distance parameter in memory.
16. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said sixth computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
17. The computer program product of claim 16, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for storing an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
18. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein said sixth computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid.
19. The computer program product of claim 18, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria comprises computer readable program code means for storing an ordinal position parameter in memory.
20. A system to control overtime in an auction, comprising:
means for offering a lot, defined at least in part by a buyer, to a plurality of potential sellers, said lot having at least one product;
means for defining a closing time for said lot, wherein said closing time for said lot defines a time before which bids for the lot are to be submitted by a potential seller,
means for receiving a first bid from a potential seller for said lot;
means for identifying said first bid as a current best bid;
means for comparing each successively received bid to said current best bid, and identifying said successive bid as said current best bid if said successive bid is better than said current best bid; and
means for determining whether a received bid is better than said current best bid; and if said received bid is better than said current best bid, means for identifying said received bid as said current best bid and extending said closing time for said first lot by a second time interval; and if said received bid is not better than said current best bid, means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria; and if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria, extending said closing time for said first lot by a third time interval.
21. The system of claim 20, wherein said second time interval is equal to said third time interval.
22. The system of claim 20, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria determines whether said received bid is received within a fourth time interval of said closing time.
23. The system of claim 20, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria determines whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
24. The system of claim 23, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria stores a percentage parameter in memory.
25. The system of claim 21, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria determines whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
26. The system of claim 25, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria stores a price distance parameter in memory.
27. The system of claim 21, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria determines whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
28. The system of claim 27, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria stores an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
29. The system of claim 21, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria determines whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid.
30. The system of claim 29, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria stores an ordinal position parameter in memory.
31. A computer program product for enabling a processor in a computer system to control overtime in an electronic auction, said computer program product comprising:
a third computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to determine if a received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria within a first time interval of said closing time for said lot, wherein said at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria can be satisfied if said received bid is not better than a current best bid; and
a fourth computer readable program code means for enabling the computer system to extend said closing time for said first lot by a second time interval if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria.
32. The computer program product of claim 31, wherein said fourth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is received within a third time interval of said closing time.
33. The computer program product of claim 31, wherein said fourth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
34. The computer program product of claim 33, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid includes storing a percentage parameter in memory.
35. The computer program product of claim 31, wherein said fourth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
36. The computer program product of claim 35, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount includes storing a price distance parameter in memory.
37. The computer program product of claim 31, wherein said fourth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
38. The computer program product of claim 37, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier includes storing an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
39. The computer program product of claim 31, wherein said fourth computer readable program code means comprises computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid.
40. The computer program product of claim 39, wherein said computer readable program code means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid includes storing an ordinal position parameter in memory.
41. A system to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
means for defining a closing time for said lot; wherein said closing time for said lot defines a time before which bids for the lot are to be submitted by a potential seller;
means for determining if a received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria, wherein said at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria can be satisfied if said received bid is not better than a current best bid, within a first interval of said closing time for said lot; and
means for extending said closing time for said first lot by a second time interval, if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criteria.
42. The system of claim 41, wherein said means for extending said closing time determines whether said received bid is received within a third time interval of said closing time.
43. The system of claim 41, wherein said means for extending said closing time determines whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
44. The system of claim 43, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid stores a percentage parameter in memory.
45. The system of claim 41, wherein said means for extending said closing time determines whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
46. The system of claim 44, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount stores a price distance parameter in memory.
47. The system of claim 41, wherein said means for extending said closing time determines whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
48. The system of claim 47, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier stores an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
49. The system of claim 41, wherein said means for extending said closing time determines whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid.
50. The system of claim 49, wherein said means for determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid stores an ordinal position parameter in memory.
51. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first time interval is an overtime trigger interval representing a time interval during which an overtime condition can cause extension of a closing time;
52. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said second time interval is an overtime extension interval representing a time interval to extend a closing time;
53. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
54. The method of claim 53, wherein said predefined number of rank ordinal positions equals one.
55. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
receiving a plurality of bids each having a bid price;
ordering each bid from a best bid price to a worst bid price; and
receiving a bid having a bid price within a predefined price of said best bid price;
56. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
receiving a bid having a bid price within a predefined percentage of said best bid price;
57. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first overtime condition comprises receiving a bid from a predefined bidder;
58. The method of claim 57, wherein said predefined bidder is an incumbent bidder.
59. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
receiving a first set of bids;
determining a first frequency for said first set of bids; and
receiving a second set of bids at a second frequency;
60. The method of claim 59, wherein said second frequency is higher tan said first frequency.
61. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
receiving a plurality of bids from a group of bidders;
generating a statistical analysis parameter for said received bids; and
matching said statistical analysis parameter with a predefined statistical analysis parameter;
62. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
receiving a plurality of bids from a bidder;
63. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot;
b) determining whether said first overtime condition occurs during said first time interval;
c) extending said first closing time using said second time interval in accordance with said determination;
d) modifying at least one of said first time interval, said second time interval and said first overtime condition; and
e) performing (b) and (c) using said at least one modified first time interval, second time interval and first overtime condition.
64. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
d) defining a third time interval, a fourth time interval, a second overtime condition and a second closing time for a second lot;
e) determining whether said second overtime condition occurs during said third time interval; and
f) extending said second closing time using said fourth time interval if said second overtime condition occurs.
65. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first lot comprises at least one of a custom industrial product and material, and at least one of said first time interval, said second time interval and said first overtime condition is defined in accordance with said at least one of a custom industrial product and materials;
66. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first overtime condition comprises:
receiving a bid having a bid price other than said best bid price;
67. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
68. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
70. The machine-readable medium of claim 69, wherein said predefined number of rank ordinal positions equals one.
71. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first overtime condition comprises:
72. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
73. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
74. The machine-readable medium of claim 73, wherein said predefined bidder is an incumbent bidder.
75. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
76. The machine-readable medium of claim 75, wherein said second frequency is higher than said first frequency.
77. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
78. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
79. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
80. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
81. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
a) defining a first time interval, a second time interval, a first overtime condition and a first closing time for a first lot, wherein said first lot comprises at least one of a custom industrial product and material, and at least one of said first time interval, said second time interval and said first overtime condition is defined in accordance with said at least one of a custom industrial product and material;
82. A machine-readable medium whose contents cause a computer to control overtime in an electronic auction, by performing:
b)ition occurs during said first time interval; and
83. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising the steps of:
84. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of storing overtime extension parameters for each of said plurality of lots.
85. The method of claim 1, wherein step (e) comprises the step of adding the value of an overtime extension parameter with a market closing time for a lot.
86. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of dynamically varying an overtime extension parameter associated with a lot during an auction for the lot.
87. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising the steps of:
(c) receiving a first bid from a potential seller for said lot,
(i bid is better than said current best bid, identifying said received bid as said current best bid and extending said closing time for said first lot by a second time interval;
(iv) if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot exime for said first lot by a third time interval.
88. The method of claim 87, wherein said second time interval is equal to said third time interval.
89. The method of claim 87, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is received within a fourth time interval of said closing time.
90. The method of claim 87, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
91. The method of claim 16, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of storing a percentage parameter in memory.
92. The method of claim 87, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
93. The method of claim 18, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of storing a price distance parameter in memory.
94. The method of claim 90, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
95. The method of claim 94, wherein the step (f)(iii) comprises the step of storing an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
96. The method of claim 87, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said current best bid.
97. The method of claim 96, wherein step (f)(iii) comprises the step of storing an ordinal position parameter in memory.
98. A method to control overtime in an electronic auction, comprising the steps of:
(d) if said received bid satisfies at least one behind-market bid lot extension criter second time interval.
99. The method of claim 98, wherein step (d) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is received within a third time interval of said closing time.
100. The method of claim 98, wherein step (d) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is within a predefined percentage of said current best bid.
101. The method of claim 100, wherein step (d) comprises the step of storing a percentage parameter in memory.
102. The method of claim 98, wherein step (d) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is higher than said current best bid by a selected amount.
103. The method of claim 102, wherein step (d) comprises the step of storing a price distance parameter in memory.
104. The method of claim 98, wherein step (d) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is from an incumbent supplier.
105. The method of claim 104, wherein step(d) comprises the step of storing an incumbent supplier parameter in memory.
106. The method of claim 98, wherein step (d) comprises the step of determining whether said received bid is within a predefined number of rank ordinal positions of said cbid.
107. The method of claim 106, wherein step (d) comprises the step of storing an ordinal position parameter in memory.
This is a continuation divisional of copending application Ser. No. 09/252.790 filed on Feb. 19, 1999, which claims priority of provisional applications No. 60/101,141, filed on Sep. 18, 1998, and Ser. No. 60/110, 846, filed on Dec. 4, 1998.
The electronic catalog model of electronic commerce involves one buyer and one seller at a time. When many buyers compete for the right to buy from one seller, a buyer-bidding auction model is created. A noteworthy example of the buyer-bidding auction model is that operated by PriceLine.com and described in U.S. Pat. No. ssued to Walker et al. In this system, potential buyers compete for airline tickets by submitting a bid for an airline ticket on the PriceLine website, and airlines can choose to accept a bid, thereby committing the buyer to buy the ticket. dding auction types of electronic markets do not work in some situations however. If the required product is custom, it is not possible for suppliers to publish a set price for a catalog market. Likewise, it is not possible for buyers to identify the product they want to bid on in a buyer-bidding auction. There are fewer suppliers and no standard product and pricing information available for the buyer of custom industrial products. Traditionally, when a company requires a custom industrial product, procurement is made by a buyer for the company who searches for a supplier and acquires price quotes from a potential supplier for the needed custom product. The search is slow and somewhat random because it usually relies heavily on personal relationships. The costs associated with locating vendors, comparing their products, negotiating, and paperwork are a big factor in the make-or-buy decision. The cost of switching suppliers is very large, which means that the quoted price is probably not the lowest fair price and that it is hard for a new supplier to enter the market.
In a supplier-bidding auction, bid prices start high and move downward in reverse-auction format as bidders interact to establish a closing price. The auction marketplace is one-sided, i.e. one buyer and many potential suppliers. Typically, the rchased are components or materials. “Components” typically mean fabricated tangible pieces or parts that become part of assemblies of durable products. Example components include gears, bearings, appliance shelves or door handles. “Materials” typically mean bulk quantities of raw materials that are further transformed into product. Example materials include corn syrup or sheet steel.
The supplier-bidding auction model requires that the bidding product or service be defined by the buyer (identified as Buyer 10 in FIG. 1). An auction coordinator works with buyers to prepare for and conduct an auction and to define the potentially new supply relationships resulting from the auction.
During the auction 56, bids 58 will be taken against individual lots (and their thin RFQ 54. While bidders must submit actual unit prices for all line items, the competition in an Auction is based on the aggregate value bid for lots. The aggregate value bid for a lot depends upon the level and mix of line item bids and the quantity for each line item. Therefore, bidders submit bids at the line item level, but compete on the lot level.
Communications and Software ally between potential suppliers 30 at their respective remote sites and the coordinator 20 at its site. As shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, information is conveyed between the coordinator 20 and the suppliers 30 via a communications medium such as a network service provider 40 accessed by the participants through, for example, dial-up telephone connections using modems, or direct network connections. A computer software application is used to manage the Auction. The software application has two components: a client component 31 and a server component 23. The client component 31 operates on a computer at the site of each of the potential suppliers 30. The client component is used by suppliers 30 to make bids during the Auction. The bids are sent via the network service provider 40 to the site of the coordinator, where it is received by the server component 23 of the software application. The client component includes software used to make a connection through telephone lines or the Internet to the server component. Bids are submitted over this connection and updates are sent to connected bidders.
This Auction employs a decision rule to trigger overtime that can be stated: “when a low bid is submitted during a first time interval t before the scheduled close, reschedule t.” Thus, for a time interval t of one minute, a scheduled closing time of 10:30 is extended to 10:31 if overtime is triggered.
In the prior system, if a valid, low bid is received in a specified time interval before a lot's scheduled closing time, then the closing time is amended (delayed) to give other bidders more time to react to the late-arriving bid. A bid for second place, something an incumbent supplier might be expected to do, would not trigger an overtime. Unlike in- person auctions, industrial auctions need to allow second place bids. Thus, it has been found that this is an overly simplistic model, which may still be cutting off bidding too soon. A low bidder needs a chance to react to a second place bid, but it cannot if that second place bid does not trigger overtime. Therefore, it would desirable to be able to trigger Overtime, or extend Overtime, on the basis of more complex bid scenarios.
In the industrial market, the stakes can be quite large, with contracts awarded for millions of dollars and for contracts that can last for several years. Therefore, the suppliers that would be incurred by honoring an erroneous bid is substantial.
Once bidding activity has ceased, a lot is placed into “Pending” status prior to closing the lot. The lot closing time can be dynamically altered to meet the time period required to resolve any technical disruptions experienced by bidders. From Pending status, lots can be set to automatically close after a predefined period of time has elapsed with no technical disruptions reported by bidders, or the lot can be manually closed or held in pending status. Following the resolution of a technical disruption a lot can be returned to “Open” status for all participants to allow bidding activity to continue. Pending status will then be used again to dynamically alter lot closing times until all bidders have fully participated with no technical disruptions. This ensures that all bidders may place all bids irrespective of any technical disruptions that occur during the event without prejudicing the positions and bidding activity of other bidders. “Pause” status ensures that disruptions to an auction can be dealt with equitably without prejudicing existing bidding activity or positions achieved by bidders. Auction Pause allows the auction coordinator to indefinitely “freeze” an auction without disrupting the bids placed before the pause went into effect. The Pause status can be applied to an entire auction (all lots) or to specific lots within an auction. The Pause status can be applied at any time during an auction and will override any other status currently in effect. In one embodiment, no bidder is able to submit bids while the auction is in Pause status. In an alternate embodiment, bids may continue to be received but would not be entered into the auction. In this embodiment, bids could be held in a queue awaiting entry upon the removal of the Pause status.
The auction method and system of the invention are described below. Seven aspects of the system and method are described: a) dynamic lot closing extension; b) flexible overtime; c) flexible bidder-determined line item decision rules; d) pending status; e) bidder-specific bid limits; f auction pause; and g) error detection and prevention.
The Extended status can be applied to more than one subsequent lot . Thus, if the rescheduled closing time for the first lot reduces the interval to the second lot's closing time to less than the minimum interval, and the second lot's closing time is therefore extended sufficiently long that it in turn is too close to the scheduled closing time of a third lot, the third lot's closing time is in turn extended to be at least the minimum interval beyond the second lot's closing time.
1 Supplier A $8,515,383 19.4% Supplier A $8,352,524 20.9%
2 Supplier B $9,129,639 13.6% Supplier B $8,463,769 19.9%
3 Supplier C $9,635,396 8.8% Supplier C $8,674,775 17.9%
4 Supplier D $10,289,320  2.6% Supplier D $9,465,808 10.4%
1 Supplier A $8,515,383 19.4% Supplier A $8,515,383 19.4%
2 Supplier B $9,129,639 13.6% Supplier B $8,874,012 16.0%
3 Supplier C $9,635,396 8.8% Supplier C $8,821,191 15.5%
2 Supplier B $9,129,639 13.6% Supplier B No bid 0%
3 Supplier C $9,635,396 8.8% Supplier C No bid 0%
4 Supplier D $10,289,320  2.6% Supplier D No bid 0%
In a second scenario, the buyer establishes a market-wide ceiling at the highest offline bid ($10,289,320), and chooses to forego the right to accept the offline bids. result is shown below in Table 12.
1 Supplier A $8,515,383 19.4% Supplier A $8,863,448 16.1%
3 Supplier C $9,635,396 8.8% Supplier C $8,926,834 15.5%
However, the confirmation pop-up box is self-governing. It only helps in situations where the bidder believes the bid is incorrect; there is no system-based intelligence in the confirmation pop-up box. Therefore, some bidders have entered erroneous bids even though they had to confirm the bids. The pace of the auction, and bidding on multiple lots simultaneously allows for bidder errors. Because erroneous bids affect the critical integrity of the auctions, additional error detection and prevention-features were developed using system-based intelligence.
LOT 1-Historic Price = $1,768,334
Supplier F decides to commence bidding on lot 1. On their opening bid, Supplier F omits a zero from the bid amount, entering $153,507 instead of $1,525,070. This is an-opening bid 91% below historic and 78% below market, thereby violating the second and third rules. Supplier F is prevented from entering this bid.
1 "FairMarket Launches New Self-Serve Auctions.", Business Wire, p6161495, Jun. 16, 1998.*
2 "Moai Technologies Introduces New catogories of Business to Business Auction Software . . ", Business Editors and Computer writers, Mar. 16, 1998.*
3 "Online bidding software", Electronic Buyers' News, Aug. 25, 1997 Issue 1072, p86, 1/6p.*
4 "Sold!. . . To the Lowest Bidder", Computer Finance, v6, n2 Jul.1995.*
5 "Venture Capitalists Fund Two Massachusettes Internet Related Companies", , Boston Globe, Jan. 14, 1998.*
6 Andrews, "Auction Catch the Interest of Hobbyists and Big Business", Aug. 24, 1998.
7 Associated Press, "Auction on Web is Buyer's Market", Apr. 6, 1998.
8 Associated Press, "FreeMarkets Takes Auction on Internet", Feb. 23, 1998.
9 Auction Port, "Online Auction Community-New Auctions Since Sep. 2, 1998" (7/98).
10 Auction Port, "Online Auction Community—New Auctions Since Sep. 2, 1998" (7/98).
11 Auction Sales, "Live Auctions Online" (Sep. 1998).
12 Broadvision Developing First interactive Commerce Management System To Support Online Sales & MArketing Process . . . , Business!.*
13 Danny Cohen, "Computerized Commerce" Information Processing 89 (Aug. 25-Sep. 1, 1989).
14 Freemarkets Online(TM), "Homepage" (1998).
15 Freemarkets Online(TM), "Online Industrial Market Making, An Overview of Purchasing Executives".
16 Freemarkets Online™, "Homepage" (1998).
17 Freemarkets Online™, "Online Industrial Market Making, An Overview of Purchasing Executives".
18 Freemarkets(TM) Online, "Bidware Manuel" (Jun. 9, 1988).
19 Freemarkets™ Online, "Bidware Manuel" (Jun. 9, 1988).
20 J. Sairamesh et al.; "economic Framework for Pricing and Charging in Digital Libraries", D-Lib Magazine, Feb. 1996.*
21 Jahnke, "How Bazaar" (Aug. 27, 1998).
22 Jean-Pierre Banatre, et al., "The Design and Building of Enchere, a Distributed Electronic Marketing System" Communications of the ACM, No. 1 (Jan. 29, 1986).
23 Lee, Ho Geun, "Do electronic marketplaces lower the price of goods?" Communications of the PCM, v41n1 pp 73-80 Jan. 1998.*
24 Malone et al., "The Logic of Electronic Markets", Harvard Business Review, No. 89311 (May-Jun., 1989).
25 OnSale, "How to Play" (1998).
26 Steinert-Threlkeld, "New Watchwords: Let Sellers Beware", Jun. 1, 1998.
27 U.S. application No. 09/252,790, filed Feb. 19, 1999.
28 U.S. application No. 09/282,156, filed Mar. 31, 1999.
29 U.S. application No. 09/282,157, filed Mar. 31, 1999.
30 U.S. application No. 09/282,158, filed Mar. 31, 1999.
31 U.S. application No. 09/311,555, filed May 14, 1999.
32 U.S. application No. 09/311,556, filed May 14, 1999.
33 U.S. application No. 09/311,558, filed May 14, 1999.
34 U.S. application No. 09/311,559, filed May 14, 1999.
35 U.S. application No. 09/311,582, filed May 14, 1999.
36 U.S. application No. 09/327,600, filed Jun. 8, 1999.
37 U.S. application No. 09/490,867, filed Jan. 24, 2000.
38 U.S. application No. 09/490,868, filed Jan. 24, 2000.
39 U.S. application No. 09/490,877, filed Jan. 24, 2000.
40 u-Auction-It(TM) (1997).
41 u-Auction-It™ (1997).
42 Von det Fehr et al.; "Predatory bidding in sequential auctions", Oxford Economics Papers, v46, n3, p345(12) Jul. 1994.*
43 WebAuction.com, "How to Play" (1998).
44 Wilder, What's Your Bid?-FreeMarkets' real-time online bidding technology lets clients drive down costs and improve product value, Nov. 10, 1997, Information Week.
45 Wilder, What's Your Bid?—FreeMarkets' real-time online bidding technology lets clients drive down costs and improve product value, Nov. 10, 1997, Information Week.
46 Woolley, "E-muscle", Mar. 9, 1998.
US7272575 * Jul 13, 2001 Sep 18, 2007 Lilly Mae Vega Method and system for facilitating service transactions
US7571135 Jul 15, 2005 Aug 4, 2009 New York Stock Exchange System and method for determining and applying parity in a hybrid auction market
US7593885 Sep 4, 2001 Sep 22, 2009 Ozb2B Pty Ltd Materials supply contract system and method
US7647267 Jul 15, 2005 Jan 12, 2010 New York Stock Exchange System and method for setting and using a momentum liquidity replenishment price in a hybrid auction market
US7739154 * May 3, 2007 Jun 15, 2010 At&T Corp Method and system for dynamically extending the duration of an auction
US7747509 Jul 15, 2005 Jun 29, 2010 New York Stock Exchange System and method for setting and using a sweep liquidity replenishment price in an hybrid auction market
US7778916 Jul 15, 2005 Aug 17, 2010 New York Stock Exchange System and method for order sweep in a hybrid auction market
US7788161 Jul 15, 2005 Aug 31, 2010 New York Stock Exchange System and method for managing an imbalance in a hybrid auction market
US7788162 Jul 15, 2005 Aug 31, 2010 New York Stock Exchange System and method for presenting broker and specialist interest in a hybrid auction market
US7853500 * Jul 11, 2007 Dec 14, 2010 John Nicholas And Kristin Gross Trust U/A/D April 13, 2010 System and method for determining right of access
US7921052 * Sep 11, 2003 Apr 5, 2011 Autotrader.Com, Inc. Efficient online auction style listings that encourage out-of-channel negotiation
US8024247 Jul 15, 2005 Sep 20, 2011 New York Stock Exchange System and method for publishing liquidity replenishment prices in a hybrid auction market
US8266000 * Sep 12, 2010 Sep 11, 2012 Harris Technology, Inc. Real time auction with end game
US8412615 Aug 28, 2009 Apr 2, 2013 Ozb2B Pty Ltd Materials supply contract system and method
US20020069079 * Jul 13, 2001 Jun 6, 2002 Vega Lilly Mae Method and system for facilitating service transactions
US20020138391 * Dec 23, 2000 Sep 26, 2002 Kroeger Dann E. System, method and article of manufacture for a bid manager in an integrated scheduling and document management framework
US20040015391 * Sep 4, 2001 Jan 22, 2004 Dupreez Anthony Gert Materials supply contract system and method
US20040034590 * Aug 19, 2002 Feb 19, 2004 David Zinberg On-line auction
US20050240519 * Apr 26, 2004 Oct 27, 2005 Aiken Curtis E Sr System and method for automated commerce directed towards minority suppliers
US20060015441 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for managing and trading auction limit orders in a hybrid auction market
US20060015442 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for publishing liquidity replenishment prices in a hybrid auction market
US20060015443 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for managing an imbalance in a hybrid auction market
US20060015444 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for setting and using a sweep liquidity replenishment price in an hybrid auction market
US20060015445 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for presenting broker and specialist interest in a hybrid auction market
US20060015446 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for setting and using a momentum liquidity replenishment price in a hybrid auction market
US20060015447 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for order sweep in a hybrid auction market
US20060015448 * Jul 15, 2005 Jan 19, 2006 Roger Burkhardt System and method for determining and applying parity in a hybrid auction market
US20060218070 * Mar 23, 2005 Sep 28, 2006 Lange William W Method of advertising, marketing and auctioning real estate
US20070055577 * Oct 10, 2006 Mar 8, 2007 Commonwealth Intellectual Property Holdings, Inc. Internet and wireless integrated virtual presence
US20070055578 * Oct 10, 2006 Mar 8, 2007 Commonwealth Intellectual Property Holdings, Inc. Internet and wireless integrated virtual presence
US20070244762 * Jan 28, 2005 Oct 18, 2007 Du Preez Anthony G Default Final Offers in Online Auctions
US20070294140 * Jun 5, 2006 Dec 20, 2007 Bezos Jeffrey P Method and system for publicizing commercial transactions on a computer network
US20080021794 * Sep 18, 2007 Jan 24, 2008 Vega Lilly M Method and system for facilitating service transactions
US20100023444 * Sep 29, 2009 Jan 28, 2010 Roger Burkhardt System and method for managing and trading auction limit orders in a hybrid auction market
US20120296757 * May 17, 2011 Nov 22, 2012 Smith Brendan A Iterative auction system and method
WO2006012445A3 * Jul 21, 2005 Jul 20, 2006 Espeed Inc System and method for managing trading orders received from market makers
WO2006019986A3 * Jul 15, 2005 Jun 1, 2006 Nyse Inc System and method for a hybrid auction market
U.S. Classification 705/37, 705/1.1, 705/26.3
Cooperative Classification G06Q30/0601, G06Q30/08, G06Q40/025, G06Q40/04
European Classification G06Q30/08, G06Q40/04, G06Q40/025, G06Q30/0601
Apr 8, 2005 SULP Surcharge for late payment
Free format text: MERGER;ASSIGNOR:FREEMARKETS, INC. (A DELAWARE CORPORATION);REEL/FRAME:016902/0422
May 12, 2009 B1 Reexamination certificate first reexamination
Free format text: THE PATENTABILITY OF CLAIMS 1-8, 51, 52, 57-65, 67, 68, 73-81 AND 83-86 IS CONFIRMED. CLAIMS 9-50, 53-56, 66, 69-72, 82 AND 87-107 WERE NOT REEXAMINED.