IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v34y2016i12p919-934.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the number of new and repeated bidders in construction auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Pablo Ballesteros-Pérez
  • Martin Skitmore

Abstract

The number of new bidders – bidders from whom there is no previous registered participation – is an important variable in most bid tender forecasting models, since the unknown competitive profile of the former strongly limits the predictive accuracy of the latter. Analogously, when a bidder considers entering a bid or when an auctioneer is handling a procurement auction, assessing the likely proportion of experienced bidders is considered an important aspect, as some strategic decisions or even the awarding criteria might differ. However, estimating the number of bidders in a future auction that have not submitted a single bid yet is difficult, since there is no data at all linking their potential participation, an essential requirement for the implementation of any forecasting or estimation method. A practical approach is derived for determining the expected proportion of new bidders to frequent bidders as a function of the population of potential bidders. A multinomial model useful for selective and Open tendering is proposed and its performance is validated with a dataset of actual construction auctions. Final remarks concern the valuable information provided by the model to an enduring unsolved bidding problem and the prospects for new research continuations.

Suggested Citation

  • Pablo Ballesteros-Pérez & Martin Skitmore, 2016. "Estimating the number of new and repeated bidders in construction auctions," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(12), pages 919-934, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:34:y:2016:i:12:p:919-934
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2016.1231408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01446193.2016.1231408
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446193.2016.1231408?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Klemperer, 2004. "Auctions: Theory and Practice," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number auction1.
    2. Paul Klemperer, 2004. "Survey of Auction Theory, from Auctions: Theory and Practice," Introductory Chapters, in: Auctions: Theory and Practice, Princeton University Press.
    3. Paul Klemperer, 2004. "Auctions: Theory and Practice," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number auction1.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jean Richard Jokhu & Rofikoh Rokhim1 & Riani Rachmawati1 & Mohammad Hamsal, 2019. "Strategic Decision Process in SME’s Context: A New Perspective Using Indigenous, Institution, Firm, and Environment Characteristics," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(4), pages 68-83.
    2. Qiao, Yu & Labi, Samuel & Fricker, Jon D., 2021. "Does highway project bundling policy affect bidding competition? Insights from a mixed ordinal logistic model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 228-242.
    3. Tomáš Hanák & Ivan Marović & Nikša Jajac, 2020. "Challenges of Electronic Reverse Auctions in Construction Industry—A Review," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chatterjee, Rittwik & Chattopadhyay, Srobonti, 2015. "Competition and Auctioning Licenses," MPRA Paper 67086, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    3. Drabik Ewa, 2013. "Several Remarks on Banach–Mazur Games and its Applications Ewa Drabik," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 5(1), pages 1-5, June.
    4. B Kelsey Jack, 2009. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts in Indonesia - Participant Learning in Multiple Trial Rounds," CID Working Papers 35, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Alessandra Casella & Adam B. Cox, 2018. "A Property Rights Approach to Temporary Work Visas," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(S1), pages 195-227.
    6. Soumyakanti Chakraborty & Anup K. Sen & Amitava Bagchi, 2015. "Addressing the valuation problem in multi-round combinatorial auctions," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 1145-1160, October.
    7. Popkowski Leszczyc, Peter T.L. & Qiu, Chun & He, Yongfu, 2009. "Empirical Testing of the Reference-Price Effect of Buy-Now Prices in Internet Auctions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 211-221.
    8. A. Talman & Zaifu Yang, 2015. "An efficient multi-item dynamic auction with budget constrained bidders," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(3), pages 769-784, August.
    9. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2019. "Minimum price equilibrium in the assignment market," ISER Discussion Paper 1047, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    10. Comerford, Emma & Binney, Jim, 2006. "Lessons learned from the Queensland Vegetation Incentives Program - applying auction theory to vegetation protection," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 174101, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Philip Brookins & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2014. "An experimental study of bidding in contests of incomplete information," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(2), pages 245-261, June.
    12. van der Laan, G. & Talman, Dolf & Yang, Z., 2018. "Equilibrium in the Assignment Market under Budget Constraints," Discussion Paper 2018-046, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    13. Jonathan Levin & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2016. "Properties of the Combinatorial Clock Auction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2528-2551, September.
    14. Brânzei, R. & Fragnelli, V. & Meca, A. & Tijs, S.H., 2006. "Two Classes of Cooperative Games Related to One-Object Auction Situations," Discussion Paper 2006-25, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Wilson William W. & Dahl Bruce L., 2005. "Railcar Auctions for Grain Shipments: A Strategic Analysis," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, April.
    16. Ganuza, Juan José & Viecens, María Fernanda, 2011. "Deployment of high-speed broadband infrastructures during the economic crisis. The case of Xarxa Oberta," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 857-870.
    17. Sven-Olof Fridolfsson and Thomas P. Tangeras, 2015. "Nuclear Capacity Auctions," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    18. Ralph-Christopher Bayer, 2016. "A Primer on Auction Design, Management, and Strategy , by David J. Salant ( MIT Press , Cambridge, London , 2014 ), pp. 184 ," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 92(298), pages 507-508, September.
    19. Eric Budish & Judd B. Kessler, 2022. "Can Market Participants Report Their Preferences Accurately (Enough)?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1107-1130, February.
    20. Peter Helgesson & Bernt Wennberg, 2015. "The N-Player War of Attrition in the Limit of Infinitely Many Players," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-93, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:34:y:2016:i:12:p:919-934. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.