Thank you for your kind words--you must have missed those occasional posts where I have gotten snappy. I will just point out that there have been many other very reliable, friendly moderators and other volunteer participants here, new and old, from whom I've learned a great deal (such as Colfax30, GeoNit, and so-on) and who are wonderful resources to our users. Furthermore, I think we need to give credit to our administrators, including those on haitus and those who work quietly in the background, for making this site possible.
Finally, let's not forget that so much of the value on BiddingForTravel.com comes from the bid-win postings of our ordinary users. Without whom these forums would perish. To all those who post their findings (and who bid via the priceline links at www.amazing-bargains.com) I extend my hearty appreciation.
I would normally have sent private messages to you with the above comments, but my ezSupporter has run out, and I'm limited to the number of messages I can send to ezInboxes. Now rather than hijack this topic further, I hope we can get back to bidding. Cheers!
You are so right, Keen Wink. Certainly didn't mean to slight anyone. I guess I singled out moderators such as yourself, as those are the ones I have the most interaction with, and it has all been so helpful, positive and supportive. So, along w/yourself, I thank all the moderators, official or otherwise who so willingly share so much of their knowledge and time, and of course all the fellow bidders such as myself who share their bidding experiences; certainly a collaborative effort.
I want to second the thanks for the hard work of the moderators and for the contributions of fellow bidders.
I don't understand the instructions to back all the way out of Priceline to bid a new permutation. I always just click "Hotels" at the top of the rejection screen and am given a form with the city and dates already filled in, from which I click "Name Your Own Price" and can bid a different zone combination with no problem.
I've been looking at your matricies, as a result of a post you made elsewhere, and pardon me, but I'm a bit confused. Perhaps you can clarify this a bit for me.
In your top post of this topic, you wrote:
Quote:One Acceptable Zone / Four Free Re-bid Zones
Acceptable Zone = A Free Re-bid Zones = B, C, D, E
A
A + B
A + C
A + D
A + E
A + B + C
A + B + D
A + B + E
A + C + D
A + C + E
A + D + E
A + B + C + D
A + B + D + E
A + C + D + E
A + B + C + D + E
What I am wondering is.. why do you list no combination of:
A + B + C + E ?
I would think that could be bid just before the final offer, and it would yield a total of 16 offers, as predicted by the 2^4=16 rule.
GeoNit's matrices above are well done, and definitely an enhancement to the site. However, I think it's important to point out to users that when you have multiple acceptable zones, if you follow the matrices above and increase your bid each time, you may very well not end up with the absolute lowest possible bid.
For example, let's look at GeoNit's last matrix, for four acceptable bid zones with no free rebids. You're seeking the absolutely lowest possible price. Unknown to us, the lowest price that Priceline will accept for a hotel in zone A is $51, zone B is $60, zone C is $54, and zone D is $58. So we start at $50, and go down the matrix:
Bid 1--Zone A, $50--rejected.
Bid 2--Zone B, $51--rejected.
Bid 3--Zone C, $52--rejected.
Bid 4--Zone D, $53--rejected.
Bid 5--Zones A&B, $54--accepted in zone A.
Result? You just overpaid by $3. But then again, you got multiple rebids by using the strategy--if you didn't, you might not have gotten a win at all, or might have overpaid signicantly more than $3. So it was likely worth it. But I think it's important to know the potential cost of using such a strategy.
A different option would have been to bid $50 on zones A, B, C, and D (individually), $51 on zones A&B and on C&D (which would have been a winning bid in this example), $52 on zones A&C and on B&D, $53 on zones A&D and B&C, $54 on zones A&B&C, $55 on zones A&B&D, $56 on zones A&C&D, $57 on zones B&C&D, and $58 on zones A&B&C&D. If you would have done this in this example, you would have won your bid at $51--the absolute minimum possible amount, and the most that any winning bid would have overbid is $1--but, on the other hand, if $58 had been rejected, you'd be out of bids for the day, while GeoNit's matrix would have had more bids remaining. It all depends on what your objectives and priorities are.
Also, all of GeoNit's multiple acceptable zone matrices and my altered bid strategy above are most effetive if the zones are equally acceptable to you. But we all know that this is rarely the case--usually, our thought process is more along the lines of "My first choice is to pay $xx for a 4* in Zone A, second is $xx for a 3* in zone A, third is $xx for a 3* in zone B, fourth is up to a higher amount of $xx for a 4* in zone A...", etc. etc. etc. And for these situations, using any of the matrices above AS-IS won't work. Instead, you have to doctor a matrix yourself that meets the needs of your bid attempt, but that also meets the rules of PL (regarding things like not bidding for the same zone level/star combination multiple times, etc.). For this, both GeoNit's and my matrices are excellent ways to learn more about how to set such a matrix up. But there can be no cookie-cutter matrix we can put together for you to use, as no matrix can anticipate the infinite possibilities that could come up based on anyone's individual bidding priorities.
Another side note--I had one person write to me to ask why the order sequence for my matrices (in the other permutations thread) for "X" free rebid zones differs from GeoNit's matrices for one acceptable zone / "X" free rebid zones shown above. The answer is--They don't, really. Both my and GeoNit's matrices work through every possible combination, and because they're only differing in the sequence that the free rebids used, whose sequence you use doesn't really matter. (But note that you can't just do them randomly, or you'll have past combinations lock out future rebids. You need to use a planned sequence, such as the ones that GeoNit and I lay out.) I would suggest that mine may be slightly easier to use, as GeoNit's matrices require you to start a new bid every single time, while mine allow you to use the "add a zone" rebid feature in Priceline on every other bid, saving a few minutes. But the end result is exactly the same, and you will have a successful bid at exactly the same point--so use whichever you are more comfortable with.
Verkuilb, I tested my Four Acceptable Zones / No Free Re-bid Zones matrix here p070.ezboard.com/fpriceli...=761.topic , bidding at the 1* level exclusively.
By starting all four initial zone bids at $15, my potential maximum minimum-bid overpayment was reduced to $1 for all subsequent bids since I was using $1 incremental increases after each Priceline rejection.
GeoNit, just a small technicality: I assume that when you did that testing, you did exactly what your matrix says (with the exception you noted in your bid, that you bid $15 on all four zones)--your day 1 bids were:
$15 on Zone A
$15 on Zone B
$15 on Zone C
$15 on Zone D
$16 on A&B
$17 on C&D
$18 on A&C
$19 on B&D
$20 on A&D
$21 on B&C
$22 on A&B&C
$23 on B&C&D
$24 on A&B&D
$25 on A&C&D
$26 on A&B&C&D
If that's the case, then yes, you did eliminate the possibility of a $3 overbid by bidding $15 on all four zones to start--but you only reduced the maximum overbid to $2, not $1. If, for example, a $17 bid would have been accepted by PL in Zone B, you would have won it two bids later for $19. (Neither your $17 or $18 bids involved Zone B.) Similarly, if a $19 bid would have been a winner in Zone C, you would have gotten it for $21. And if $21 would have won in Zone D, you would have paid $23.
But like I said, this is only a technicality. For the most part, getting all these extra rebids by using your matrix is well worth the possible overbid amount, unless you have tons of time to do one-bid-a-day bidding.
And look at the bright side--by having this continuing conversation, we're keeping this thread posted near the top of the forum where it belongs!