Skip to main content
Add as a preferred source on Google

Forward vs. Reverse Auctions

  • 09/01/13

In a nutshell, there are really only two categories of auctions — forward and reverse auctions. There may be variations with these based on a number of factors, including the progress of the auction and the criteria for determining the “winner” of the auction.

Forward auctions take the form of a single seller offering an item for sale, with buyers competing to secure the item by bidding the price upward. Forward auctions are far-better understood by the public at large than reverse auctions as to how they operate, due primarily to the fact that they are widely used at the consumer level. They are also widely used when the goal is for the seller to receive the most money possible for the item being offered at auction. Thus, a forward auction should be utilized for sales of goods and services of all types, whether conducted online, offline or a hybrid of the two.

Reverse auctions are the other major form of auctions. In a reverse auction, a single buyer makes potential sellers aware of their intent to buy a specified good or service. During the course of the actual reverse auction event, the sellers bid against one another to secure the buyer’s business, driving the price to be paid for the item downward. Thus, the winning bidder is the seller who offers the lowest price. Reverse auctions are most typically used for procurement by private companies, public sector agencies and nonprofit organizations.

Reverse auctions are not a short-term tactic for procurement operations, but are, in fact, a proven method for long-term management of indirect spend — delivering significant savings and process efficiency. For more information on reverse auctions and the procurement process, visit Reverse Auction Research online at www.reverseauctionresearch.org.

Source: Reverse Auction Research (www.reverseauctionresearch.org)

This article originally appeared in the College Planning & Management September 2013 issue of Spaces4Learning.

Featured

  • Wold Completes Geothermal Projects at Two Minnesota Schools

    Wold Architects & Engineers recently announced that it has completed two geothermal expansion projects for Mounds View Public Schools in Shoreview, Minn., according to a news release. The work at Highview Middle School and Irondale High School serves the district’s long-term goal of reducing energy costs and dependency on non-renewable fuel sources, as well as improving building performance.

  • Rethinking K-12 Schools as a Continuous Learning Experience

    Most students move through three or more separate facilities during their K-12 journey, yet the built environments they encounter at each stage have traditionally been designed in isolation, with little continuity in spatial language, learning philosophy, or physical resources. Each new school is a reset with different layouts, learning models, expectations, and ways of moving through a building. The next generation of school design is making the case that the first day of kindergarten and the last day of high school can and should feel connected through common support systems and infrastructure in the physical environment.

  • Back-to-School Playground Safety: 7 Common Hazards to Look for After Summer Break

    As summer break comes to an end, school administrators have plenty to prepare before students return. While classrooms, hallways and common areas often receive attention during all the back-to-school preparations, the playground should not be overlooked. Months of weather exposure, storms, and regular wear can leave behind hazards that may not be immediately noticeable.

  • UCF Modernizes College of Hospitality Management

    The University of Central Florida in Orlando, Fla., recently completed a major renovation effort for the Rosen College of Hospitality Management, according to a news release. The project modernized 77,600 square feet worth of academic classrooms, teaching labs, and collaborative spaces to support both students and faculty.