Forward vs. Reverse Auctions

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

  • Benson Polytechnic High School in Portland, OR

    Preserving Legacy, Designing for the Future

    As historic academic buildings age, institutions face a difficult decision: preserve and adapt or demolish and rebuild. How do we honor the legacy of these spaces while adapting them to meet the needs of modern learners?

  • Dallas ISD Voters Approve $6.2B Bond Package

    Dallas ISD voters have approved a record-setting $6.2-billion bond package that district leaders say will modernize aging campuses, eliminate portable classrooms and reshape learning environments across one of the nation’s largest school systems.

  • Harvard Announces Replacement Facility for Native American Program

    Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., recently announced that construction will begin this spring on a new home for its Native American Program, according to university news. The 6,500-square-foot, all-electric building will stand three stories and serve as the central hub for the Harvard University Native American Program (HUNAP).

  • Universities Continue to Launch Multimillion-Dollar Campus Transformations

    What makes the current wave of campus development especially noteworthy is its emphasis on multi-use functionality and community integration. Institutions are no longer investing solely in academic or athletic facilities in isolation. Instead, they are creating destinations that blend recreation, health, housing, and event-driven economic activity.