Originally Posted by Sink r8

I'm delighted you would wait to gain some perspective before you run. that's a good thing.

So let's tone it down, and take a step back. Let's also dropp the LARGE CAPS: no sense in yelling.

WRT the practice bids at FedEx, the concept as I read it is fairly simply: people would bid differently in the practice than in the final. They'd try to see what everyone else would do in the practice. As a result, when people finally pulled the trigger on a real bid... they wouldn't get anything like what they got on the practice.

I think the problem with a practice is that people have no incentive to divulge their true intentions, and no penalty for bluffing. Therefore, practice bids seem to me to make little sense in practice.

Conceptually, they're fantastic.

They good method I see is for the company to run a few, rapid-succession bids, so that the results are published before training occurs. In doing so, they would not divulge how many bids would occur. Everyone bids truthfully enough, because everyone truly risks getting stuck with their award, but has a chance to try to improve their position in smaller clean-up bids.

Surprisingly, that's often exactly how the system works in practice: everyone bids carefully, and hopes they will be able to improve their position later.

I will agree that I don't like the fact the company can game the bid by making categories bigger than expected, i.e. by allowing more AE's, not processing all displacements, or even cancelling a bid if they don't like the awards. They seem to have a lot of latitude after the bid is closed.