Criticism
Mark D. Griffiths, professor of gambling studies at Nottingham Trent University, has repeatedly called for more regulation of sites like MadBid, but the UK's Gambling Commission has stated that it does not believe that such sites involve gambling, and while the Office of Fair Trading has worked against other sites which utilise automatic bidding against customers, it says it has nothing to add to the work already done.
Due to the possibility of participants losing an auction, some analysts have criticized the model or compared it to gambling, even when operating without fraud. The Better Business Bureau has stated that, "not all penny auction sites are scams" and to "know exactly how the bidding works, set a limit for yourself, and be prepared to walk away before you go over that limit." The Washington state attorney general's office studied the bidding-fee scheme and concluded that it does not constitute gambling under its state laws. It is now studying whether or not such "penny auctions" constitute a lottery.
In May 2015, The Guardian exposed irregularities across three Madbid markets (USA, UK and Europe) where the prices successful bidders were shown to have paid were inaccurate. A Fiat car was shown as having sold for £193, $193 and €193 in its respective markets, an iPad for £34.40, $34.40 or €34.40, and a camera for £23.94 or €23.94. Due to the concept of exchange rates, at least 2 out of the 3 claims were definitely incorrect. Madbid's explanation was that 'Bid winners (from each of the MadBid sites) are automatically displayed across the three sites. However, the software that drives this is not sophisticated enough to deal with the currency conversion and interest rate variables between the pound, dollar and euro. To simplify matters, the price is paid is [sic] consistent across the sites.'
The Guardian also claim that winners of auctions may pay considerably more for their goods than had they purchased them through conventional retail channels, using the example of a toaster with RRP of £79.99 that sold for £36.27 plus £8.99 delivery, but was available for £24.99 delivered from another website. The price paid by the winner excluded the cost of bids.