15

Let's say there is one house remaining in the bank. Alice wants to build it on the light blues (normally $50/house) and Bob wants to build it on the dark blues (normally $200/house). Per the rules, it goes up for auction:

When the Bank has no houses to sell, players wishing to build must wait for some player to return or sell their houses to the Bank before building. If there are a limited number of houses and hotels available and two or more players wish to buy more than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at auction to the highest bidder.

Is there a minimum price this house needs to auction for? Can Bob get this house for $100 despite the normal purchase price for a house on the dark blue houses being $200?

0

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
13

The official rules do not directly cover this, and Hasbro generally avoids clarification of the Monopoly rules. Following the rules as written there is no minimum set out for starting the auction.

That said, official Monopoly tournaments have historically used the following addition to the rule for building shortages:

The Banker runs auctions.
Players must indicate the specific property to be improved if the house/hotel is won before bidding.
Auction bids start at the value of the houses/hotels for the lowest-priced property where it might be placed.
The highest bidder, after giving his/her money to the Banker, places the house/hotel on the identified property.
If houses/hotels remain and more than one person wish to purchase the remaining houses/hotels, then another auction is held for the right to purchase these houses/hotels, one by one.

which in your stated scenario would allow Bob to acquire a house for minimum of $50 despite the normal purchase price for a house on the dark blue houses being $200

5
  • By that rule, Bob's initial bid is $200, assuming a dark blue is the only place he wants to/can place it. If he also has oranges (could place it there or dark blue) he would start at $100, but then would place it on the orange. Commented Nov 25 at 9:01
  • 12
    I think this answer has the correct reading of tournament rules. Since all player identify the property to be improved before the auction starts, the "Auction bids start at the value of the houses/hotels for the lowest-priced property where it might be placed." considers all player choices, which in the question scenario would be the lowest of (50, 200) for a starting bid of 50. Commented Nov 25 at 14:18
  • @ChrisDodd I think the effect would be quite the opposite. If Bob sees there is a housing shortage and Alice wants to buy the remaining houses at 50$ each Bob will be excited to force an auction and get the chance to buy dark blue houses for less than the regular $200 price and hinder Alice at the same time. Commented 2 days ago
  • @quarague: Right, so if Alice wants to buy a house, she first asks Bob if he wants one. If he says yes, he buys one for $200. If he says no, Alice buys one for $50. If he changes his mind at the last minute and says he wants one, she changes her mind, and we have an impasse and the game stops, unable to make progress. Commented 2 days ago
  • 3
    @ChrisDodd I think this is resolved by the turn order. It is Alice's turn and she announces she intends to buy the houses for $50. At that point Bob may object and then there will be an auction or he can keep quiet and then Alice will buy the houses. Neither person can change their mind after their announcement. Commented 2 days ago
4

The rules don't really cover this, but I would say Bob needs to bid a minimum of $200, or else he doesn't want the house and there is no shortage (and so no auction) and Alice gets it for $50.

This is implicit from the rule saying "If two or more players wish to buy". In order to "wish to buy" they must be willing to pay at least their normal price for the house.

If you don't rule this way (allowing Bob to buy the house for less than "face" value), you get into a situation where Alice only wants to buy the house if Bob does not, leading to a Alice trying to by the house but then refusing (and denying an auction) if Bob expresses interest.

3
  • 2
    The only time I would see it playing out like this is if one of the people claiming to want to buy a house literally cannot afford it at its normal price, including lacking any existing assets they could sell or properties that they could mortgage to get the money (in which case this is a moot argument since they have no valid properties to put the house on anyway). Otherwise, there's nothing stopping someone from claiming they are "willing" to buy the house despite not actually wanting to buy it, just like there's nothing stopping a player from bidding on a property they don't actually want. Commented Nov 25 at 19:00
  • @Abion47: There's also nothing in the rules preventing a player from trying to negotiate trades and refusing to roll the dice for their turn until someone agrees, other than the fact that it delays the game and makes it unplayable. Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    I mean, sure. But there's a pretty big difference between exploiting the rules to raise prices for your opponents to try and give yourself an edge (which is fully within the entire spirit of the game) and using a technical loophole in the game's rules to justify bringing the game to a screeching halt and just generally being a supremely unfun person to play games with. So I'm not sure how that's relevant here. Commented yesterday
0

The first problem I see with getting the house cheaper than normal is the craziness of the idea - because there is a shortage and people fight over limited resource, stuff is now cheaper? Huh?

The other problem I have with it is the potential for exploiting this with another player cooperating (if others are unable to interfere): A offers 50$, B offers 51$, gets the house, then immediately sells it to the bank for 100$. Repeat until bank is empty or until players C, D ... leave the table.

We played house shortage with house rule: "bidding happens on surcharge". This was implemented to make cheaper houses relevant in bidding wars - this change allows them to be used to push prices of even expensive houses up. I imagined it as "all houses cost 50$, the rest is the bribe to let you place it". It didn't seem to change the game all that much, though.

New contributor
Zizy Archer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.