The objective of this study was to investigate the existence of starting point bias in the bidding game contingent valuation elicitation technique when determining willingness to pay (WTP) for improving the qualify of running water in Seoul and its vicinity. Of all existing contingent techniques, the bidding game most closely mimics the normal price taking behavior in local markets. Three different starting points (low, medium and high) were used to determine WTP and the existence of starting point bias in the meanwhile respectively. The respondents were randomly assigned to the three different starting point groups in order to ensure homogeneity, so that any variation seen in WTP could be attributed to the starting point effects. And a pretested interviewer-administered questionnaire used to elicit WTP. Non-parametric test and the logit model were used to analyze the data for evidence of starting point bias. In this instance, the high starting point group had a high WTP, and low starting point group had a low WTP. This means there exist starting point bias in estimating WTP by bidding game in this instance. This finding might signal that people may actually be making up their minds on the maximum amount they are willing to pay for running water service as a bidding iterating is going on and is influenced by the starting point used in the bidding game. The problem of slaking point bias can be avoided if the respondent is asked directly for the maximum WTP without payment cards or a bidding game. But such a question is perceived as being very difficult to answer and this leads to problems of non-response and being unrealistic.