Shane Bellone Thinks It's Ok To Bypass Broker.

[talhahassan]

Hi

I sent two LLL.com domains which I was brokering to Shane Bellone in response to his thread in Domains Wanted.

He replied to me first about dropping the price.

I asked how much is his client's highest offer . To which he said how many months finance would be agreeable.

I told him owners won't agree to financing options.

He then asked me why I messaged him in the first place as his requirement was related to financing the domain and he will contact the owners now to see if they will agree.

I apologized to him for missing the financing part and asked when did it become a good business practice to bypass brokers and contact the owners directly.

His reply was " My business is to get the best price for myself and my clients. Bypassing a broker who may or may not have an exclusive contract makes sense. Saves them a commission which therefore saves me or my client money."

I am attaching the link to the screenshot as well.

imgur. com/a/l4VDz
I think it's totally unethical to bypass a broker . What are your thoughts on this?

 

[wot]

Guess you won't be offering him anymore names as a broker if that is his way of operating, and you probably won't be alone.

 

[trampoline]

I think it's totally unethical to take 15% on every domain(or any other value), but i guess you want agree on that. Anyway, i think that unethical is, when your client accepts the direct offer from the other party(in your case,Shane). Thats why i think that would be better a fixed fee(or per/hour),and not a hypothetic 15%. But i guess you wouldnt agree on that either.

 

[wot]

I think it's totally unethical to take 15% on every domain(or any other value), but i guess you want agree on that. Anyway, i think that unethical is, when your client accepts the direct offer from the other party(in your case,Shane). Thats why i think that would be better a fixed fee(or per/hour),and not a hypothetic 15%. But i guess you wouldnt agree on that either.

I think your post is generally nonsense, could we agree on that?

 

[trampoline]

I think your post is generally nonsense, could we agree on that?

If you explain me why, maybe we can come to an agreement. :D

 

[goffee]

Unethical ..Tag him here to reply..

 

[talhahassan]

I think it's totally unethical to take 15% on every domain(or any other value), but i guess you want agree on that. Anyway, i think that unethical is, when your client accepts the direct offer from the other party(in your case,Shane). Thats why i think that would be better a fixed fee(or per/hour),and not a hypothetic 15%. But i guess you wouldnt agree on that either.

I don't charge 15% I most of the times don't even take 10%
Regardless whatever fee the broker is charging , a broker is working to make money and someone trying to bypass him this way isn't ethical at all.

 

[talhahassan]

Guess you won't be offering him anymore names as a broker if that is his way of operating, and you probably won't be alone.

This was my first and last time dealing with him.
I posted this topic to warn other brokers like me.

 

[N-A]

This is exactly what I was trying to relay in this message to namePros' management: https://www.namepros.com/threads/limit-viewing-requests-wtb-forum-for-repeat-violators.971562/

Sellers do not read the WTB criteria, they merely just blast off messages. Now, it has become a problem to a seller, and buyer.

You chose to waste his time, and now, you think it's unethical to "cut you out"? Give me a break.

I'd be even more angry at your client if he chose to sell to @Shane Bellone behind your back if you have an exclusive contract than Shane contacting the owner of the domains at this point.

I hate it when people waste my time. It's the only commodity on Earth worth something to me. (Money is good though, too)

 

[S-B]

@talhahassan

Your lackadaisical approach to business is not my problem. You should have a exclusivity agreement with your client. We have no contractual obligations so I fail to understand how I am "being unethical." My responsibility is to my client, not to you.

 

[talhahassan]

This is exactly what I was trying to relay in this message to namePros' management: https://www.namepros.com/threads/limit-viewing-requests-wtb-forum-for-repeat-violators.971562/

Sellers do not read the WTB criteria, they merely just blast off messages. Now, it has become a problem to a seller, and buyer.

You chose to waste his time, and now, you think it's unethical to "cut you out"? Give me a break.

I'd be even more angry at your client if he chose to sell to @Shane Bellone behind your back if you have an exclusive contract than Shane contacting the owner of the domains at this point.

I hate it when people waste my time. It's the only commodity on Earth worth something to me. (Money is good though, too)

I apologized him for wasting his time and this was the first time it happened with me,still it doesn't give anyone a valid reason to bypass any broker.

I am surprised that you don't consider this as an unethical business act.

 

[N-A]

I apologized him for wasting his time and this was the first time it happened with me,still it doesn't anyone a valid reason to bypass any broker.

A broker can only call one's self a legitimate broker if they an exclusive deal with a client. If that's the case, you have nothing to worry about. Otherwise, you just have permission to sell a name for a pre-determined price and get a commission if a buyer happens to come along... you're more in the realm of being an affiliate marketer right now.

 

[talhahassan]

@talhahassan

Your lackadaisical approach to business is not my problem. You should have a exclusivity agreement with your client. We have no contractual obligations so I fail to understand how I am "being unethical." My responsibility is to my client, not to you.

Wow so you are still defending yourself.
Most of the domainers here know that very few sellers agree to exclusive agreement for brokerage,guess you are not new in this industry.
Also around 75% deals on this forum are brokered without exclusive agreement.
Plus you mentioned bypassing a broker who may or may not have an exclusive agreement makes sense.

I think you have made your point that you don't consider bypassing a broker unethical. Well most of the brokers here on forum will agree with me.

 

[talhahassan]

A broker can only call one's self a legitimate broker if they an exclusive deal with a client. If that's the case, you have nothing to worry about. Otherwise, you just have permission to sell a name for a pre-determined price and get a commission if a buyer happens to come along... you're more in the realm of being an affiliate marketer right now.

I will disagree with that.
I also co broker domains.Other brokers send me the domains they don't have exclusives to and I don't go around bypassing them.

 

[S-B]

Wow so you are still defending yourself.
Most of the domainers here know that very few sellers agree to exclusive agreement for brokerage,guess you are not new in this industry.
Also around 75% deals on this forum are brokered without exclusive agreement.
Plus you mentioned bypassing a broker who may or may not have an exclusive agreement makes sense.

I think you have made your point that you don't consider bypassing a broker unethical. Well most of the brokers here on forum will agree with me.

You have no real statistics to back up that claim. That just makes you look silly. Even if it was true, the majority of people on this forum are hypocrites. When was the last time anyone here BINed a domain from GoDaddy? I'm guessing it's been a while. Why would you pay an additional 10-30% for a domain? That's not business. That's charity.

 

[N-A]

Most of the domainers here know that very few sellers agree to exclusive agreement for brokerage,guess you are not new in this industry.

I've always brought that up when working with someone. Always. I suppose I'm a part of the 25%.

I will disagree with that.
I also co broker domains.Other brokers send me the domains they don't have exclusives to and I don't go around bypassing them.

You're not true brokers then. Like I mentioned, every domain I handled, I had an agreement with the seller for exclusivity, or, have been made aware that this is not the case. You're making it sound more like MLM (multi-level-marketing) now (Broker X can't sell it, neither could Broker Y, but since Broker Z sold it he owes Broker X for getting the initial deal and Broker Y for bringing it to his attention).

 

[talhahassan]

You have no real statistics to back up that claim. That just makes you look silly. Even if it was true, the majority of people on this forum are hypocrites. When was the last time anyone here BINed a domain from GoDaddy? I'm guessing it's been a while. Why would you pay an additional 10-30% for a domain? That's not business. That's charity.

So you are one of the few righteous here?
The purpose of my post was to warn others and I think my original post is endorsed after your replies.

 

[S-B]

So you are one of the few righteous here?
The purpose of my post was to warn others and I think my original post is endorsed after your replies.

Wow you were endorsed by two people. The forum unites!

 

[talhahassan]

I've always brought that up when working with someone. Always. I suppose I'm a part of the 25%.

You're not true brokers then. Like I mentioned, every domain I handled, I had an agreement with the seller for exclusivity, or, have been made aware that this is not the case. You're making it sound more like MLM (multi-level-marketing) now (Broker X can't sell it, neither could Broker Y, but since Broker Z sold it he owes Broker X for getting the initial deal and Broker Y for bringing it to his attention).

Disagree with you. It's not MLM it's how many domain brokers work on trust.
. I have pasted his reply also in which he says regardless if a broker having exclusive agreement he thinks contacting the owner directly is ok.

 

[S-B]

Disagree with you. It's not MLM it's how many domain brokers work on trust.
. I have pasted his reply also in which he says regardless if a broker having exclusive agreement he thinks contacting the owner directly is ok.

Again, it's not my responsibility to uphold a contract I don't have. It's the owner's responsibility.

 

[AbdulBasit.com]

A broker can only call one's self a legitimate broker if they an exclusive deal with a client. If that's the case, you have nothing to worry about. Otherwise, you just have permission to sell a name for a pre-determined price and get a commission if a buyer happens to come along... you're more in the realm of being an affiliate marketer right now.

There is something we call ETHICS. I hope you are aware what is it!

 

[S-B]

There is something we call ETHICS. I hope you are aware what is it!

I expect you to BIN all your domains from the websites that list them. No more utilizing their filters then backdooring them. Hypocrite.

 

[talhahassan]

Wow you were endorsed by two people. The forum unites!

I didn't post the thread to get likes. Just to warn others which I did.
Have a great day.

 

[headsupp]

Overall what it comes down to is the exclusivity between the broker and the seller. I don't think I have ever had a non exclusive domain brokered before. Simply said, its the industry norm.

 

[S-B]

I didn't post the thread to get likes. Just to warn others which I did.
Have a great day.

Money talks. As long as I'm paying, most will do business with me. Plain and simple.