Dynadot

Bidding on your own names at NameJet...?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Once in awhile I see people bidding on their own domains at NJ. I would think it would be frowned upon.

Today's seems more obvious than normal. Or am I missing something here?

Airlinejobs.com owned by Andy Booth at Booth.com and high bidder is BQDNcom (James Booth).

3 bids down we see Boothcom as a bidder.

Same thing with MovieZone.com. Owned by Andy Booth in which he currently appears to be the high bidder.

High Bid: $2,475 USD by boothcom

They actually won their own domain airplanesforsale.com. Im guessing it didnt get as high as they wanted so needed to protect it.

Bidder Amount Date
bqdncom $2,001 7/17/2017 12:23 PM
boothcom $1,950 7/17/2017 12:23 PM
 
44
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
@ategy the question isn't legality. The question is of ethics. There is a conflict of interest risk with representing both sides of a transaction and double dipping. That is the reason if you read why some brokers choose one side or the other, they are representing the situation by choosing and honest in that respect.

I have zero experience with this company and not posting this as an ad either. I am simply doing so to state clarity and recall reading it when he was posted on James weekly Blog.

For example- Read Bill's page:

http:// www.nameninja.com/ why-us.html
  • We’re Ethical - When you’re paying Name Ninja to do a job, we won’t accept a referral fee or commission from the other party or vendor involved in the transaction. That way you get unbiased advice with no risk of conflict of interest.
 
3
•••
solution = don't list, don't buy
Easier said than done when they are holding onto your "non-refundable deposit" $$$$
 
2
•••
Easier said than done when they are holding onto your "non-refundable deposit" $$$$

Not to mention many don't know about this. A lot of innocents caught in the crossfire.
 
2
•••
Olvier, I am not making any accusations at all. I am asking because I find this a little baffling....

You say that you have an automated bidding system, assuming you had this custom made or you coded it yourself. Now, I'm not a programmer but I have on various occassion for various reasons been invloved with software development lifecycles...so I have some understanding of the process, what I find odd is that you say that you are working on a "fix" to be able to exclude all your domains... like I said, I am not a programmer but surely all this would entail is having a database of all your domains that the bidding system would call upon before bidding and then omit itself from bidding on domains in this database. I would imagine that is not a difficult function to add, or am I missing something here? (perhaps a developer/programmer here could clarify this for us?) - I'm sure that you fully understood that bidding on your own domains is a problem and not a small one, I would have thought that knowing fully well what the implications are of biding on your own domains.. you would have resloved this "bug" before you even went live with your automated bidding system?. It's almost like Porsche releasing a new model in their range that looks awesome and peformes like a beast but the brakes dont work yet they release it anway saying..."we will sort the brake problems out soon". :xf.confused:

@Oliver Hoger - Would appreciate your views on this....


no it should be very easy to do that, in theory. Main problem is not filtering the list, I would guess but keepig your DB up to date. If you have a spreadsheet, very easy. If you have thousands of domains with different registrars could be a problem simply because your data is not up to date but not because it is difficult to filter a list which is one of the easiest things to do in programming.
 
1
•••
I am not going to keep repeating myself but just because me and Andy are brothers does not mean we are the same people. I have my own portfolio, he has his. So we do bid against each other sometimes like on MGP.com, JLZ.com etc. We have partnered on a few names like D8.com that is it.

Just because we share a surname does not make our businesses the same does it.

I understand your frustration here. I think part of the reason for the confusion is your NamePros username: @BoothDomains That shared surname is also your NamePros handle. (assuming Andy Booth was already known when you created this handle?)

Below is a screenshot, of ShillGate, originally provided to NamePros by me.

upload_2017-7-22_15-37-30.png


The first statement, "It appears that BQDN likes to bid on BoothCom auctions that are no reserve" is based off of BQDNcom bidding / and winning domains with a WHOIS showing of James Booth. It would have been great if from the get go, @andyboothsi, came clean and cleared up that the domains were being sold by account Seek (Oliver) instead of leaving it up to the community to put it on blast.

Being that, my first google search, showed you James, being the younger brother of Andy, I assume Andy was already established and possibly well known in the community. Hence, why curtailing off the booth name (which has proven industry weight) can cause confusion. Especially, when you buy domains together, ie D8.com, it is unknown what other domains you buy together. I mean really, when I hear Booth domains, and hear about booth brothers, it's hard to dissassociate you from one another. Changing our NamePros username to BQDN would go a long way in helping distinguish the two.

A website being created making false accusations against me there too (shillgate.com). This is all slanderous.

I don't think it is all slanderous (note: I'm not a lawyer) given the nature, confusion, and failure to honest and forthright from the get go. This is just Part 1 of shillgate. Part 2, 3, 4 etc will be dependent on how open everyone is, what actions are taken, what is uncovered, etc. IMO, being reactive rather than proactive doesn't help change the narrative quicker.

I will say that (in light of current public evidence and unraveling details) the below portion could be changed from James Booth (accused) to (person of interest)
upload_2017-7-22_15-51-0.png

I don't mind questions being asked about me if they are constructive and factual like @Michael is doing.

Yes JamesB1989 is my old account. It has not been used in a long time. @Michael can check this account and I also request @Michael to check my BQDNcom account on Namejet and provide domains that I have bid on. I have never shill bidded. Once I started BQDN.com I created the BQDNcom account at NameJet to list names and buy names for my business

I wouldn't have had to ask the question if from the get go you proactively came forward with all your NameJet handles. Once I uncovered the second NameJet handle, I immediately posed the question. I want to take your word for it. As you can understand, all handles are needed to validate a statement such as I have never shill bidded. At this time, there is no evidence pointing to a third handle.

I just don't appreciate false accusations and (death) threats being sent to me.

I think it's important to reiterate this is not acceptable, and whoever is doing it, can potentially get in more trouble than anything we are talking about in ShillGate.

If you haven't already, I urge you to report those threats. If you're comfortable please post them. I've heard conversation of assumptions that the threats are coming from potentially people involved in ShillGate that don't want certain information to come to light. Without seeing the threats, these conversations can't be publicly debunked that this is not the case.
 
2
•••
I am only on page 19 of this AMAZING Drama.... but I will say the whole thing so far about people bidding on their own domains.... no costs? HAHAHA.

What no one has mentioned so far is artificially increasing the value of your domains via shill bidding.

For Example.

You have a domain worth $500. You put it on an auction site and for whatever reason you now have it won with a shill account for $5,000.

What happens then?

We all know thanks to NameBio @Michael and others, there is a record of that price.
Estibot will even adjust its own value based on new auction data.

You now artificially increased your "domain value" from $500 to the $5k range... after all, someone else was willing to pay it and now you can point to past sales and new updated estibot value as you relist it.

EVEN if you do not get $5k, you may get $2k.... but you still made money, even after paying the original shill bid auction fee.

Okay, now back to reading. =)

Yep, the potential increased value of these shilled domains is something I mentioned on this thread (post #14): https://www.namepros.com/threads/le...s-idea-of-owners-bidding-in-auctions.1030988/
 
0
•••
no it should be very easy to do that, in theory. Main problem is not filtering the list, I would guess but keepig your DB up to date. If you have a spreadsheet, very easy. If you have thousands of domains with different registrars could be a problem simply because your data is not up to date but not because it is difficult to filter a list which is one of the easiest things to do in programming.

Hmmm I get what you mean but surely if he is updating the list that the DB connectes to on lets say a weekly basis... just with the domain names he has purchased and listed on Namejet, it should be somewhat of a manageable task? (no clue if that's how it works, I'm asking :)....) - To me it seems that NOT bidding on your own domains should have been a high priority issue for him, high enough priority for him to even have someone work half a day every Friday dedicated to just updating his domain database..... Or was he aware of this "bug" and knew fully well how it would work to his advantage... OR...was it even a "bug" in the first place? Maybe was a function that he actually wanted? :)
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Easier said than done when they are holding onto your "non-refundable deposit" $$$$

Have you requested a refund?

or Contacted the Bureau of Consumer Protection?

The FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection stops unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices by collecting complaints and conducting investigations, suing companies and people that break the law, developing rules to maintain a fair marketplace, and educating consumers and businesses about their rights and responsibilities.

Fighting Scams and Fraud
As the nation’s consumer protection agency, the FTC takes complaints about businesses that don’t make good on their promises or cheat people out of money. We share these complaints with our law enforcement partners and use them to investigate fraud and eliminate unfair business practices. Each year, the FTC also releases a report that provides information about the number and type of complaints we receive.

Cheers
Corey
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Anybody that wants to help audit / investe please PM or email IfTheyWontAuditWeWill@Gmail.com

A BIG thank you to everyone who has reached out thus far. It warms my heart to see so many people reaching out with either data, or just a willingness to lend a hand. There is a lot of data to go through, and I will begin delegating tasks once we have a solid foundation, and can confidentially articulate instructions.

Right now, the need is as much Bidding History's as possible from NameJet.

Tips, directions, and willingness to help is equally appreciated.

Thank you again for everyone's cooperation.
 
4
•••
A BIG thank you to everyone who has reached out thus far. It warms my heart to see so many people reaching out with either data, or just a willingness to lend a hand. There is a lot of data to go through, and I will begin delegating tasks once we have a solid foundation, and can confidentially articulate instructions.

Right now, the need is as much Bidding History's as possible from NameJet.

Tips, directions, and willingness to help is equally appreciated.

Thank you again for everyone's cooperation.


@Grilled Great job. It will be all be documented and you will get the hard data necessary and have a public answer after piling through all the data.
 
1
•••
Oh yes .. also on my agenda is improving the current state of auctions! That's why I participate in the theoretical debates and discussions.

I've also had a couple of sessions with the "Domain Investor Product Team" at GoDaddy to help make their horribly buggy platform a friendly place for all domainers.

It's not just about talking .. it's about following up as well.
 
0
•••
I AM allowed to bid on any name I wish even if a family member owns it.

(originally seen on Domain Gang) ...
We determined that the initially identified domains were owned by a bidder, which is a clear violation of our terms, and as such we have suspended the related accounts.

So, how could NameJet at the same time a) suspend an account that belongs to Andy Booth AND b) still explicitly allow James to bid on domains owned by Andy?

Did they recommend Andy to open another account, or to use somebody elses account to sell his domains?
 
Last edited:
1
•••
I am still having fingers pointed at me and I just want to clarify that I AM allowed to bid on any name I wish even if a family member owns it. ... Please actually provide FACTS and show me where I have ever shill bidded because I haven't. ... The fact that people are making accusations towards me without any facts is unfair and slanderous.

I wrote this back on Page 11 days ago ..

Ummm .. moral "opinions" on either side aside .. just for the argument's sake .. is there anything in the rules that prevents James Booth from bidding on a domain *IF* it were owned by @andyboothsi (and vice versa)?

This is one reason why what @MediaOptions said is valid. Because now where do we draw the line of who can/can't bid .. and more importantly .. how do you prove what the person's intentions were.

Obviously we have the right to suspect a brother's role in an auction .. but what if he genuinely wants the domain .. and his brother legitimately wants to get maximum value ... we also can't conveniently overlook the fact that there are plenty of other people very connected to each other in the domain industry .. this sort of thing is impossible to police except in very rare instances like this one (which might not even turn out to be justified I should stress).

The opposite also holds true .. people often team up to buy a domain .. when in fact that act in itself removes potential bidders and technically could be seen as cheating the buyer out of getting the maxing market-value for his domain. Nobody seems to have a problem with this is seems, even if it could have just as marked an effect on the end result.

That's why I said there are shades of grey in this .. what makes it worse is that the domain community is relatively small .. and aside from a few domain super-categories, there actually isn't much liquidity for 95% of domains owned by non 6-figure+ domainers.

Am I allowed to tell an acquaintance about my auction knowing he will want the domain and will bid and effectively drive the price up .. but not actually be able to afford what will likely be the final price? To some that could be considered "manipulation" or shill bidding .. when it clearly isn't to others.


Anyhow .. it would be really nice if @NameJetGM would give us the details as to how they know it wasn't owned by Andy .. so that we could indeed move past this and actually discuss domain auction theory without feeling guilty about getting too off-topic .. lol


I think a big problem here are the rules themselves. Are brothers allowed to bid on each others auctions? I haven't completely gone through the terms, but based on the discussions the answer is "technically" yes.

SHOULD family members be allowed to bid on each others domains? That is up for debate, as there are many economic instances where family members are not allowed to participate in financial trades, and other instances where it is allowed but sometimes must be declared. But if this currently is not in the rules, then the only thing to accuse @BoothDomains (James Booth specifically) of is shill bidding *IF* there is actual proof .. of which to my knowledge going by this thread so far there is not.

People .. just like with Andrew of @MediaOptions, you need to stop making slanderous assumptions openly like throughout this thread.

*IF* you suspect something, then by all means DEFINITELY go looking for facts like @Michael and @Grilled. Even openly ask questions if what you see is very suspicious .. but that's where you need to draw the line. Not only that .. but even if you suspect .. then instead of being confrontational and assumptive of guilt, be constructive, ask the right questions and share/request data/information.


Personally what I think would be worth taking a look at is not so much the family relationship (although I'm not saying yes/no to that either way for future), but more if you are in business or doing business or have recently done business with the person in question then you should not be bidding on each other's domains.

The problem with that potential small-fix (only a small part) however .. is that all we see are handle/user names. It is conceivably possible that someone bids on a recent business partner's domain without even knowing (obviously that isn't the case here .. I'm just talking about the future, since this obviously isn't in the rules now).



So have a rule stating you cannot bid on a domain listed someone you are in business with, or have been in business within the last X period of time (12-24 months?). Which includes any business (even outside non-domain business), the sharing (co-ownership) of domains, listing of domains and/or brokering of domains.

Such a time limit should not be retroactive, to give brokers and listers a fair chance to choose which aspect of the industry they want to work in. Participation at an auction house should really be either as a buyer/seller OR as a broker. The problem with the domaining industry is that it hasn't been big enough to really justify that delimitation and the stricter regulation we see for Wall Street.

It's either that .. or go the other extreme and allow everything, but in an open transparent way as Andrew and I explored much earlier in this discussion. Which I still think is an option worth exploring .. especially after all this incident in this separate thread:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/le...-of-owners-bidding-in-auctions.1030988/unread


Also, I'm thinking having access to an API account AND a "hand bid" account should definitely be a no-no. It should be one single account per human person. Possibly even go so far as to not allow corporate accounts (like Facebook has it) so it really is one account per person with zero overlap. Fine if you want want to change your username, but have name change history publicly visible.


Sorry if I wasn't clear - they are definitely not the seller of the domains. It is 100% a different seller.

Finally .. it's not just NameJet (@NameJetGM) who needs to take note of this. NameJet is at fault here for not sharing enough information in a timely fashion. I'd still like to know what exact and detailed information led to the above statement. It is a very bad customer service move and at this point the lack of details is reason enough to suspect unethical trading/bidding/behaviour.

BUT ... We do need to give a lot of credit to NameJet for having visible usernames. That commitment alone shows vastly more transparency than other auction platforms such as GoDaddy. It is the only reason some of you were able to sniff out these questionable bids and hopefully get NJ to clean up it's act a little.

These sorts of things could and likely are happening all the time at GoDaddy, and we are none the wiser. They are currently upgrading their Auction platform .. I'd specifically invite @Joe Styler to check out this discussion and report back to us if they plan to move towards displaying unique user ID's or some other way of identifying bidders? And if not, then why? (Because in all honesty, there might be a good reason I can't think of, but think we all have the right to know what it possibly could be)

And where the heck is ICANN for all of this? With the countless $$$ millions in their coffers, I'd think this is EXACTLY the type of industry specific issue where policy is actually needed. (Although I guess in all fairness at least 50% of the people here would think ICANN would likely make things worse rather than better! lol)
 
Last edited:
1
•••
To translate aftermarket status. When you submit domain name in auction, you are stepping in a gray zone -so called "Auction for (In-Expiration) Expired Names". In another words - you decide to give up a few steps before official expiration and during the auction, other individuals can claim/bid "back-order" and pay for any names they find valuable. Jungle rules for the end-user, Nassau rules for all domainers. (Leave ICANN out of this topic.)
 
0
•••
It's amazing how oblivious Namejet is in regards to the Sherman Act, enforced by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Their negligence and incapacity to see this fraud is suspect of collusion........If you work at Namejet, have some donuts and coffee ready for the feds.
 
0
•••
Is it out of the realm of possibility for some of the large auction houses to employ at minimum 3rd party quarterly audits to inhibit illicit bidding?

The problem is not impossible to police and possibly even solve on their end.
 
0
•••
I want to express my sincere apologies to Andrew Rosener at @MediaOptions.
Andrew does not know me personally, nor do I know him.

I have become very strong in my posts, as like him I am serious in my feelings of the shill bidding practice and in what I stated. If you review my posts, they may be incorrectly misconstued as accusations against him. Some of the language I used was strong and perhaps inappropriate.

In no way shape or form have I libeled him nor used his names, that of his company or that in my posts. However, it perhaps can be insinuated that I have.
Nor have I attempted to discredit his integrity or success. I wish his good company continued success as the market leader in the domain business.

Anything that this thread demonstrates is that we all make mistakes in our passionate use of the english language. I don't think anyone here can deny this debate has been harmful to many people, buyers and sellers alike. Again, I want to make it clear that the moderators may delete all my posts, that feel should be deleted.

Andrew Rosener deserves all of our respect and admiration for his success. Do business with him and his company. If he accepts my business in the future, I will look to do mutually beneficial business with him.

I hope this post will clear up confusion people might have had about my position on auctions, the process and this specific incident.
 
5
•••
I try very hard to stay away from commenting on these issues because I tend to get way too involved for my own sanity, but I’ve written too much over the week and it needs to get spoken.

This is one of the smallest, and most tight knit industries there is. Hence why it is so troubling when shit like this happens. This industry is forged on trust and relationships, burning bridges is a big no no, unless those bridges are PROVEN to be doused in gasoline already (then by all means, here is a lighter you can use).

For one, the ridiculous accusations and witch hunting behavior need to stop, PERIOD. For people to tip-toe around accusing and some even actually accusing @MediaOptions of fraud, without providing ANY evidence of it is lynch mob behavior to say the least. Drew shared an idea, and while his timing was terrible - he did not deserve to get doused in gasoline. After speaking with him, he even assumed that my original comment was directed towards him - let me be very clear that it wasn’t - it was directed towards the entire industry and the shill bidding behavior (among other behavior) that is being allowed to continue EVERYWHERE.

Secondly, I’m infuriated that with ALL the technology available, money at hand, and talent in this industry we have not made an iota of progress within the auction marketplace system. Even more so disappointed by the pitchfork-swinging-witch-hunt-lynch-mob motivated actions that some members are taking. That said, THANK YOU to all those who are positively and vigorously pursuing the truth with REAL data and facts: you are what's right with this industry.

It's time for this industry to step it the fuck up. However that happens, it needs to happen NOW. Otherwise we can all kiss it goodbye.
 
19
•••
Maybe nobody specifically mentioned it because it's the entire point of shill bidding! ;)

If it weren't for those concerns this topic wouldn't have existed in the first place.


There actually is a secondary reason for shill bidding on many domain auction platforms, and that's to track and/or keep a record of a domain auction. I'm thinking more than 50% of $69 NameJet bids (on domains with more than a handful of bids) fall into that category. But with the larger amounts in question here that really isn't the case.

HAHA, thanks. =) I was short on time and did not spell it out.

Obviously shill bidding will raise prices... but I am saying raising prices for longer term. Not in the hopes of getting your domain name bid up against 1 buyer, but even if you win with a shill bid.... and pay the fees, it is well recovered on the backend when you can now market the domain being "worth" a lot more as someone else paid that price.

@Michael is it possible to run stats on what percentage of the total namejet market , or total of premium/liquid domains were bid on by hkdm (or whatever it is) and oliver?

Leading to the other point... this being a scheme to raise 4L prices and then liquidating portfolio... ie pump and dump.
 
0
•••
For people to tip-toe around accusing and some even actually accusing @MediaOptions of fraud, without providing ANY evidence of it is lynch mob behavior to say the least

Besides the coincidental WHOIS mail forwarding service address matching Oliver (nobody has reported other domainers using that same address yet), the only evidence pointing to @MediaOptions has been allegations.

One such allegation has been that of bidding on his own 6N.com

The below screenshot may not be the alleged 6N.com (as it has yet to be stated which 6N.com was involved) but there is one NameJet sale that there's not enough public info (as of yet) to confirm or deny. (This does not prove wrong doing - possibly incomplete WHOIS or missing changed WHOIS in the time between last WHOIS available / auction.)

WHOIS Date 16 Feb 2016 -- (Does anybody have a WHOIS date for this domain before the 5/10/2016 auction?)

upload_2017-7-22_21-29-30.png


upload_2017-7-22_21-28-21.png


upload_2017-7-22_21-31-36.png
 
1
•••
Ok, so now done with the 50 pages of drama and it is worth it.

The only thing that keeps popping in my head now is the warning from the guy (who is now banned) that outed Andy Dicker..... the one who got sweetheart deals from Flippa, etc.

I recall one message stating that it is not actually in the auction marketplace's interests to really investigate these. This is why I am not surprised at all that it was seemingly overlooked by NameJet... It is only when the issue becomes this blatant and the pitchforks are out that they have an interest in investigating, or more or less forced to.

I am still thinking of that interview posted on DSAD or another site with "NameJet Reserve".... who was affiliated with NJ and was bidding up all reserve auctions so that next bid would win it.

While the Booths were the initial target...it just may be that they are ethically challenged (Okay to bid on family/related auctions) and questionable business practices (ie having friends sell for them, or even that California lawsuit)..... the real issue and the big iceberg below the water line is HK/Oliver and NJ..... and the propped up market that they undoubtedly propped up.... (to what extent and how much are they benefiting is the question).

Unfortunately while "Will-full ignorance" is okay for individuals.... it is NOT okay, nor do I think it will hold up in a court of law as this gets more and more publicized.

At this point I am wondering....

1. Is there ANY relationship between NameJet and Oliver/HKPM and or anyone else who is a major bidder/seller.... beyond customer/provider? IE... owners/shareholders/incentive fees, etc.

2. Were Oliver/HK anyone else receiving any other incentives/discounts, etc.

If this was simply 1 or 2 accounts, accounting for 2 or 3 auctions, I would understand.... but it is not.... it is BIG players.

I also don't understand how the hell the system let you bid on your OWN auction.....
and beyond that... how big players have admitted in this post to BIDDING on their own auctions (by mistake)..... Do you not know what names you own?

Is the NJ process that much of a joke that they REALLY let you bid on your own auction?!?!!? After how many years in the business?

From the auction marketplace side I think there is 1 answer... and they will NOT like it... that is to move to a FLAT FEE pricing model.

When the auction house makes the same amount of money, they will not have the issue of profits vs integrity, and WILL be forced to focus on the integrity.

As LONG as they have the financial incentives to generate higher prices... I promise you, they will not keep it as their focus points and will only "focus" on it in blatant situations like these.

As far as costs.... well, a dogshit domain name will cost them the same as a premium domain name to list.... so it should not be an issue.
 
1
•••
Besides the coincidental WHOIS mail forwarding service address matching Oliver (nobody has reported other domainers using that same address yet), the only evidence pointing to @MediaOptions has been allegations.

One such allegation has been that of bidding on his own 6N.com

The below screenshot may not be the alleged 6N.com (as it has yet to be stated which 6N.com was involved) but there is one NameJet sale that there's not enough public info (as of yet) to confirm or deny. (This does not prove wrong doing - possibly incomplete WHOIS or missing changed WHOIS in the time between last WHOIS available / auction.)

WHOIS Date 16 Feb 2016 -- (Does anybody have a WHOIS date for this domain before the 5/10/2016 auction?)

Show attachment 64948

Show attachment 64947

Show attachment 64949

Not saying anything to the info provided above... BUT I will say to the common address. Both likely use the same registered agent service to incorporate their entity in Gibraltar or another tax haven. Would be far more red flag if both used the same address for a suite in Omaha or what not owned by the same business.

Same address in a known tax haven is most definitely just that.... registering an off shore company for asset protection and taxes.... Ie Virtual Office addresses.
 
0
•••
Not saying anything to the info provided above... BUT I will say to the common address. Both likely use the same registered agent service to incorporate their entity in Gibraltar or another tax haven. Would be far more red flag if both used the same address for a suite in Omaha or what not owned by the same business.

Same address in a known tax haven is most definitely just that.... registering an off shore company for asset protection and taxes.... Ie Virtual Office addresses.

We are in full agreement to this.

I would just like to see if any OTHER domain investors are using the same Gilbitar service. If it's as big as we keep assuming it is, surely we can find another investor using the same service. Or am I wrong to think there is more than 2 domain investors using that service?
 
0
•••
We are in full agreement to this.

I would just like to see if any OTHER domain investors are using the same Gilbitar service. If it's as big as we keep assuming it is, surely we can find another investor using the same service. Or am I wrong to think there is more than 2 domain investors using that service?

I highly doubt that even 5% of domainers, found here have a separate entity for their domaining business... and even LESS would incorporate in an off shore tax haven such as Panama, Bahamas, Gibraltar, Cyprus.
.. and again, there is only 1 reason to incorporate there. =)

... and as I say this as a financial professional. I do have my business incorporated, but in FL. No need for bahamas.
 
1
•••
4
•••
Back