Let's discuss Andrew Rosener's idea of owners bidding in auctions

equity78 · Jul 19, 2017

To give the idea it's own thread let's discuss the idea put forth by Andrew Rosener of @MediaOptions that owners would be allowed to bid on their own domain names at auction.

Andrew never stated to do it secretly or against an existing platform's TOS.

I don't see what Andrew sees, let's say I have a 4L.com Rayy.com, there are a bunch of backorders at $69 and the name is at $300 with Andrew in the lead.

I think $300 sucks, so I bid Andrew up, he counters back and this goes on in traditional bidding war style to $1,800. For this hypothetical no one else jumped in so it's just me the owner vs Andrew. I obviously have an advantage, I try to get Andrew to go to $1900 so I bid $1850 he has to go to $1900 to take the lead. He doesn't he says too much for that name I'll pass. I will the auction at NameJet. I pay them $1,850 and they send me back 90% of the $1,850.

I was certainly in an advantageous position compared to Andrew, without me, the owner, he wins at $300. No other person bid, only the person with a vested interest, the owner bid.

I have proposed a few exotic type auction ideas here at Namepros over the years, some have been allowed, some haven't. One I proposed that @Eric Lyon thought was interesting but decided against (I had no problem with that). Was an owner clawback option, where the owner does not participate in the auction but if it closes say at $500, the owner could say I want to callback my name and pay the winning bidder say 10 or 20%.

In that example the market would be fair, everyone bidding upfront would know that the owner had the option to clawback the name. It would be better than a reserve auction because there would be some monetary gain for participating and being top bidder as opposed to bidding all day on GoDaddy, not meeting reserve and the high bidder has nothing to show for their effort.

Just my opinion, what is your opinion?

anantj · Nov 13, 2017

Grilled said:
@anantj - Pretty sure you meant /MediaOptions (plural). Not sure what relevance this adds, but there is a NameJet bidder alias of singular MediaOption.

Yes, I did mean mediaoptions

LarryDomain · Nov 13, 2017

Oh man this is @ShillGate to the max now. Keep up the research, let's expose these scums.

offthehandle · Nov 13, 2017

November 8, 2015 at 9:45am

"But the bull is running and there are no current signs of a slow down or any apparent reason for the music to stop playing"

owntype · Nov 15, 2017

Why don’t you just set a reserve price?

wwwweb · Nov 15, 2017

I don't think many of us questioned such practices in the past, or sales, we were just happy to go along with the hype. If you ask a question you get that intimidation factor like how dare you question ME!

Good on Grilled for doing alot of digging, and finding many patterns that seem to lead back to the same network of people, over, and over.

No wonder they are not feeling the namepros crowd, because if nobody answers their questions, they go out, and roll up their sleeves, and actually do the work, and find the answers.

offthehandle · Nov 16, 2017

owntype said:
Why don’t you just set a reserve price?

That would not meet the goal of those who engage in price manipulation. For those involved, it's all about the hype and hoopla- and rah-rah-rah with pom-poms. As an individual you have to know you are entering an arena full of craziness. Your bidding opponents are prepared with such tools as Multiple accounts for the same person, Group overseas proxy bidders, "Partnerships" and side agreements, API's programmed to act certain ways, "Accidentally" bidding on your names- all add to the fun. Then the platform looks the other way as it all occurs.

In case you haven't already, read some of threads here, it's a lot of reading but quite an education.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/bidding-on-your-own-names-at-namejet.1030874/

https://www.namepros.com/threads/do...y-sell-getting-uncomfortable-w-shane.1037973/

Then twitter messages sent out to the world, like the one below chastising those people who exposed the situation. Pointing out factual historical bidding information about irregular bidding is hardly defamatory.

wwwweb · Nov 16, 2017

Off topic which I apologize to the OP of this thread equity78, but I wondered about this scenario.

I don't know what is real, or what is not real anymore when it comes to domaining, you have to think things thru for yourself, and see what makes the most logical sense. Maybe others can explain?

November 28, 2016

https://domaininvesting.com/black-com-being-marketed-by-heritage-auctions/

April 21, 2017

Sept 28, 2017

November 7, 2017

offthehandle · Nov 16, 2017

Flat out rejected a $10,000,000. offer.

But you have to admit one thing. It's entertaining. And "whatever the market will bear" is an admirable quality. If they find an end user who will buy it for that, well fantastic.

wwwweb · Nov 16, 2017

offthehandle said:
Flat out rejected a $10,000,000. offer.

But you have to admit one thing. It's entertaining. And "whatever the market will bear" is an admirable quality. If they find an end user who will buy it for that, well fantastic.

This is what I don't get to reject a $10,000,000 offer for black.com, and not even bother countering, only to list it with an Asking price of $750,000, five months later, for 13 1/3 X less of the previous offer is very hard to understand. To join the $10,000,000 domain sale club is a prestigious feat.

The last known major color I know that was for sale was Purple.com, and they wanted $1.5M, and they were getting offers, but not their target number. It has since sold to a mattress company.

offthehandle · Nov 16, 2017

wwwweb said:
This is what I don't get to reject a $10,000,000 offer for black(.)com, and not even bother countering, only to list it with an Asking price of $750,000, five months later, for 13 1/3 X less of the previous offer is very hard to understand. To join the $10,000,000 domain sale club is a prestigious feat.

Probably owner indecision after being oversold on the value (it's being brokered- whois owner is in Saudi Arabia, I have a feeling the owner does not need to sell.) so the owner got really pumped up and then a bit greedy? No takers after a limited marketing campaign outbound. Later a reality or an ego check occurred, so thought to have it relisted with another broker (who had lower expectations) or to sell right away maybe to meet a deadline like a tax obligation or reinvestment. That jumping around does not look good for a future buyer if they search the net.

I don't get the instability in the advertising nor get the jump again from $1.9 to 2.9 in less than 2 months. Truly hope it sells for more than the current $2.9 Mil asking price. Take it off the market a year, then relist it for $5.0 Mil.

It does help the entire industry. It's a great name. A new fashion line "Black"- high end fashion and advertising.

The first thing that comes to my mind is Keith Black Racing engines. Not sure why they would want it though since he is dead and they own KeithBlack.com. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Black_(engineer)
Karen Black is dead.

Johnny Cash should own it, the "Man in Black". But he's dead too.
Yes, we have no more Cash, Jobs (steve), Hope (Bob), as the joke goes.

Addison · Nov 16, 2017

offthehandle said:
Then twitter messages sent out to the world, like the one below chastising those people who exposed the situation. Pointing out factual historical bidding information about irregular bidding is hardly defamatory.
Show attachment 73123

Does he really not understand anonymous members? He can assault you if he knows your identity!

Tidbit history lesson on what happens if Mr. Rosener knows your identity (brace yourself, it's monstrous):

Verbal assault:

Grilled said:
the last word I said to this Sherpa (prior to another threatening DM) was peace ... up until an hour ago when he surprised me with a phone call. The phone call lasted about 1 minute and 42 seconds. I hung up as soon as this Sherpa became verbally abusive SCREAMING at me to SHUT UP twice

Threats of unspecified methods (IMO, these threats have physical overtones):

Andrew Rosener said:
But so help me god, if my name comes up again or my company name, you will regret the day you even thought about entering the domain business. Remove all comments immediately that contain my name or company name. You are causing irreparable harm to my business and reputation. We are talking about potential MILLIONS OF DOLLARS in damages. I don't want to even waste my time with this kind of sh*t, but I take my reputation VERY seriously and if you don't stop, you will find out how seriously. I make Rick Schwartz look like a school girl.

Andrew Rosener said:
My only assumption is that if you have nothing, you have nothing to lose. Well I'm going to test that theory on each and every one of you until you cry mercy.

Andrew Rosener said:
So help me God, you will all regret the day you decided to call yourselves Domainers. You give "Domainer" a bad name.

Threats of villainous libel (second quote) and endangerment?:

Grilled said:
The below quote is the next thing A.R. said, except I added asterisks on my personal information prior to posting in this thread.

Lets start with @Grilled (C*r*st*ph*r H*d*i*k)

Registrant Organization: *h*is*o*her H*d***k
Registrant Street: 1**5 L***e C*a***es Dr
Registrant City: ***e**
Registrant State/Province: GA
Registrant Postal Code: 3****
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.4049266610
chrish******@gmail.com
cheap*********@gmail.com
chrishy*****@gmail.com
sports******@gmail.com

This ignorant excuse for a human being is so stupid that he doesn't even understand how two companies can share a registered agent address. He even calls a Sovereign nation (Gibraltar) a "Fantasy Island". Go back to 5th grade Geography maggot.

Grilled said:
Now look, it's obvious that you don't know (or didn't at the time) who I am by the fact you threatened to post an arrest report of a kid who is under 18 for a strangulation charge should I not abide by your request. see below

"Back to Christopher Hydrick (@Grilled), this piece of internet excrete is a felon! Oh the irony! It is always the folks who preach the loudest who have the most to hide. This piece of excrement is running around telling everyone that he is a super hero of domain justice, but actually he is a criminal himself.

Here is a link to his mugshot after he was arrested for felony assault by strangulation:

https://bustednewspaper.com/duncan-christopher-hydrick-2016-10-20/"

I bring up those two quotes, because while the person in that arrest report may be a cancer to society, I am most certainly not.

Who is going to use their full name to talk about someone who will threaten to bankrupt you, threaten to put you in jail, and God knows what else?? Mr. Rosener even said he harassed @Grilled's family! Fact.

The worst of it? Mr. Rosener has a far-reaching history of doing this to people including competitor brokers. His threats come across as dangerous, IMO. Stay safe, people!

Domain Shane said:
I have always felt you were given your face, your words, and your voice. To hide any of those for any reason other than security is showing lack of accountability.

Mr. Cultra believes in anonymity when it involves security. To be secure, you must be safe. To be safe from harm, dangerous people must not know your name, where you live, or your family members. It's scary that Mr. Rosener knows all of that about @Grilled and used it to attack him in a monstrous way.

Vile.

Who is @Grilled? He explains to Mr. Rosener:

Grilled said:
I have served this country honorably being a military veteran. I take great offense to outrageous claims of me being a cancer to society. I did not put my life on hold at 18 to swear an oath to defend this country to be called a cancer to society. As a veteran, I take great pride in my past and in my country.

Now that you know my past, you must know war means something different to a civilian as it does to a soldier. You literally said this is a war. An obvious trigger word for any current or former military veteran.

Tidbit over. Who's the real cancer?

wwwweb · Nov 16, 2017

offthehandle said:
Probably owner indecision after being oversold on the value (it's being brokered- whois owner is in Saudi Arabia, I have a feeling the owner does not need to sell.) so the owner got really pumped up and then a bit greedy? No takers after a limited marketing campaign outbound. Later a reality or an ego check occurred, so thought to have it relisted with another broker (who had lower expectations) or to sell right away maybe to meet a deadline like a tax obligation or reinvestment. That jumping around does not look good for a future buyer if they search the net.

I don't get the instability in the advertising nor get the jump again from $1.9 to 2.9 in less than 2 months. Truly hope it sells for more than the current $2.9 Mil asking price. Take it off the market a year, then relist it for $5.0 Mil.

It does help the entire industry. It's a great name. A new fashion line "Black"- high end fashion and advertising.

The first thing that comes to my mind is Keith Black Racing engines. Not sure why they would want it though since he is dead and they own KeithBlack.com. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Black_(engineer)
Karen Black is dead.

Johnny Cash should own it, the "Man in Black". But he's dead too.
Yes, we have no more Cash, Jobs (steve), Hope (Bob), as the joke goes.

Between Nov 2016, and May 2017 we are talking about 2 different owners though.

I just can't see many people, no matter what the domain not counter, or even bother with a $10M offer? Then see it list with a $750k asking price 5 months later. Between the ask, and sale price in May, I have no idea, but it would either be equal or less that amount, discounting itself even further from that $10M mark.

Black.com is a great domain, it's a color, it's a surname and so on, but it has to be used carefully in respect of sensitive issues that surround it, so it can be limited in some senses when it comes to specific marketing, as there are many sensitive people that can mistake things very quickly out there.

offthehandle · Nov 16, 2017

wwwweb said:
Between Nov 2016, and May 2017 we are talking about 2 different owners though.

Really, I didn’t look at that history, only current. So different owners and different prices?

wwwweb · Nov 16, 2017

offthehandle said:
Really, I didn’t look at that history, only current. So different owners and different prices?

Yes, check the dates on my original post above, the $10M statement was made 5 months prior to the domain going up for sale with an ask of $750K.

So what I ultimately don't get is if someone was so offended with $10M 5 months prior, why put it up for sale at $750K, after only a few months ago not even willing to deal at $10M?

I can see turning down $10M, and firesale for $2,3,4,5M, but if you were offered $10M 5 months ago, are you going to higher a huge firm like Heritage Auctions, and put out a $750k straight out of the gate?

It's not like the stock market, or bitcoin has been tanking during those months, for most business people, 2017 was a record year.

offthehandle · Nov 21, 2017

Let's discuss Andrew Rosener's idea of owners bidding in auctions

Top Member

Top Member

Top Member

.Top Member

DomainName.comTop Member

Top Member

.Top Member

Top Member

.Top Member

Top Member

.Top Member

Top Member

Top Member

.Top Member

Top Member

.Top Member

Similar threads

We're social

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement