Atom / Atom.com - Marketplace (formerly Squadhelp)

JudgeMind · Jan 26, 2019

Hey Folks,

I've just started using squadhelp.com to list some of my brandable. So far I have 76 domains listed, there is no fee to list. I've had some decent action so far in the way of interested buyers but no sales as of yet. I've only been with them for 1 week now.

A bit of a summary review of SquadHelp:

PROS

No Listing fee
No Logo design fee
Ability to submit your names to end users holding naming contests
Ability to chat directly or send a message directly to end users.
Stats of your marketplace domains are shown in the marketplace dashboard.
Their customer service and support has been great, 24hr a day chat.
Ability to increase or decrease the list price of your domains or to show a discount. You can decrease or increase the price yourself by $200. If you want to lower more, you can contact support.
End users can shortlist your domains before they make a decision on which they want to purchase. The number of shortlists is shown in you marketplace dashboard.
When you submit your names you get to set the price you wish to get. Because their commissions are high I recommend listing at a higher price to offset the commission costs.
Their landing pages are fairly basic but they work. Because the marketplace is fairly new, I'm sure we will see style improvements in the future.
One thing I really like is they accept multiple extensions. I have listed .co and .io along with .com
Each seller gets a direct link to their marketplace portfolio, HERES MY PORTFOLIO. It is handy if your trying to p[promote your portfolio through social media.
I like that their marketplace doesn't have tens of thousands domain listings like BB. They are fairly strict on the domains they accept to list and so this helps keep the number of domains in the marketplace down and gets your listings more exposure.

CONS

Their commissions are very high, depending on the domain name they are usually between 30% and 35%. However, there are no listing fees, no logo design fees, so in the end their commission is very similar to brand buckets.
Their logos are not top quality, in fact I requested to have some of my logos remade.
I think they have a big backlog of logos to design, the wait time for logo design has been around 1 week, but your names are still listed while the logos are being designed.
After your names are accepted you need to agree to their commission rate, at this point you also need to apply your own keywords, descriptions etc. I found this was very time consuming.

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

Embrand said:
If I ever launched a marketplace, I think the first person I would hire would be John Berryhill.

Jannes · Jul 4, 2026

Future Sensors said:
I'm going to disable this in settings.

I really didn't like that I was opted-in by default (cf. Afternic Boost). But what do they care, they're not the ones who have skin in the game.

Of course this is a cool "innovation", and it may very well turn out to be net positive for many sellers, especially because risks don't have to actualize, but as long as there are risks involved, sellers should be aware of those and then opt in themselves if they want.

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

Future Sensors said:
Show attachment 306344

As you can see, Atom uses comparable, already‑developed sites as the basis for its mockup creation, in this case even pulling from "Purchased" with a "d". And as John already showed on X, from GoDaddy. That's highly alarming.

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

Screenshot 2026-07-04 at 20-16-21 Purchased.com — Consumer Marketing & Data Analytics.png

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

Jannes said:
As perhaps expected, John Berryhill (on X) is having a blast with this new potential ammunition for UDRP cases.

(no links, IYKYK)

Overruled. Its importance makes inclusion necessary in this thread about Atom.

This is the kind of innovation that escaped @PaulENicks over at that other domain marketplace outfit he used to work for... I forget the name... https://t.co/hx3oU98zFW pic.twitter.com/loICHSISZs
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

Help me out, Paul, what was the name of that outfit. @Bladel used to work there, too... pic.twitter.com/T1XJ7FWT2u
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

It's on the tip of my tongue... somebody throw me a bone here... pic.twitter.com/2gfxMeY7Cl
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

Velocity.Now · Jul 4, 2026

Seems familiar

Embrand · Jul 4, 2026

It says the domain is verified, so I guess GoDaddy is getting rid of them. Could use a better logo, though

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

h/t @jberryhill

Embrand · Jul 4, 2026

No "See it live"?

jberryhill · Jul 4, 2026

Embrand said:
If I ever launched a marketplace, I think the first person I would hire would be John Berryhill.

So, that was Frank Schilling's idea too, but I was already working for him.

Do you know that every broker at Uniregistry got a one-hour orientation course in recognizing and defusing potential trademark claims, and periodic refreshers on new topics.

The Uniregistry brokerage interface had an "ask lawyer" button they could push to put a conversation into my pipeline for review.

Atom.com does a lot of innovative "outside of the box" stuff. Darpan is a fast moving target of creative ideas, and he has a team that can execute on them. There's no question about that. I don't mean to give him a hard time, and I do feel badly that I probably annoy the heck out of him. I think he's a great guy, though. Brilliant and good at what he does.

I see the world from a pretty narrow perspective, but in the Plan B UDRP threat environment, which is palpable and real, you have to consider things from a "how can this be twisted to be used against me". Not all UDRP panelists understand the secondary market very well.

Heck, I still get "WHOIS privacy as bad faith" arguments.

This is from a UDRP response I filed last weeK;

Broker communications, marketplace features, BIN prices... all kinds of things show up in UDRP complaints to prove all sorts of bizarre theories.

But I've seen - more than once - UDRP complainants manipulate PPC search pages by conducting searches on them and then saying, "see - there are ads for infringing stuff".

These people will try anything and try to pass it off on a UDRP panel as some deliberate action by the respondent.

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

jberryhill said:
Atom.com does a lot of innovative "outside of the box" stuff. Darpan is a fast moving target of creative ideas, and he has a team that can execute on them. There's no question about that. I don't mean to give him a hard time, and I do feel badly that I probably annoy the heck out of him. I think he's a great guy, though. Brilliant and good at what he does.

Good points. And it's something every UDRP panel will agree on.

NameGroove · Jul 4, 2026

jberryhill said:
So, that was Frank Schilling's idea too, but I was already working for him.

Do you know that every broker at Uniregistry got a one-hour orientation course in recognizing and defusing potential trademark claims, and periodic refreshers on new topics.

The Uniregistry brokerage interface had an "ask lawyer" button they could push to put a conversation into my pipeline for review.

Atom.com does a lot of innovative "outside of the box" stuff. Darpan is a fast moving target of creative ideas, and he has a team that can execute on them. There's no question about that. I don't mean to give him a hard time, and I do feel badly that I probably annoy the heck out of him. I think he's a great guy, though. Brilliant and good at what he does.

I see the world from a pretty narrow perspective, but in the Plan B UDRP threat environment, which is palpable and real, you have to consider things from a "how can this be twisted to be used against me". Not all UDRP panelists understand the secondary market very well.

Heck, I still get "WHOIS privacy as bad faith" arguments.

This is from a UDRP response I filed last weeK;

Show attachment 306377
Show attachment 306378

Broker communications, marketplace features, BIN prices... all kinds of things show up in UDRP complaints to prove all sorts of bizarre theories.

But I've seen - more than once - UDRP complainants manipulate PPC search pages by conducting searches on them and then saying, "see - there are ads for infringing stuff".

These people will try anything and try to pass it off on a UDRP panel as some deliberate action by the respondent.

@Atom.com - love the new feature. And I'd like to keep it on for all standard landers. However, as with all things related to UDRP, I use minimal landers for certain names. Is this feature auto-off for all minimal landers? (and/or can we have a toggle to turn it off for minimal, if not)

Atom.com · Jul 4, 2026

Appreciate the thorough stress testing in this thread, John's especially. Several of the changes we've shipped today came directly from it. Since there's been a lot of discussion about how this feature works, here's a full rundown of the mechanics, what's changed since launch, and where we stand on the concerns raised.

How concepts are generated. When a visitor clicks "see it live" on a listing, they describe what they're building, and we generate a website concept for that domain around their idea. The concept is created in that visitor's session, at their request, based on their input. It's a sales visualization tool, similar in spirit to the logos we already generate for every listing, except personalized to what the buyer has in mind.

What other visitors see. Nothing, by default. A generated concept is visible only to the visitor who created it. It's not stored on the domain's sale page, not indexed, and not shown to anyone else. The only way a concept becomes visible on a listing is if the seller reviews it and approves it. Sellers have full control over what appears on their landers, same as before this feature existed.

Disclaimers on the image. Every generated concept now carries text rendered on the image itself stating that it was created from the visitor's own input, for illustration purposes, and is not affiliated with any brand. We put it on the image rather than around it deliberately, so it travels with any screenshot, wherever that screenshot ends up.

Disclaimers in the brand guide. The brand guide a buyer can request includes the same disclaimers:

About this concept. Generated by AI from the description you entered, this is an illustrative example only — not a real brand. Atom and the domain's seller did not create, direct, or review it, and any resemblance to an existing or trademarked name, logo, or brand reflects the description you entered, not any action by Atom or the seller. The domain is offered for sale as a generic string.

Brand guides are only sent to verified Atom accounts, so no one can trigger an email to an address they don't own.

Trademark screening. The tool now rejects attempts to generate concepts based on well known trademarks. This operates at two levels: domains that contain or closely match known marks won't generate concepts at all, and prompts that attempt to steer a concept toward a known brand are rejected.

On deliberate manipulation. Can a determined bad actor still craft an input that steers around the filters? Possibly. No filter is perfect against someone who is trying hard, and we won't pretend otherwise. But consider what that scenario actually consists of: the complainant themselves typed the prompt, the resulting image was never visible to any other visitor, it exists only because they requested it, and it says on its face that it was generated from visitor input. That's the same species of manufactured evidence as running infringing searches on a PPC lander and screenshotting the results, which has been described in this thread better than we could put it. It's also worth keeping in perspective what a determined bad actor could do without us: anyone can open any of the dozens of AI site builders or image tools, type "make a website for [domain] that looks like [brand]," and produce a far more convincing fake in five minutes, with no filters, no disclaimer on the image, and no record of who made it. Our version of this capability is the one that refuses trademark prompts, labels every output on its face, and keeps generation logs, so who typed what is provable if it ever matters.

Opt-out. We know some sellers would rather not weigh any of this, and that's a legitimate position. Opt-out is full and granular: you can disable the feature across your entire portfolio, or only on your minimal landers if you want it on some listings and not others (from your Marketplace Settings)

Zooming out: as a platform, we're going to keep building features we believe increase conversions for sellers. That's the job. Some of those features will use new technology, and new technology deserves scrutiny exactly like this thread has provided. Our approach will stay the same each time: ship the feature with responsible checks and balances, tighten them quickly if there are any gaps, and always leave the decision in the seller's hands. Early signs are that buyers who visualize a domain engage more deeply with the listing, which is the outcome everyone here wants. We'll keep monitoring, keep improving, and keep listening.

Future Sensors · Jul 4, 2026

Thanks @Atom.com.

I'm still concerned that you're obviously using GoDaddy's logo without permission (unless I'm mistaken and you actually got their permission), and that Atom's "See it live" mockups appear to copy well‑known existing sites.

King · Jul 5, 2026

Please add .now as an option in naming contests.

NameGroove · Jul 5, 2026

Atom.com said:
Opt-out. We know some sellers would rather not weigh any of this, and that's a legitimate position. Opt-out is full and granular: you can disable the feature across your entire portfolio, or only on your minimal landers if you want it on some listings and not others (from your Marketplace Settings)

much appreciated, thank you

NicTraders · Jul 5, 2026

Future Sensors said:
Overruled. Its importance makes inclusion necessary in this thread about Atom.

This is the kind of innovation that escaped @PaulENicks over at that other domain marketplace outfit he used to work for... I forget the name... https://t.co/hx3oU98zFW pic.twitter.com/loICHSISZs
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

View original

Help me out, Paul, what was the name of that outfit. @Bladel used to work there, too... pic.twitter.com/T1XJ7FWT2u
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

View original

It's on the tip of my tongue... somebody throw me a bone here... pic.twitter.com/2gfxMeY7Cl
— John Berryhill (@Berryhillj) July 3, 2026

View original

Insert 'Very concerning' Quick Reply here...

Future Sensors · Jul 5, 2026

NicTraders said:
Insert 'Very concerning' Quick Reply here...

What worries me most is that they are supposed to be the experts, yet they wait for commentary to highlight problems every time. It's a recurring pattern, also with the many bugs. Good intentions, but avoidable damage. And Sellers end up having to double‑check constantly that everything has been properly disabled and actually works.

NicTraders · Jul 5, 2026

Atom.com said:
Appreciate the thorough stress testing in this thread, John's especially. Several of the changes we've shipped today came directly from it. Since there's been a lot of discussion about how this feature works, here's a full rundown of the mechanics, what's changed since launch, and where we stand on the concerns raised.

How concepts are generated. When a visitor clicks "see it live" on a listing, they describe what they're building, and we generate a website concept for that domain around their idea. The concept is created in that visitor's session, at their request, based on their input. It's a sales visualization tool, similar in spirit to the logos we already generate for every listing, except personalized to what the buyer has in mind.

What other visitors see. Nothing, by default. A generated concept is visible only to the visitor who created it. It's not stored on the domain's sale page, not indexed, and not shown to anyone else. The only way a concept becomes visible on a listing is if the seller reviews it and approves it. Sellers have full control over what appears on their landers, same as before this feature existed.

Disclaimers on the image. Every generated concept now carries text rendered on the image itself stating that it was created from the visitor's own input, for illustration purposes, and is not affiliated with any brand. We put it on the image rather than around it deliberately, so it travels with any screenshot, wherever that screenshot ends up.

Disclaimers in the brand guide. The brand guide a buyer can request includes the same disclaimers:

Brand guides are only sent to verified Atom accounts, so no one can trigger an email to an address they don't own.

Trademark screening. The tool now rejects attempts to generate concepts based on well known trademarks. This operates at two levels: domains that contain or closely match known marks won't generate concepts at all, and prompts that attempt to steer a concept toward a known brand are rejected.

On deliberate manipulation. Can a determined bad actor still craft an input that steers around the filters? Possibly. No filter is perfect against someone who is trying hard, and we won't pretend otherwise. But consider what that scenario actually consists of: the complainant themselves typed the prompt, the resulting image was never visible to any other visitor, it exists only because they requested it, and it says on its face that it was generated from visitor input. That's the same species of manufactured evidence as running infringing searches on a PPC lander and screenshotting the results, which has been described in this thread better than we could put it. It's also worth keeping in perspective what a determined bad actor could do without us: anyone can open any of the dozens of AI site builders or image tools, type "make a website for [domain] that looks like [brand]," and produce a far more convincing fake in five minutes, with no filters, no disclaimer on the image, and no record of who made it. Our version of this capability is the one that refuses trademark prompts, labels every output on its face, and keeps generation logs, so who typed what is provable if it ever matters.

Opt-out. We know some sellers would rather not weigh any of this, and that's a legitimate position. Opt-out is full and granular: you can disable the feature across your entire portfolio, or only on your minimal landers if you want it on some listings and not others (from your Marketplace Settings)

Zooming out: as a platform, we're going to keep building features we believe increase conversions for sellers. That's the job. Some of those features will use new technology, and new technology deserves scrutiny exactly like this thread has provided. Our approach will stay the same each time: ship the feature with responsible checks and balances, tighten them quickly if there are any gaps, and always leave the decision in the seller's hands. Early signs are that buyers who visualize a domain engage more deeply with the listing, which is the outcome everyone here wants. We'll keep monitoring, keep improving, and keep listening.

I appreciate the response, and the changes you've made so quickly. However, I think you should completely disable the feature whereby Sellers can save and display the visualisations. If these are genuinely created in response to one potential buyer's inputs, then they should remain that way, and it should not be in the seller's hands whether they keep these visualisations to show to others.

NicTraders · Jul 5, 2026

Jannes said:
John Berryhill (on X)

Future Sensors said:
Overruled. Its importance makes inclusion necessary in this thread about Atom.

I also continue to appreciate that you guys keep us informed of what's happening on Twitter (can't bring myself to call it the other name). I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't frequent that platform, and it's valuable to have an idea of what's happening over there.

cosmologin.nz

dias-festivos-mexico.com.mx

believers-electronics.com

reddybook.pro

braintriggers.io

karinsgarden.nz

m4uhd-to.tv

toolcalls.ai

remontnoe.info

betandyou-899813.info

Atom / Atom.com - Marketplace (formerly Squadhelp)

BrandAim.comTop Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

Top Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

Top Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

Atom.comUpgraded Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

Top Member

Top Member

78% of human domainers will be replaced by robotsTop Member

Top Member

Top Member

NameHim.Com

WMD.com

vivlys.com

NightSpy.com

Shift5.com

Steer.co

Restory.com

BluePage.com

Astrophysics.org

Button.co

Similar threads

We're social

NameHim.Com

WMD.com

vivlys.com

NightSpy.com

Shift5.com

Steer.co

Restory.com

BluePage.com

Astrophysics.org

Button.co

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement

Answers

Relevance

Reaction

Status

Feeling