Another NO RESERVE seller ignoring rules on Flippa

[SeaLink]

Just wondering if I'm wrong.....
I saw a "no reserve" auction on Flippa for a .io name with 13 mins left. Rather than do the $1.00 bid thing, I (probably stupidly) bid $21.00. As I always do, I sent a pm to the seller asking that they acknowledge my bid. Of course the auction ended without him approving my bid and 2 mins later I got a pm asking for my bid. I replied that it was $21, as he knew and he said, "hey, I relisted, submit your bid, and btw my reserve is $100. I sid, "kinda slick of you to fail on your NO RESERVE bid." His response was "no way I'm selling for 21 when I paid 40 for the name."

I happen to feel the selective adherence to the rules at FLIPPa is total bs. This has happened to me many times. I've been told the seller has the right to refuse bids based upon the sellers history..... Oddly enough, I have over 100 transactions with a perfect record. I've definitely overpaid in the past and I've also given names away for nothing. I think that selective adherence to rules is bs.....

 

[Daniel Mac Sweeney]

People like this piss me off!!
Name and Shame him.
If it's a NO RESERVE it's a NO RESERVE!

Flippa should have a fine system for losers like this.

 

[SeaLink]

It's happened to me 3 or 4 times and Flippa does Zippity Doo Dah about it.
Thanks for your feedback, good to know I'm not crazy. I have a screenshot showing NO RESERVE!

 

[Daniel Mac Sweeney]

They just pumped $$$$ into a redesign, I now think they need to sort out this problem.!

 

[SirDrago]

Exactly why I don't use these auction sites. Nothing better than business P2P, yes it takes more work and time but you build your client list. A happy customer is a repeat customer. IMO

PLUS the fact that after listing fee and commission you could have built your Own domain selling site for the same price if not less.

 

[SeaLink]

Daniel Mac Sweeney-
I totally agree with you. Site looks great but sad that they allow this to happen...over and over!

 

[SeaLink]

SirDrago-
you make a great point! trying to pick-up a few names here and there and hopefully will be able to work out a plan that works for P2P. So true about the listing fees & commish.

 

[silentg]

Have you reported the seller?

 

[SeaLink]

I will report it to FLIPPA however it only falls on deaf ears. Its happened multiple times and they tell me that despite the rules (ie: in a no reserve auction you have to sell, blah-blah-blah) that someone has the right to refuse to accept a bid from any bidder for whatever F'ing reason they want. I could understand if my reputation there was tainted, but its perfect. I also feel STRONGLY that when a first bidder comes-in they often attract new parties. I know that I have often had to jump out as bidding has become too rich for me, AFTER I've been the first one to get it going. Feels sleazy to me.

 

[ulterios]

People like this piss me off!!
Name and Shame him.
If it's a NO RESERVE it's a NO RESERVE!

I have had that happened to me just recently. No Reserve is No Reserve! However, I was the only bidder and the seller didn't accept.

I won't name a name myself since the seller is on here and I really don't want to start an issue that really doesn't matter since I can't force him to sell it anyway and the way he is going about business shows he won't last long anyway. The name wasn't even worth my time but I figured I would bid anyway to see what kind of person he is and if he is really selling it as a "No Reserve" domain. I got my answer!

 

[RevolutionaryDomains]

In the end it comes down to the integrity of the seller. If s/he lists with no reserve the sale should be honored, regardless of how low the final price. After all, it's not the buyer's fault seller didn't include a reserve.

Seller's remorse is never a reason to circumvent a sales commitment. However, if the sales platform fails to hold sellers accountable then the problem runs far deeper than just a dishonest seller, IMO.

 

[equity78]

The only way things change are by applying pressure, Name and Shame and it is actually more of a bad mark for a seller to reneg then it is for a buyer. Let me make clear both are bad. But most countries have laws that say if a purchaser has a second thought they have a certain time frame to back out. So when you name and shame these people there are a fair number of people who will take the other side and back the buyer changing their mind.

The seller is looked at in a different light, they controlled everything, setting up the auction, listing the product, stating it was in inventory and was no reserve. The person backing the seller reneging would be hard pressed to find a legitimate reason and may look like a fool by association.

I have no first hand experience of Flippa not helping out, I believe the members here are telling the truth and something has to be done if this is being ignored.

 

[Asfas1000]

I disagree with you guys. Since the seller did not approve the bid, he is in no obligation to sell.

 

[ulterios]

I disagree with you guys. Since the seller did not approve the bid, he is in no obligation to sell.

Well, I do understand why you believe that.

However, a NO-Reserve auction is supposed to mean that you will sell it for the winning bid, no matter what that is. Otherwise it defeats the point of having a "NO-Reserve" auction. That isn't what that type of auction is intended to be.

Why not state that it's a reserve auction, if you do have a reserve?

To me it's no big deal BC I really only bid BC it was going to be cheap, I didn't really want the name that bad as to bid whatever the seller thought was enough. If I wanted to make a point of it I could name him and since he's a member of this forum it would have cast a dim light on his selling status, especially since he hasn't been here long.

The point is that if you have a minimum that you will accept, why not just set that as the starting price if you have no intention of being an honest and respectable seller?

 

[Asfas1000]

The point is that if you have a minimum that you will accept, why not just set that as the starting price if you have no intention of being an honest and respectable seller?

I am not yet convinced that the seller would back out if there was a bid, say 5 days before the auction end, and he had approved that bid, hoping for some competition.

I take it he would not accept less than $40 in post-auction negotiations. Of course I could be wrong.

 

[N-A]

I disagree with you guys. Since the seller did not approve the bid, he is in no obligation to sell.

I'd have to agree.

If the bid was pending and subsequently rejected, before relisting, there's no backing out of a sale (as it was nonexistent) here.

Where @octacage may have messed up was revealing his proxy bid, allowing for the seller to negotiate based upon that, or to relist with a reserve higher than that to ensure a sale wouldn't take place.

Bid not accepted, seller's right to relist (on Flippa at least, since bidders can be approved or denied for any rhyme or reason).

 

[N-A]

Flippa doesn't have any rule requiring seller's to approve of bids, but, they do have this rule which this scenario may fall in:
"Any bids or offers (including Buy It Now) without a response from the seller within 72 hours will be automatically rejected."

See: Rules

Seems like a huge loophole for anyone suffering from seller's remorse.

 

[Banezer]

base on flippa rules the seller is right, because he has the right to accept or reject a bid, if he had accepted the bid i would say he is wrong.

Maybe flippa should fix the rules well.

Because base on accepting or rejecting bid, the sell has 100% right.

Just my opnoin

 

[SeaLink]

.....and I wouldn't be surprised if one of the respondents here was actually the non-seller hiding behind another name...but that's a whole different issue.
-no reserve is no reserve and if you begin an auction like that, end it like that...be a man. If any of you have any business experience you know that its all about the "spirit" of the deal. Its obvious when someone slithers out of an obligation an looks for loopholes to justify their actions. Most of you believe this.
-most sellers who think that the "seller who did not deliver" was justified in his actions have probably used the same methods to get out of contracts they created.
- what I fail to understand is the logic that goes into REJECTING a late bid. Firstly- the auction gets extended by an hour. Secondly, I came-in @ 21 vs 1 or 5 or something very low- meant I was interested. Most of the times I have done this I have attracted more attention and as I said above, have had to leave the auction as the price exceeded my budget.
-The line, and this is cut/pasted from my messages in FLIPPA- his words...... "I paid 40 for each one of those domains.. Sure as hell not going to sell them for 21 " with the smiley face to boot, SHOWS A SELECTIVE INTERPRETATION OF FLIPPA'S RULES which I happen to think is total BS. I tend to adhere to rules, I don't look for ways to use them when they suit me, and for my benefit -AND- AT OTHER PEOPLE'S EXPENSE.

While I agree with both Ulterios and Equity 78 on much of what you say, I think that the fake-seller is a turd and has been and will continue to behave the same way. Publicly humiliating them will not get me the domain name, which frankly isn't worth my time. Unfortunately I go back to the "spirit" of the deal, ie: the turd set-up the NO RESERVE auction and rejected my bid because it was too low.

I will ONCE-AGAIN report this to FLIPPA and will once-again hear that the seller had the right to reject the bid because he was having a bad hair day.

 

[SeaLink]

"FLIPPA, WHERE NO RESERVE MEANS NO OBLIGATION!"

This is awesome for their business and should be front and center of their marketing materials. Hey, at least they collect the listing fees!

Very surprised that Kevin(?) the Flippa guy has not chimed-in on this one. Always seems very nice and level-headed. Oh well, I'll probably be banned for venting about the abusers of their system.

 

[ulterios]

Oh well, I'll probably be banned for venting about the abusers of their system.

YOU ARE BANNED!!!!!

Just kidding!

Hey, it's the truth. If you are selling something as "No Reserve", then morals dictate that you should stick to ethics. If you have no intention of being a stand-up seller then don't list things without a reserve!

 

[Ms Domainer]

I am not yet convinced that the seller would back out if there was a bid, say 5 days before the auction end, and he had approved that bid, hoping for some competition.

I take it he would not accept less than $40 in post-auction negotiations. Of course I could be wrong.

Please post your Flippa handle so that bidders don't have to bother with your "sales."

 

[N-A]

I think the entire problem here is that people are basing their opinions on laws and regulations of auction houses around the world. When you raise your hand, you are bidding; the auctioneer doesn't get to judge you by appearance and say, "no, we're not going to accept your bid."

Flippa has decided to create their own auction house, without being an auction house or auctioneer (ToS) and not follow the traditional auction format for whatever reason to introduce accepting and rejecting bids.

With that feature, along with giving the seller full rights to run an auction how they see fit, the morals and ethics found at typical auctions no longer exist.

By the way, my account is "David Walker". Feel free to reject my bids; then you're just as much part of the problem as Flippa allowing that nonsense.

 

[SeaLink]

Thanks for all the feedback. Now I'm pretty sure that I'm not crazy.

And as with David, my name here is the same as my name there, Octacage.

 

[ulterios]

I'm pretty sure that I'm not crazy.

That makes one of us!

Not meaning that you are crazy, just that you are pretty sure you aren't crazy.

I can't say the same thing about myself.

This fits me pretty good: