Bidding on your own names at NameJet...?

[webquest]

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

 

[Silentptnr]

I read the entire thread.

The reason that bidding on your own auctions, or those of friends, is usually not allowed, is that it would be easy to abuse the auction system. Both bidders and sellers could be victimized.

Certainly, @MediaOptions (Andrew) makes a fair point as to how auctions "could" work, but I don't think that's the point of why this type of "organized bidding" is not generally allowed.

@NameJetGM , it really doesn't matter if the Booths were not the seller or the owner. And what sense would it make to bid on domains that a client bought from you, and pay them less than they paid you?

This is a form of cheating. This is a form of manipulation. No need to rationalize it.

I hope @NameJetGM have the courage to approach this issue with balance, figure out exactly what this is, take corrective action, learn from it, and make the system better for everyone.

Thanks to the op for bringing this to light. I'm really proud of this dialogue.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

Stop it, man. Just stop it, please. Personal greed could alter your judgement permanently.

You don't believe that more competition is a good thing?

 

[alcy]

this should become the goto thread of domaining.... to find out who are the good guys and the bad guys in domaining today

 

[DNWon]

Thank you @Michael from NameBio for your eye opening research into this matter and @Kate for your concise and accurate take on this situation!

I am still interested to know if Andrew @MediaOptions ever bid on his own auctions at NameJet?
The question has been asked by a few members but has yet to be addressed by Andrew!

And it would be helpful if @NameJetGM would investigate if the Booth Brothers have any connection to Oliver Hoger in any way as it does now seem quite plausible that there was a shill-bidding triumvirate operating against the NameJet Terms of Service and potentially a breach of fiduciary duty if NameJet knew this was happening and/or allowed it to continue to happen.

Would like to see some replies from all involved soon!

 

[Wannabean]

You can measure the sophistication of a society by how well it protects it's vulnerable members.

If you don't want to risk losing your name for a knock down price then set a reserve. I've had massive concerns about shilling for a long time and have raised the issue in various places on the forum. I rarely buy in auctions anywhere except on Namepros because of it.

If Namepros don't charge a commission and the staff still manage to make it one of the safest marketplaces for domains then I don't see what the excuse is for everyone else.

The domain market is erratic and therefore particularly susceptible to manipulation, the whole CHIP thing showed us that.

I love a good logical debate but when it comes down to business there's no longevity unless your rock solid when it comes to ethics. After all isn't that how you build a rep in this game? (or isn't that supposed to be how you build a rep?)

A few might be interested to know James Booth and I agreed a deal for a 4L Chip in November 2015 (I was the seller). Escrow was set up immediately by James and terms agreed by both of us. Then communications stopped and the money never arrived (we haven't spoken since). Left a bad taste in my mouth. That's not to say he is or isn't guilty of whatever he's being accused of here but I always thought he was front running on that deal and backed out when the prices stopped going up. I never got an apology or explanation. No hard feelings but it's just not the way I do business. Shortly after I read an article somewhere about how he was the next rising star in domaining...

 

[xn--v4h.com]

Folks this truly a sad state of affairs that someone can not initiate an intellectual & theoretical discussion about industry practices. Again, I chose the wrong place and time to initiate such a discussion, but that does not excuse the comments and accusations being made.

Its up to Namejet to decide how they approach the Booth situation. That is a totally separate topic from the discussion I started about an open bidding process at auctions. You folks are much too quick to jump to conclusions and throw out wild accusations. Most of you probably never even read my initial post in its entirety. I proposed a theoretical argument that I believe would lead to a MORE transparent market with better pricing and more liquidity. I welcomed contradictory arguments based on logic. Instead I got a witch hunt. I guess I should have known better.

The reason the domain industry offers very little liquidity is precisely the reason why you all are afraid of an honest debate and contradictory argument to popular belief.

You say you want an open and transparent market but really you just want a closed garden operating by your rules and cheap under valued domains available at auction. I love buying under value as much as the next guy...probably more! But that does NOT lead to industry growth. It does NOT elevate the market. It does NOT lead to price appreciation. It leads to wild speculation and wild market turbulence as we have seen over the last few years.

Efficient and effective markets are the key to growth. #1 thing holding back the domain industry. My proposal was just that. A theoretical proposal meant to be debated.

Anyhow, I've learned my lesson and will no longer offer my opinion or offer advice here ever again.

It is a ridiculous spot where people can't decipher between an idea and the current situation. Emotions can be strong but in time, reason always wins out. I must admit I was offended by what I read from you at first, but having thought about it more, it does make sense. For example, if I were to sell my ☮.com domain on an open auction today where a seller is allowed to bid, there is no way anyone who would bid higher than I would. The price at gavel time IS the market price, much like a stock price where the seller is always trying to find the highest buyer. If there is no match because the seller IS that highest buyer, then the stock still belongs to the seller. Anyway I believe domainers are smart enough to understand you Andrew, no doubt in my mind. I hope you continue to educate us and won't be discouraged for doing what seems natural for you.

 

[NameJetGM]

Silentptnr & others,

I appreciate your comments. Please note that we are continuing to investigate this matter (as I said we would), and we will take steps needed to preserve and maintain the integrity of our platform.

And while I can appreciate the debate around bidding practices, our rules are clear - we do not condone shill bidding, period.

I will provide a further update when I can and thank everyone for their attention and the constructive comments. This helps us do better.

-Jonathan

 

[rentmynames]

I don't know guys, to me there's a HUGE difference between what Andrew is saying and what has transpired at NJ. The timing couldn't have been worse to talk about theories when people are being ripped off. But that shouldn't negate the crux of his argument that more competition (even with the seller bidding) in an open auction produces a truer market value of that asset.

@xn--v4h.com please read this from @NameJetGM

As an official statement from NameJet – our policy is clear that sellers cannot bid on their own domains, period.

YOU got it my friend ? SELLERS CANNOT BID ON THEIR OWN DOMAINS, PERIOD.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

@xn--v4h.com please read this from @NameJetGM


YOU got it my friend ? SELLERS CANNOT BID ON THEIR OWN DOMAINS, PERIOD.

What you seem to not understand is my comment. It's theory. It's an intellectual exercise to decide whether we SHOULD allow sellers to participate. It's way beyond NJ and has NOTHING to do with the current situation there.

 

[promo]

What you seem to not understand is my comment. It's theory. It's an intellectual exercise to decide whether we SHOULD allow sellers to participate. It's way beyond NJ and has NOTHING to do with the current situation there.

Sure it has something to do with the current situation. He is guilty of exactly the same behaviour. Bidding on his own auctions at NJ. That he is trying to deflect the discussion into a theoretical realm is besides the point. We are talking about his actual actions here..

 

[Wannabean]

I think pretty good judging people thats why I dont get ripped off. If you were stupid to fall for some crap from those so called leaders of the domain world. then your as blind as a bat.

Your kinda blaming the victim here. Not cool. I said at the start of my previous post: You can measure a society by how well it protects it's most vulnerable members. Think about that for a minute.

Wealth and money are two very different things and a lot of the problems in domaining come down to people failing to tell the difference between them.

 

[rentmynames]

It's NEVER right to bid on your own domain name, openly or not. That's scamming, shill bidding, and that's why the term RESERVE is used in auction.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

Sure it has something to do with the current situation. He is guilty of exactly the same behaviour. Bidding on his own auctions at NJ. That he is trying to deflect the discussion into a theoretical realm is besides the point. We are talking about his actual actions here..

Where is the proof. You need to be careful about accusing someone of wrongdoing without proof otherwise it could be you on that other end in the future. Let's not go there because we need to be prudent in our judgment, although I often fall short myself

 

[rentmynames]

@xn--v4h.com Proof ? What the heck have you been reading ?

 

[hawkeye]

...I'm supporting the IDEA of openly allowing owners to participate in auctions which have NO RESERVE. Everyone has a fair and equal shot at buying the asset. Where is the flaw?

Drew, as I see it the flaw is that 'there is' a reserve in a no-reserve auction - the costs of that domain which only the owner can know. So as it wouldn't make sense for a dn owner to keep bidding past that known cost (would a owner bid, and pay, up to $20k on a name they have $10k into it?), the only reason for a dn owner to bid on a no-reserve auction would be to try to get it up to that 'known' no-reserve. So what am I and others missing that everyone has a 'fair equal chance' to buy an asset, that they may have gotten cheaper if the dn owner hadn't been bidding on and raising the price?

 

[Silentptnr]

I will only add that the expectation of fair and honest bidding is critical in an auction environment.

If I sell a domain even here on NP, I dont feel it would be right or good for my image to bid on that domain, let alone win it for less than i sold it to the person for.

Nothing has been said that would be an acceptable rationalization for lets call it insider bidding.

It is very challenging to maintain integrity considering advanced technology. It is an ever evolving battle.

These complicated matters have to be dealt with on a case by case basis.

Lets give the platform room to evaluate and take action. This will give the best chance to improve for everyone.

At the end of the day, I dont think anyone would want to tarnish their reputation including the platform at issue and the members at issue. Sometimes pushing the envelope too far can lead to misunderstandings, mistrust and negative perceptions.

Perhaps there were infractions. Perhaps not. Either way, appearances do matter.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

It's NEVER right to bid on your own domain name, openly or not. That's scamming, shill bidding, and that's why the term RESERVE is used in auction.

If everyone knows the seller will be participating in the auction, then those who don't want to participate won't participate. Then there won't be a deal probably. But there might be bidders who might be interested despite the seller bidding. Is that wrong? There's no deception there. What I'm against is not knowing the seller is involved. To me that's shilling.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

@xn--v4h.com Proof ? What the heck have you been reading ?

I'm taking about @MediaOptions . Where is the proof he did something wrong? It's also wrong to accuse someone when theres no evidence.

 

[Beezy]

You might get the domain cheaper but thats not the fair market value . It's possible the person who would be willing to pay the highest price for an asset is the current owner of that asset .

Which is a. against the rules at namejet and b. the very definition of shill bidding, which people keep posting for you to read.

Your veiwpoint has been heard man (edit: or woman), How many times are you going to post the same thing?

 

[Chris Hydrick]

I did a little digging myself into the featured seller account mentioned initially. These featured pages seem to all be Oliver Hoger's:

http://www.namejet.com/featuredauctions/6ifd5lvs
http://www.namejet.com/featuredauctions/8fyd9zfl
http://www.namejet.com/featuredauctions/9rev0pcj

So I can also check which auctions run through those featured pages were bid on by "seek" which is Oliver's known NJ alias.

Take a look at this (click for larger):

Auctioned by Oliver, bid on by Oliver above the min back order, and confirmed by WHOIS history to have been owned by him at the time.

So I dug deeper. It turns out for the first featured seller account above, user "seek" bid in 18 of those auctions and was the runner-up in three. For his second featured seller account he bid in 17 auctions and was the runner-up in four. For his third featured seller account he bid in 46 auctions and was the runner up in one. Didn't win any though, that's some fancy shilling! I can provide proof of all this if you need more than the above screenshot.

Here's where it gets REALLY interesting:

IAOR.com | Ended 2016-12-13 & Re-auctioned 2017-01-17
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3866603&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3879552&lt=reports

Seek bid in the first auction which is how it got my attention. Picked up from Domain Capital around April 15, 2015. Switches to privacy a few months later as part of a move to eNom (but the NS never changes) and is then auctioned by Oliver. Then a month after the first auction WHOIS switches back to his name, is re-auctioned, and then stays in his name another four months before he sells it to another domainer. The same alias won it both times and it never changed hands.

Auction doesn't show as cancelled, so this could be an example where he won by accident and ate the commission, and warrants further exploration. Checking "winner8888" this alias has bid in 318 of Oliver's first featured account (a quarter of all of them!), was the winner in 6 of them, and was the runner up in 17 of them. In fact, all six of Oliver's auctions that winner8888 won are still owned by Oliver, or were owned by him months after the auction completed successfully before being re-sold:

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3880556&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3879552&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3866603&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3864440&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3862385&lt=reports
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3862353&lt=reports

What are the odds that all six domains won were paid for (we know because it wasn't cancelled and the user wasn't banned) but the winner never once updated the WHOIS? I'm not a betting man, but I'd be willing to wager that winner8888 is (one of) Oliver's shill account(s). So I spot checked a bunch of other domains won by this account, and all that I checked had WHOIS in Oliver's name. Seems this account belongs to Oliver, unless I'm missing something.

So I checked Oliver's two other featured auction pages to see what kind of damage winner8888 is doing. This account bid in 286 auctions run by his second featured account, won one, and was the runner-up in 14. And it bid in 217 auctions for his third featured account, won two, and was the runner-up in three.

In total it seems that he has bid in at least 902 of his own auctions from two different aliases, and that's just the accounts we know about.

Anyway, it's harder to do this kind of deep dive for the Booth brothers since they don't have their own auction page, and they likely legitimately bid in many of Oliver's auctions since all three guys are into short domains. But let's check.

Bid on by "boothcom":

6ifd5lvs: Bid on four, won one, runner-up in two.
8fyd9zfl: Bid on 0.
9rev0pcj: Bid on 0.

And for "bqdncom":

6ifd5lvs: Bid on eight, won two, runner-up in one.
8fyd9zfl: Bid on 0.
9rev0pcj: Bid on one, runner-up in one.

I blew through all my WHOIS history queries for the month (ouch!) but if anyone wants to look into these 13 auctions to see if any were owned by the Booth brothers at the time they were bidding on them shoot me a PM and I'll get you the list. EDIT: Someone is running this for me now, no need for further assistance. Thanks.

Time for me to be black-balled, lol These views are my own, and I'm not speaking on behalf of any company I work for and the respective company owners are not aware of this post. I have to run out for a few hours so might be slow to reply to any follow-up questions.

`Holy moly! I need to step my investigative game up. This research is spectacular! The industry would be in trouble if you created an anonymous NP account, and started grilling the industry without fear of it effecting your business relationships. Regardless, THANK YOU for all you do in the industry.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

Which is a. against the rules at namejet and b. the very definition of shill bidding, which people keep posting for you to read.

Your veiwpoint has been heard man (edit: or woman), How many times are you going to post the same thing?

Well the reason why NJ calls it shilling is it's an online auction. Nobody can see the bidders. So I agree with them. But in an open auction like Christies that would not be considered shilling.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

`Holy moly! I need to step my investigative game up. This research is spectacular! The industry would be in trouble if you created an anonymous NP account, and started grilling the industry without fear of it effecting your business relationships. Regardless, THANK YOU for all you do in the industry.

Making you look bad @Grilled

 

[Beezy]

Well the reason why NJ calls it shilling is it's an online auction. Nobody can see the bidders. So I agree with them. But in an open auction like Christies that would not be considered shilling.

Let's agree to restrict the convo to namejet from now on in this thread ok?

And specifically the allegation and research that has been uncovered and namejet's response.

If domains are to be listed at christies we can revisit.

 

[nicedomains]

I'm taking about @MediaOptions . Where is the proof he did something wrong? It's also wrong to accuse someone when theres no evidence.

Remember this a few hours ago...?? It was an accusation from a reputable member. You acknowledged it. MO has not acknowledged this post or answered the straight forward question asked.

In early 2016 when I was bidding for 6N Chips at NJ, I was puzzled at @MediaOptions bidding on his own names. Now I know why he did because system allowed it. Sorry to say @NameJetGM , its very unethical.

Really? Someone like me would have thought the arrangement would be something completely different. So unfair for many of us who are unaware and that's wrong.

@MediaOptions, have you ever won your own names at namejet?

 

[Beezy]

Keep pulling on the threads. There is a lot more here and I know for a fact there are people on the sidelines reading this who can't say anything.

@NameJetGM is either going to have to ban these members or decide they are an unethical auction house that allows shill bidding.

It's going to be interesting to see what they do, and if people come forward or not.