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.
This is not mob mentality, this is friggin common sense!
Well your common sense accused me of doing something I didn't do. In other words your common sense is wrong.
 
0
•••
That is wrong because you wouldn't want me to do the same to you.

Well when you catch me shill bidding up my own auctions, bidding up my brothers auctions, bidding up my partners auctions, having multiple shill accounts, sharing parking accounts with people I claim not to know, and being a vocal proponent of shill bidding, breaking the terms of service of an auction house, having an email address with the same handle as a bidder ID I claim to know nothing about, being warned about shill-bidding but continuing to do it, because the auction house is more worried about profits then integrity, then you can call me out too!
 
1
•••
1
•••
0
•••
One thing is for sure, the NJ gang has been at this for years (with the full knowledge of NJ)
Expecting NJ's investigation to "reveal the truth" is like trying to get a politician convicted for war crimes !
A class action lawsuit from all victims of this organised scam is the only way to get anywhere
 
Last edited:
7
•••
I find it strange Oliver shares the same WHOIS address as others in the industry. What are they trying to shield -- I don't get it. Maybe there is a fantasy island for domainers. I want to go to a fantasy island.

I think this was discussed on page 397 .. lol

Seriously though .. the real answer is that a lot of similar companies hold the same address because it isn't their real physical address. There are often legal/tax reasons why a company would "officially" want to be in a certain jurisdiction.

From there, there are a handful of companies that offer that sort of legal service .. could be P.O. Boxes or a legal office, etc. I think it was said that there are a couple million companies that share the same physical Delaware address.

This fact most certainly doesn't mean anyone is innocent or guilty though .. just not really something that can be used to make a verdict, as it's possible for it be like that for legit reasons AND for illegitimate reasons.
 
2
•••
I think this was discussed on page 397 .. lol

Seriously though .. the real answer is that a lot of similar companies hold the same address because it isn't their real physical address. There are often legal/tax reasons why a company would "officially" want to be in a certain jurisdiction.

From there, there are a handful of companies that offer that sort of legal service .. could be P.O. Boxes or a legal office, etc. I think it was said that there are a couple million companies that share the same physical Delaware address.

This fact most certainly doesn't mean anyone is innocent or guilty though .. just not really something that can be used to make a verdict, as it's possible for it be like that for legit reasons AND for illegitimate reasons.

Exactly. That's all I'm saying.

It could be something as little as these friends asked each other what mail forwarding businelss development company the one is using for said location, and the other one took the advice to use the same company. No collusion just acting upon a potential review of good services. There might be something magical about that location. IDK ---simply an anomaly at this point.

Do you know any other domain investors that happen to use that address?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Let's the numbers/facts play out, Michael Sumner is doing a great job with that.
 
2
•••
0
•••
With that said, it is my understanding that Andy and James Booth are not the sellers or current owners of the domains at issue. Andy did own them recently, but per him (both to me privately and in this thread) the domains are no longer his to sell, and he was interested in reacquiring them at what he felt were good prices. However, the WHOIS still reflects Andy as the registrant and that has made this whole thing confusing and problematic.

"It is my understanding", isn't very convincing.
Either it is known who owned the names or you do not know and we would hope you will provide that info when you figure it out later. They could have quickly played a game and transferred them to their nextdoor neighbor for all we know.

@NameJetGM
As the GM of NameJet I would like to think that you have access to the information of who the actual seller of these domains is! Why is it an "understanding" and "per him" the domains are not his. If they aren't his and were listed by someone else, I would like to think that you as the GM would be able to verify that? Please do!

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

I'd just like to note what actual data/information led to the 100% number in the above statement?

Whether or not something wrong was done here or not .. I think a big issue here is also the lack of speed, transparency and information. Particularly given the seriousness of the accusations.

At the end something is wrong here .. I think more information is needed to make final verdicts on any and all involved .. but the lack of information is wasting a lot of time here with speculation because of lack of data and facts.

@Michael is doing a fantastic job helping shine some light ... but just imagine what he could do if he had some of the actual information that is realistically owed to the community at large given the circumstances?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
NameBio:
Your go-to source for all the numbers, stats and facts since forever.

NameBio's @Michael :
Your go-to source for all the numbers, stats and facts from now on
and forever.
(y)
 
2
•••
Yes, it is certainly possible given that Oliver almost exclusively sells short domains, so a buyer interested in short domains would be in a high percentage of Oliver's public auctions relative to other sellers' public auctions. That said, there were some other big sellers of short domains, including Media Options and others.

Oliver's public auctions of 4L.com, 3L.net, 5N.com, or 3C.com totaled 6,908. There were 13,053 in these categories where the seller was not one of Oliver's five known featured auction pages. So that means Oliver probably represented about 53% of NJ's public auction inventory in these categories, but Oliver's auctions represented 94% of HKDN's overall public auction spend. That doesn't seem right to me.

But this explains why NJ let's him get away with obvious violations of ToS. You ban him, you lose 53% of the supply.
 
4
•••
I believe Oliver's explanation of why some of HKDNs wins were using Oliver's parking account is the truth. A friend helped check the NS history on practically all of HKDN's wins that weren't Oliver's auctions, and he didn't change the NS on a single one.

Doesn't mean he isn't HKDN necessarily, but that piece of potential evidence seems to be an actual coincidence.
 
12
•••
I believe Oliver's explanation of why some of HKDNs wins were using Oliver's parking account is the truth. A friend helped check the NS history on practically all of HKDN's wins that weren't Oliver's auctions, and he didn't change the NS on a single one.

Doesn't mean he isn't HKDN necessarily, but that piece of potential evidence seems to be an actual coincidence.
Still waiting for Mr. Hoger to answer the question that I have posted no less than 3 times:

From time to time, does HKDN sell domains back to you privately that were previously won in NJ auctions?
 
1
•••
I have sat back and read all of this, and wanted to wait a little for the dust to settle. Clearly the writing is already on the wall. I think it is time that I addressed the original issue. A mistake was made by me, not the 'Booth bros'. Andy Booth, not James Booth.

There was a misunderstanding in terms of the status of this small handful of domains. I had thought they were already sold (we had discussed a trade value, me and Oliver do this kind of thing all the time), that once again they were free game at auction, but it later became apparent that wasn't the case. Oliver's intentions with the domains were only to list them on my behalf. Obviously when that came to light, I knew I had screwed up.

I have no track record of being a shill bidder. I am not in the business of pumping up or inflating a domain value. I naively wasn't fully aware of the TOS at NJ, and given I was not technically the seller, tried to genuinely buy some of the domains back (as technically they were already transferred. Despite Whois records indicating I was still owner, they were out of my hands/control).

James' involvement (BQDNcom) was innocent - he wasn't in on anything. Just because we are the 'Booth brothers', it doesn't mean that we always work together. James does his own thing for the most part. Sometimes we are connected, for example in the case of buying D8.com, but generally he conducts his business alone. He was obviously aware that these domains were about to be put up for sale and saw an opportunity. His intentions weren't to inflate the values. He actually won 2 of the small handful of auctions that DID complete either for himself, or on behalf of a client. Even more disturbing, he in recent days received a death threat via his website, BQDN.com, about his Namejet bidding activity.

Oliver, thinking he was just selling for me, took it upon himself to bid on the domains that he knew had parking revenue. Those turned out to be the ones he genuinely wanted (take MovieZone as a case in point). Oli wasn't trying to inflate any value either. His understanding at this point was that he wanted to buy the good ones and his bid was not made to pump anything up, he had every intention to follow through.

I would never knowingly have sabotaged my own reputation for something like this. There was no attempt to disguise who we were (which obviously looks beyond stupid given what was come to light) in terms of bidding handles, nor was there attempt at fraud or deception. On the domains I was bidding for, I took the view that they were no longer mine, and I had as much right as anyone to buy them back. I even won one and had every intention of following through. Again, inflating the value was never the goal. There was genuine intent there.

About my activities in other auctions, such as MGP.com, I have never made any attempt to 'fake' a bid. If I'm bidding, it's because I want it.

Jonathan @NJ had a different understanding of the situation, and for that reason had defended me. There were several miscommunications during this debacle which is why it has escalated to this stage. It's unfair to make him the scapegoat as he was only doing his job.

I was the one here at fault, but I hope you understand that is was a genuine mistake, not part of some elaborate conspiracy to defraud anyone. I hold my hands up and apologize to anyone that may have been affected in bidding for those domains. I am disappointed to have let down the domaining community and have learned a lot from what has happened.
Should of taken another day or two to come up with a better response then that. Wow.
 
4
•••
Think most have heard of an API. As far as certain players in domain auction space using API w/out blocking out own auctions.

Having an API also means if you wan

I did not write this post. I di
 
0
•••
I am a Certified Public Accountant and auditor by trade, although haven't practiced in many years.

In my professional opinion, an auction house that allows APIs in which domain owners can bid on their own no reserve auctions has either (1) Massive internal control problems or (2) Management that is turning a blind eye.

If I am wrong, and NameJet does not allow an API in which domain owners can bid on their own domains, than I apologize.

However, this is what I gather is happening from this thread.

Richard
 
1
•••
I believe Oliver's explanation of why some of HKDNs wins were using Oliver's parking account is the truth. A friend helped check the NS history on practically all of HKDN's wins that weren't Oliver's auctions, and he didn't change the NS on a single one.

Doesn't mean he isn't HKDN necessarily, but that piece of potential evidence seems to be an actual coincidence.
Thank you Michael.
 
0
•••
Does this HKDN guy ever sell a domain?
Certainly not at NameJet.
He just seems to be bidding and buying only.
 
0
•••
4
•••
I have got an email both from Jonathan and from NameJet support that they don't think HKDN and Oliver are the same guy, or HKDN is an alias of Oliver only.
 
2
•••
One thing is clear:

Shill bidding is not going to go away, if big players get only slap on the hand when caught.

The consequences of being caught have to be huge for them to think twice before engaging in shill activities.

We, as a community, have to absolutely insist that

a) whoever has bid on their own domains for any reason, with bot or not, have to be permanently banned from NJ and any other platform it has been done at. These guys apparently already even had "warnings" before, but still went on with their bot/api/didn'tknow/wasn'tmine etc excuses and were even allowed to have multiple accounts etc., while for a fraction of all that any other person would be long permanently banned from the platform

b) NJ management has to go for obvious disregard for its own ToS and turning the platform into a joke

c) legal actions against the violators and NJ has to be brought on

d) we as a community should avoid dealing with these shady people, even if there is a short term gain to be made

e) Domain Sherpa has to stop allowing its platform to be used as a platform to lure newbies into shady schemes. Many guys provide investment advice there without providing disclaimers about risks, potential issues etc. This would not be allowed on any other platform for any other industry.

f) We shouldn't allow this issue to die away and we should be active until answers are there. Involving media outside of domain blogging would be great

g) domain investor advocacy group shout be set up with regularly elected representatives that can be our voice and protect us in situations like this. We all can pay regular dues towards this.
 
4
•••
I have got an email both from Jonathan and from NameJet support that they don't think HKDN and Oliver are the same guy, or HKDN is an alias of Oliver only.

Similar to getting email from Madoff that no ponzi scheme is going on...
 
2
•••
Don't count on namejet to take any action, I contacted support, and they just gave a cut, and paste statement.

It is status quo, bid at your own discretion, otherwise if you feel wrong doing has occurred contact your state office to file a compliant. Namejet is not going to take any responsibility, nor are they concerned about protecting their clients based on their actions.
 
1
•••
Yup clearly NJ have a vested interest in keeping a lid on this as it will cost them (& their organised shill crime gang) an absolute fortune to repay all affected customers who have been ripped off by these low lives over the years.

A class action lawsuit is the only avenue here.

NJ will go to all lengths possible to protect their "shills" in order to protect themselves.

We are talking here of millions of dollars worth of fraud surely over the years?


Don't count on namejet to take any action, I contacted support, and they just gave a cut, and paste statement.

It is status quo, bid at your own discretion, otherwise if you feel wrong doing has occurred contact your state office to file a compliant. Namejet is not going to take any responsibility, nor are they concerned about protecting their clients based on their actions.
 
1
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back