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

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Probably not. It was likely a proxy bid and not a "next bid wins" reserve lowering.

Flippa's version of proxy is a maximum bid you're willing to pay. In this case Bidder 2's bid of $525 appears to be the max bid and the bid of $475 was the minimum bid above bidder 3. Bidder 1 had to bid over bidder 2's proxy to minimum bid $530 to win the auction. If the suspended account bidder 2 was in cahoots, which is unknown because of flippas bidder mask, not bidding over $530 was the next bid wins given it was a no reserve auction. Hence why I said sorta like; to compare how shill bidding can artificially raise the price. You can't lower the reserve in a no reserve therefore the only reserve is the competition between the ones willing to pay the highest. ie the need to auction houses to ensure buyers aren't in cahoots with the sellers. Flippa is a lot less transparent than NameJet. Their willingness to respond to their customers on NamePros is more than we can say about Flippa at the moment. Ever since Kevin left Flippa, Flippa has been radio silent. David had been grilling the about trademark listings. We should probably keep the scope of this discussion to only NameJet.

On what basis is this assertion? How are you assuming that bidder 2 was suspended as a result of fraudulent bidding in this auction? There can be a host of other reasons which could have resulted in bidder 2's suspension and hence it is further possible that their bids were legitimate in this auction.

My math might of been wrong because I didn't consider minimum bid increment. So the real immediate loss would be $55. The difference of the highest bid between bidder #1 and bidder #3. (after discounting min increment and bidder #2 and assuming that is the max bidder #3 would have bid)

Though, I see your point. Due to Flippas bid masking, and failure for the public to track, it's unfair to assume the reason of suspension. Simply a red flag that more than likely has nothing to do with James. I can confirm the flippa seller account was JamesBooth1989 and he has a 100% sales rating with 33 transactions totaling $86,408.

In the future I'm just going post screenshots. I'd rather spend my time looking into details rather than explaining theoretical comparisons. Everyone can their own conclusion based off of present screenshots and discussion.

 

[Hemanttilotia]

I have just received refund for both of my domains that I asked for from NameJet on my credit card.

 

[BoothDomains]

OK, so I was mistaken. It was an auction I won at Flippa not NameJet from James Booth.
I just checked it out and here are the results of the last day of the auction. As you can see, Bidder 2 who placed a majority of the bids during the auction has been "temporarily suspended from Flippa for possibly violating the terms and conditions."

You all can make your own assumptions. I'm not casting dispersions here, just adding to the thread.

I won the auction at $530. Maybe it's just a coincendence ?!?! Or is it that Flippa is on to this ruse?
Live and learn.

(Actually not allowed to post images yet as a new member, so pasting auction results below)

• tnscott ( 100% | $784 )
  $530
  2 months ago
  Highest Bid
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $525
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $475
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 3 ( – | $7K )
  $470
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $461
  2 months ago
  
• tnscott ( 100% | $784 )
  $456
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $381
  2 months ago
  
• tnscott ( 100% | $784 )
  $376
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $306
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 4 ( NEW )
  $301
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $265
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 3 ( – | $7K )
  $260
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $255
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 3 ( – | $7K )
  $250
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $204
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 4 ( NEW )
  $199
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $130
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 4 ( NEW )
  $125
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 2 ( SUSPENDED )
  $56
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 5 ( 100% | $5.21K )
  $51
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 6 ( NEW )
  $50
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 5 ( 100% | $5.21K )
  $21
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 6 ( NEW )
  $16
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 5 ( 100% | $5.21K )
  $11
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 7 ( – | $17 )
  $6
  2 months ago
  
• Bidder 5 ( 100% | $5.21K )
  $1

 

[Addison]

Poll - Will you do business with NameJet going forward?

 

[Chris Hydrick]

OK, so I was mistaken. It was an auction I won at Flippa not NameJet from James Booth.
I just checked it out and here are the results of the last day of the auction. As you can see, Bidder 2 who placed a majority of the bids during the auction has been "temporarily suspended from Flippa for possibly violating the terms and conditions."

You all can make your own assumptions. I'm not casting dispersions here, just adding to the thread.

I won the auction at $530. Maybe it's just a coincendence ?!?!

I don't see any evidence that this users suspension has anything to do with shill bidding, or James. Just a coincidence.

You, bidder 2, and bidder 3 all wanted this domain, and the price reflected. I don't understand why though given the domain appears to be a typo. Yes there may be 12 .coms registered containing your keyword, but they're all some sort of brand protection (or unused) as the domain is a misspelling. There isn't much trying to upsell the domain in the description. The only odd thing I notice is in the description it's called a one word domain -- when in fact , as mentioned, it's a typo.

 

[Michael]

Yes JamesB1989 is my old account. It has not been used in a long time. @Michael can check this account and I also request @Michael to check my BQDNcom account on Namejet and provide domains that I have bid on. I have never shill bidded. Once I started BQDN.com I created the BQDNcom account at NameJet to list names and buy names for my business. I am still having fingers pointed at me and I just want to clarify that I AM allowed to bid on any name I wish even if a family member owns it. The reason names get listed sometimes with sellers that have featured pages is because they get a slight commission deduction from the normal 15%. Please actually provide FACTS and show me where I have ever shill bidded because I haven't. I won AirplanesForSale.com and flipped it. I won AirlineJobs.com which I will keep. I am not going to keep repeating myself but just because me and Andy are brothers does not mean we are the same people. I have my own portfolio, he has his. So we do bid against each other sometimes like on MGP.com, JLZ.com etc. We have partnered on a few names like D8.com that is it. I have never owned any of the names that were listed for sale so I have every right to buy them if I want them. The fact that people are making accusations towards me without any facts is unfair and slanderous. Like I said please check my accounts.

Per your request, this was your activity as BQDNcom in Oliver's auctions:

Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3955636
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3954914
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3899324
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3892583
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3879551
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3855286
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3853120

Won: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3955790
Won: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3955195
Won: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3873667
Won: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3873666

Runner up: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3955617
Runner up: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3929089

Bid on 35 public auctions that weren't Oliver's, won one for $20.4k, and was runner-up in 3.

--

And for JamesB1989 in Oliver's auctions:

Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3747492
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3747433
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3742135
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3729054
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3728269
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3725289
Bid on: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3722832

Won: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3726041

Runner up: 0

Bid on 37 public auctions that weren't Oliver's, didn't win any, and was runner-up in 5.

--

I don't have a lot of time to deep-dive into this, especially since I think the odds of finding anything bad are very low. But I checked WHOIS history on all the domains bid on from your old account and none appear to have ever been owned by your brother.

And for both accounts, the percentage of Oliver's public auctions that you bid on relative to the percentage of short domains in public auctions that were Oliver's, the numbers are much lower than you'd expect. 27% and 18% of your public auction participation was in Oliver's auctions, but he had more than 50% of the public auction inventory that is in your wheelhouse. Even if your participation in Oliver's auctions was double what it actually was, it would still not be suspicious. Plus you were more likely to win Oliver's auctions than another persons', so it would appear you were playing to win. And just in general, the bid volume on either account is so low that it would make for a pretty lame "scheme".

I do think bidding on your brother's auctions is a bad idea though. I see it from your perspective, if you like the name and the price is right, and you're bidding to win, your intentions are pure. And for those saying you should have just dealt directly with Andy if you liked the names, I highly doubt Andy is running his auction lists by you before he starts them so that opportunity might not be present. And even if he was, maybe you all couldn't reach a deal or he just wanted to try his luck at the auctions.

But still, the optics are really bad because it is difficult to prove your intent, and there are no shortage of domains to buy and your brother doesn't auction that much to begin with, so it is fairly painless to avoid his auctions. Not worth risking your reputation. Just my $0.02.

 

[Charley]

This is ridiculous. How come Namejet isn't aware of it?

So now I have 3 accounts at Namejet. My original account and two more I just opened. The second and third account are totally fake with fake names and info and each was opened with different email addresses and a visa gift card as the credit card info and google phone numbers.

I placed multiple bids on the same names from all 3 accounts.

I am ready to shill bid if anyone needs my services. I will be shilling on my own auctions when needed. I am obviously kidding.

I did this to see how easy it is to shill bid if I really wanted to. How the f*ck in the year 2017 am I able to have 3 accounts at a supposedly secure auction house all from the same exact IP?

What a joke, and they wonder why people don't trust their company. They can't even secure the most basic entry point for people to easily shill.

@Rick Schwartz should tweet that and @equity78 should write a story about what a joke it is.

 

[pchip]

So now I have 3 accounts at Namejet. My original account and two more I just opened. The second and third account are totally fake with fake names and info and each was opened with different email addresses and a visa gift card as the credit card info and google phone numbers.

I placed multiple bids on the same names from all 3 accounts.

I am ready to shill bid if anyone needs my services. I will be shilling on my own auctions when needed. I am obviously kidding.

I did this to see how easy it is to shill bid if I really wanted to. How the f*ck in the year 2017 am I able to have 3 accounts at a supposedly secure auction house all from the same exact IP?

What a joke, and they wonder why people don't trust their company. They can't even secure the most basic entry point for people to easily shill.

@Rick Schwartz should tweet that and @equity78 should write a story about what a joke it is.

Thanks for testing this out!

Who the heck is in charge over there? It would seem from many of the comments on this thread that some type of shilling has been suspected at NameJet for sometime and they have been notified about in multiple cases.

Crazy that they never took action sooner to help protect against this sort of thing. We're not even taking about someone using different IP's / etc... to trick the system.

Like you said, what a joke is right!

 

[Page Howe]

Hi Joseph, I have read your writing and analysis in DNW, always enjoyed it. Some blog comments as well. I have no idea of the inner workings and their qualifications to restore trust. My unqualified suspicion is these are not experienced auction people, but technical software people and managers. I think fresh blood and outside help is needed immediately.

I realize what you are saying, however 3rd party sellers would be unduly harmed, and so would the platform. This is going to sound strange, but would it be possible theoretically that if 3rd party premium names were "consigned" with seller specific reserves and then all "managed" by a certain trusted manager who has fiduciary duty and restore confidence. This person must be a highly trusted experienced auctioneer, familiar with multi million dollar tech auctions. If nothing else, they should be sought out for consultation it seems to me, if they have not been already. I will refrain from posting a name, but there is a very well known group that might be able to evaluate the entire situation. This way the platform and sellers show transparency, and loop holes that exist are identified and cleaned up. It would be the fastest way to resolve it too. Trying to come up with ideas.

but its the greed for profitability and "economies of scale" that keep Nj and godaddy tid to this expiry auctions platform to try to be a marketplace, and the third party seller want their names to "look" like expireds.

so Web/tucows if yu want to be a marketplace, be a marketplace and stop asking 2008 expired names technology for insiders to be the front facing NYSe of domains

page

 

[Kate]

When will the domain marketplaces be subject to external audits ?

 

[jaybuk]

Does NameJet still sponsor some of the blogs mentioned in this post? I've looked at a few this morning and all references to NJ appear to have been removed. Interesting timing if so.

 

[offthehandle]

but its the greed for profitability and "economies of scale" that keep Nj and godaddy tid to this expiry auctions platform to try to be a marketplace, and the third party seller want their names to "look" like expireds.

so Web/tucows if yu want to be a marketplace, be a marketplace and stop asking 2008 expired names technology for insiders to be the front facing NYSe of domains

page

Thanks for that info, very interesting.

 

[offthehandle]

Here is an podcast interview I just bumped into and found on DNW from 2015.

Thanks @DomainNameWire for the archival info.

http://domainnamewire.com/2015/10/19/5-expired-domain-tips-with-jonathan-tenenbaum-dnw-podcast-55/

 

[offthehandle]

When will the domain marketplaces be subject to external audits ?

This is self policing. The trade organization listed below has a code of ethics, and members all police one another and promote trust.

Affiliated? http://www.auctioneers.org/find-auctioneer/

http://www.auctioneers.org/consumers/consumer-faqs

"For legal and financial recourse, you will need to file a complaint within the state where the auction company is located and/or where the auction was held. For states that require an auction license, the licensing board is the first place to start. For all states, we recommend contacting the consumer protection division of the attorney general’s office as well as local city, county and Better Business Bureau offices."

http://www.auctioneers.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/NAA-Code-of-Ethics.pdf

In order for any professional organization to earn and maintain the confidence of the constituencies it serves, it must demonstrate to them the ability to "police" its own. Members have the unique ability to observe and therefore assist in the stewardship of this trust.

Members have an obligation to assist the NAA and its officers in all matters, including the investigation, censure, discipline, or dismissal of Members who engage in violations of the Code of Ethics.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Can somebody explain why a triple bid may have taken place? @Ali maybe you can help since you provided an answer to the double bid scenario.

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3932422&cat=

Sorry for the incomplete screenshot.I am writing this from my mobile while I reinstall my OS. The domain in question is ixb.net and WHOIS history is connected to Oliver in case you're wondering.

 

[Sanwal]

Can somebody explain why at triple bid may have taken place? @Ali maybe you can help since you provided an answer to the double bid scenario.

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3932422&cat=

Show attachment 65133

Sorry for the incomplete screenshot.I am writing this from my mobile while I reinstall my OS. The domain in question is ixb.net and WHOIS history is connected to Oliver in case you're wondering.

Hey Grilled,

I think it's because the reserve was not met. I might be premature at answering this but that's what it looks like at first glance.

Obviously it's HKDN in question here, so who knows..

 

[Chris Hydrick]

@Sanwal Thanks for the quick response.

Can the time of bids help confirm that?

Notice - in the screenshot line of bidding hkdn triple begin occurs two days after the last bid by another bidder.

Then the triple bid is place on the same day - with the 3rd bid one minute after the double bid.

Looking at the auction end date (52 days ago) I can deduct the auction ended in June (not may - the day of last bids) not sure how relevant this is to your assumption. Just adding it so it can either support or debunk your theory.

 

[mr-x]

When will the domain marketplaces be subject to external audits ?

When someone files a civil lawsuit or state investigator gets involved.

 

[Michael]

There are only two scenarios where multiple bids can be placed by the same alias in a row. One is a proxy bid getting triggered, and one is when the reserve is not met. Usually you can tell from the timestamps of those and the bid above it, but not always. Let me give some examples.

Bidder XYZ $511 @ 11:15
Bidder ABC $501 @ 10:42
Bidder ABC $450 @ 9:31
Bidder ABC $400 @ 8:27

This would be an example of Bidder ABC bidding under the reserve three separate times, it is impossible for the most recent of the three ABC bids to be a proxy trigger because of the 33 minutes that elapsed between ABC's last bid and XYZ's bid.

Now imagine you have another auction, no reserve, currently at $69. Bidder ABC places a bid of $250, this is entered as a bid of $79 with a proxy of $250, and it looks like this:

Bidder ABC $79 @ 7:15 (proxy $250 - not visible)
Bidder DEF $69 @ 6:32

Now bidder XYZ enters a bid of $500, that is entered as a bid of $260 and a proxy of $500, and it would look like this:

Bidder XYZ $260 @ 9:32 (proxy $500 - not visible)
Bidder ABC $250 @ 9:32
Bidder ABC $79 @ 7:15
Bidder DEF $69 @ 6:32

Notice how the bid above the double bid has the same time?

There's nothing suspicious about multiple bids in a row, in and of itself. But when you consistently see an alias bidding over and over, below reserve range, with nobody else participating it becomes suspicious.

 

[Ali]

Can somebody explain why a triple bid may have taken place? @Ali maybe you can help since you provided an answer to the double bid scenario.

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3932422&cat=

Show attachment 65133

Sorry for the incomplete screenshot.I am writing this from my mobile while I reinstall my OS. The domain in question is ixb.net and WHOIS history is connected to Oliver in case you're wondering.

Yea, looks like they're just bidding up to the reserve. If it's not met, it'll count and show every bid like that.

 

[mr-x]

This is self policing. The trade organization listed below has a code of ethics, and members all police one another and promote trust.

Affiliated? http://www.auctioneers.org/find-auctioneer/

http://www.auctioneers.org/consumers/consumer-faqs

"For legal and financial recourse, you will need to file a complaint within the state where the auction company is located and/or where the auction was held. For states that require an auction license, the licensing board is the first place to start. For all states, we recommend contacting the consumer protection division of the attorney general’s office as well as local city, county and Better Business Bureau offices."

http://www.auctioneers.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/NAA-Code-of-Ethics.pdf

In order for any professional organization to earn and maintain the confidence of the constituencies it serves, it must demonstrate to them the ability to "police" its own. Members have the unique ability to observe and therefore assist in the stewardship of this trust.

Members have an obligation to assist the NAA and its officers in all matters, including the investigation, censure, discipline, or dismissal of Members who engage in violations of the Code of Ethics.

Enom / Namejet is in WA state, which requires a license for both auctioneers and auction houses.

 

[zurc.net]

Have any of the suspended individuals been made public?

 

[Scott615]

Thank you for clearing that up James. I apologize for the implication.

 

[offthehandle]

Enom / Namejet is in WA state, which requires a license for both auctioneers and auction houses.

Well, this information is publically available from links below. At this point, I am not sure who of the readers of this thread cares, but here you go.

https://auctionlaw.wordpress.com/state-auction-laws-auctioneer-licensing-requirements/

Not sure if digital auctions are covered that way. Here are links to find out where the state licenses are issued:

Washington state:
http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/auctioneers/auccomplaint.html

Florida:
http://www.myfloridalicense.com/dbpr/pro/auct/index.html


------------------ Tucows is in Toronto
http://www.tucows.com/ investors/ whistle-blower-policy/

Chairman of the Audit Committee
Jeffery Schwartz – (416) 646-5472 or jschwartz @ tucows.com

----------------
http: //investors.rightside. co/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1564590-17-4423&CIK=1589094

On January 20, 2017, we completed the divestiture (the “eNom Divestiture”) of eNom, Incorporated (“eNom”), our wholly-owned registrar services business, to Tucows Inc. (“Tucows”). eNom’s registrar services business provides infrastructure services that enable a network of active resellers to offer domain name registration services to their customers. As part of the eNom Divestiture, Tucows also acquired eNom’s interest in its joint venture with Web.com for NameJet, LLC (“NameJet”), which offers domain name auction services to consumers. All references made to financial data, non-financial metrics and our business in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are to the Company’s continuing operations (after giving effect to the eNom Divestiture), unless specifically noted. eNom’s revenue was $155.8 million for 2016. See Note 3—Business Divestiture within the accompanying consolidated financial statements for additional information.

Premium Domain Name Service Providers : These companies specialize in the sale or ongoing monetization of higher-value domain names through auctions, domain name brokerage networks and advertising services. Companies providing premium domain name services include Rightside, NameJet, as well as Sedo.

Subsequent to year-end, we completed the eNom Divestiture. eNom’s wholesale and retail registrar provided infrastructure services that enabled a network of active resellers to offer domain name registration services and related value-added services to their customers. This revenue was previously included as part of the Registrar services revenue line item. Additionally, revenue and cost of revenue from NameJet related to eNom were included as part of the divestiture. This revenue was previously included as part of the Aftermarket and other services revenue line item.

---------------
http:// investors.rightside.co/secfiling.cfm?filing ID=1564590-16-14528&CIK=1589094

FY 2015, 10K

Auctions: We own 50% of NameJet through our joint venture with Web.com. NameJet offers domain name auction services to domain name buyers, brokerage services, registrants, registrars and registries, providing a secondary market for the purchase and sale of domain names. NameJet’s market‑tested auction platform has sold more than 460,000 domain names over the past five years.

Premium Domain Name Service Providers : These companies specialize in the sale or ongoing monetization of higher-value domain names through auctions, domain name brokerage networks and advertising services. Companies providing extensive premium domain name services include NameJet, LLC (“Name Jet”), a joint venture between Rightside and Web.com, as well as Sedo.

For sales of our owned and operated domain names generated through NameJet, we recognize revenue on a gross basis in our statements of operations, and record the related commission in cost of revenue. For sales of third-party owned domain names generated through NameJet, we recognize revenue net of auction service fee payments to NameJet. We generated revenue of approximately $5.0 million, $4.4 million and $5.1 million from domain name sales generated through NameJet for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

NameJet LLC, was in 2015 a Delaware corporation. Per 10K

 

[Name Trader]

When will the domain marketplaces be subject to external audits ?

Not in the foreseeable future