Located in Domain Marketplace Reviews, started by xtremex, May 16, 2013
I have Akifi on BB: https://www.brandbucket.com/akifi
There are tons of domains ends with IFY.
But okay, they must have their reasons.
Is it worth putting your domains to the lowest price?
Would you get better sales?
Thanks. I'm not sure how much logic there is why -fi would get accepted and -fy rejected. Maybe I just submitted on a better day or something.
As far as I can tell, nobody knows
Technically, you should move more volume at lower prices, but will the lower per name revenue be made up for in more sales? Can only try and experiment and even then few if any of us have enough names to really be able to scientifically say which is a better route.
From what I've seen, way more people bump up their prices than lower them. I tend to list them at BB suggested prices, but have been re-thinking that and debating whether to raise a lot of my prices.
Only BB itself could possibly have enough data to look into the effect of raising/lowering prices vs. BB suggested.
I would think that a relatively small percentage of the buyer base looks m o r e on price and are not too specific about the preferences they have about for the actual name.
In those cases it may probably come down to several prospects, of which the lower priced names have a real edge.
I assume this would apply mostly to the pure brandables and modified keywords.
Maybe a 25% increase in the number of sales would be an assumption? if you have a large enough portfolio of these types of names and minimize the suggested price on all of them.
I am wondering one thing guys, should I send the estimated value certificate or link when sending a email and offer a cheaper deal? lets say 20-30 % of the estimated value? going to cheap may send out a wrong message also? I am thinking to send the pdf/link in email or not don't want to come out as spam
My logo has been pending for over a week, is anyone else waiting on their logo?
it just depends sometimes takes a few week and sometimes days , each time its different
Heads up, everybody. BB has just implemented a change to their push function where they won't let accounts that are not in "good standing" receive pushed domains.
To be in good standing, you have to have an A or B score in each of these two circles in your dashboard:
I'd imagine to stop people "testing" domain names they don't own and pushing to fakes or second accounts
Congrats on your 54% approval rate! I've noticed you sell bb domains with longer expiration dates to resellers on NP...
Wondering if your high approval rate is why you reg domains for multiple years, knowing they'll get accepted, or if regging them for multiple years has an effect on your your approval rate. I mean, selling bb published domains with 2 years of GD years remaining + bb listing fee for less than $25 seems like you're taking a loss. $8.47 + $8.47 + $10 listing fee = $26.94
In any case, congrats on your recent reseller success. Your bb domains are selling like hot cakes to other sellers!
Thanks. All those names with far out renewals were bought on Domain.com resellers. At one point, during one of the sales, you could reg for up to 5 years at $1.99 per year, so I took advantage of that at the time, just leaving a lot of them at 2 years since it was only costing me less than $2 to get that 2nd year. With a few of them, that I thought were even better names / surer accepts, I upped it to 3-5 years.
Then I have recently transferred most of those out of Dotster, etc. to get them into GoDaddy since you can't easily push within Dotster anymore, so that's what put an additional year on a lot of them.
I was able to pass on a lot of that value to some people who have a little patience to buy with 2017, 2018, etc. in mind.
I stand corrected with my outrageous theory. I applaud your foresight for lengthy renewals!
This change also impacts sellers who choose to remove their names under the 30-day option of their T&Cs. Now removing names affects your "good standing". In effect there is now a penalty for removing your names, even though you adhere fully to their terms and conditions.
I copped a hit to my rating when I submitted a keyword + ona name, accidently put +ana instead, when I contacted support they removed the name (approved but not published) but it counted against me on that statistic.
You would think common sense would prevail when they could clearly see from Whois what had happened.
It's strange that it is also calculated based on your removed "accepted" names (which have never been published), e.g. you got a domain accepted, disagreed with the pricing, and then removed it from your "to do" list.
Doesn't really make sense to penalize sellers for not moving forward with publishing an accepted name, since this usually happens because the seller disagrees with BBs suggested listing price. For a published name, they have created a description and a logo, so I do see how they consider this to be a "loss" on their part, even though they didn't do this for free, as there is a listing fee (and also, removing published names *could* mean that you are selling names to end users right after the end of the 30 day removal period, bypassing BB). However, for an accepted name, they have simply added a suggested price to it, so it's not like they expended a lot of resources on "accepting" it.
I've only removed a few published names, all because of underpricing or ugly logo, and the number is so small that it would not have any impact on my account score. However, I have removed a lot of "accepted" names from my to do list, as I decided to not move forward with publishing those names, usually because I disagreed with them on the price. With the introduction of the dashboard scores, my bottom right account score (removed accepted names) now means my account will never be in "good standing" with them. With this new change announced by Nat, they have effectively excluded me from the BB re-seller market. And apparently, they are going to introduce further penalties and "sanctions" against accounts that are not in good standing in the future (and benefits for those in good standing).
According to their dashboard, I have a 5.4%+ sell-through rate and am in the "top 6% of sellers" - yet my BB account will increasingly be limited and disadvantaged, because the only thing that matters for them is whether you publish all accepted names, and then keep them published in perpetuity.
It doesn't affect your ability to list names on BB.
I would have expected it to affect your standing, wouldn't you? I'm sure they don't want people removing names. How can someone who has removed lots of names (I say lots, because removing a few isn't going to affect your standing much) still expect to receive whatever benefits those that don't remove names might get?
I have no idea what BB is doing, but we can all see they have been moving towards structuring their sellers. It seems to me that they want to nurture (potentially reward?) those of us that are dedicated to growing a brandable portfolio with them.
Have you contacted them? I would absolutely contact them if I were you. I can understand why they are rewarding/penalizing sellers good standing status but their algorithm may need tweaking. You are not trying to buck they system in any way and you have fallen into the position you are in for very valid reasons. They need to know about this.
I assume not renewing (dropping a bb domain) affects this score as well. With decreasing sales through rates, and rising inventory, hopefully they are considering some incentives to those who continually renew with sketchy margins. ie If you have 150 bb domains, you need to average at least one sale per year. If not, the domainer will have to pay $1,500 out of pocket, and hope for better luck next year.
I did contact them about it and nothing will be done about it.
In fact, they did manually check my account dashboard situation, and recognized that not all my "accepted but then removed before ever being published" names had been included in the list, due to a system error. So they added those to my score too (and now it is so bad that there is no way my account will ever be in good standing). I tried ask them to be reasonable, in the hopes of fixing my account standing, yet the result was that it worsened my "standing" with them further.
What type of response is that from them? I'm not impressed! How can someone in the top 6% of sellers not be in good standing? Logic says something somewhere needs tweaking. I've just contacted them. When I get a response, I'll PM you.
The strange thing about their system, in my opinion, is that they introduced it in a way akin to an “ex post facto law” (retroactively changing the consequences of something that was done).
Consider how their reminder emails, regarding accepted but not yet published names in our “to do” list has always said “if you simply would like any of the names removed from this list, please don’t hesitate to contact us” - they always made it seem perfectly OK to remove any accepted name you didn’t want to publish. No warning that it would have negative consequences for your account later on. So over the past one and a half year, I did just that; sometimes domains sold outside before getting accepted (since the review took ages before), or I felt the price didn’t match the value of the name, etc. and over time I removed quite a few names from my to do list, without ever publishing them.
And then suddenly they introduce an account score system where they declare that it will have negative consequences for your account to remove accepted names, and even though they just announced this recently, names that were removed years before it was announced also counts negatively towards your account score.
However, when I discussed this issue with them, they made it entirely clear that this was their intention: “submitting something and never publish it affects your dashboard metrics just as much as it does to publish and then remove”. In other words, holding their sellers retroactively accountable for something they didn’t declare was a problem until recently.
Speaking of accountability, now that they have finally acknowledged that letting BB staff publish names that never would have been accepted if they had been submitted by a regular seller (even names that had been rejected previously, when submitted by regular sellers) was a bad practice, and taken steps to try to lessen this trend, it would be good to see them use the same kind of logic they apply to regular sellers, and retroactively hold themselves accountable too, for what they have now declared was a problem. Since they have acknowledged that this was problematic, and changed the system accordingly, shouldn't they address all such problematic names already published by BB staff in the past? Is there any reason why they shouldn't hold themselves to similar standards that they hold their sellers to?
I am actually being penalized for two typos. My autocorrect changed the names that I entered, and the auto- corrected names were approved (even though they weren't mine). Don't ask me how- maybe a glitch. Anyhow, I told them what occured for at least one of the names, and the names were removed.
So, my score now reflects the removals. I am still in good standing but this makes no sense,
I kinda get the feeling that this was not properly thought through before it was implemented. I think BB's management needs to go back to the 'drawing board' and re-think this.
Good comments, Candace.
What BB wants to do is discourage abuse of their system. There are some sellers (not you or Arca of course) who are using BB as a free appraisal service so they can make money reselling approved (and unpublished) names.
Over the past few years thousands of brandables have been accepted by BB and never published. This is wasting time and resources that BB could put towards selling our BB listed names.
This abuse of the system also creates an invitation for end users (our customers) to enter the aftermarket and purchase BB curated names at wholesale prices. That is not good for BB or us.
The rating system BB has implemented is intended to 1) acknowledge those sellers who are acting in good faith and publishing most or all of their accepted names and 2) discourage those that are abusing the system at our expense.
Admittedly the system is imperfect and feedback from people like you and Arca etc. is going to help and refine and improve it over time.
Since the BB staff are not active on NPs, the best way to give feedback is via the BB Feedback channel on Slack or via their troubleshooting email: [email protected]
Thanks for your help!
Separate names with a comma.