status-monitor Disallowing all domain name funds on the forum

[wwwweb]

Member i o w a d a w g is #1 in likes, not baseballworld, but we don't recommend anyone use likes as a safety metric.


There has never been a connection to NamePros other than it being 1 out of 1,000,000 threads on NamePros. We don't tell anyone what to buy or what not to buy, and we never endorsed anything regarding his sales.

If the terms of a deal are not honored, then we get involved and take action, like we did in this case. His marketplace access has been removed and his account is restricted. We can't predict which deals will and will not complete successfully, but we could become the first 100% safe platform in the world if we could.

If there's anything else we can do to help, please contact our customer support team.

Thanks,

He was advertising an unaudited domain fund, targeting newbie investors who trusted the namepros forum. He had extensive badges, and designations associated with his profile which can send the wrong trust message to newbies.

I really think Namepros management should have been more proactive when a member is accepting funds to form a fund, there are many laws in regards to accepting such types of monies from investors, it was not going to end well, as many of these people tend to use these funds to top up their day to day living expenses.

To protect your members, and your brand it would probably be wise to block such types of fund raising by a single unaudited party. It happend here, as it targeted members of this forum, these people leave the industry with a bad taste, and mistrust, doesn't help anyone.

It got to the point where this person was saying I am making money hand over fist, I don't need your investment, but I am happy to take it for whatever reason I feel the need to share profits with all. At this point it was quite obvious where this was headed.

I feel namepros has the power to say what is right, and what not is right when people use their forum, not sure how this went unregulated, as it has a high level of risk associated with members being fleeced.

Once again it is your forum, and you have the right to do what you wish, but when it comes to raising of funds thru unaudited means, it never ends well.

Forums are nothing without it's members, the members provide the content, the forum provides the platform, without content, you have no platform, it is important to protect such members.

 

[Eric Lyon]

Thanks for your thoughtful and constructive criticism.

If we define a "domain fund" as a group of investors that use their money together to make larger domain name acquisitions than any of the members would be able to make on their own (a synergy), then these have been around the entire industry for a long time. A few groups before my time were made that were given their own forums:

• Domain Buyer Group
• TDNAM Buyers Group

Both were started in 2007 and have a lot of activity in them. To my knowledge, there were never any fraud issues in those groups. The idea behind the groups is a beneficial one if all goes well: multiple domainers get the chance to invest in domains they typically wouldn't be able to afford. Cowboys.com is a famous example where domainers like Rick Schwartz and Eric Rice got together to buy it.

The problem that arises is the same problem that arises for all sales (even domain sales): if the seller has malicious intent (intentional) or fails to deliver on their promises for unexpected reasons (unintentional), then deals fall apart and people lose money/domains/etc. We can't predict beforehand when a deal will be a success or failure, so we have to act retroactively when problems occur. The only step we could take is to ban all sales of a particular type/format, which would prevent even good people from offering them and we would still depend on the community to detect/report them.

We are typically very hands off. If users want to start and join a domain fund, then an open platform is a place where they should typically be allowed to do things in this business that they want to do.

However, you make valid points that new members could be taken advantage of in these situations, and we of course want to prevent that from happening.

I think this needs more discussion and feedback from the community before we make any final decisions on it. We want to provide a free, open, and helpful platform, where professionals can make their own decisions and do their own due diligence to decide which deals are and are not for them, but we also want to keep everyone as safe as we can.

Please share your thoughts in this thread.

Thanks,

 

[Asfas1000]

Why totally ban something that can be useful ? It would be enough to have warnings in place so that members are alert and encouraged to use their best judgement.

 

[creataweb]

Probably because of this disaster: https://www.namepros.com/threads/reviews-of-baseballworlds-investing-and-development-group.1003582/

 

[wwwweb]

What seems to be happen is people tend to have short term success, become overconfident, take on to much, make promises, and push the returns %. Then life happens, nobody can control it, and they tend to dip into these funds for personal use.

I am not against funds, but when it comes to a random guy that you paypal money to, and you have no paperwork, or paper trail to document who has invested what, or updates to the fund, and what it is buying, and selling. It is essentially just one guy gambling with your money, and if they have a bad day, they are going to lean on that as a rainy day fund, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Groups that are organized, and have their paperwork in order, and maybe are a bit more transparent by all means, this is a very capital intensive industry, and getting more expensive by the day for sure, buying power in the masses helps.

As cretaweb mentioned above, that was just a bad news situation waiting to happen. When you own a portfolio of a thousand names, and get the odd $500, $1000 sale you are essentially just treading water, and covering your renewals. Domains are just not liquid enough for investors to look for monthly dividends, or quick returns.

Good on Eric for opening it up for discussion, the most fair thing he could do is hear everyone out.

 

[ecalc]

Proposal - create an investment and ponzi scheme subforum and require fund raisers to answer questions:

1) Are you registered with a state securities regulator?
2) Have you ever been disciplined by the SEC, a state regulator, or other organization such as FINRA?
3) Who is your parole officer?
4) What training and experience do you have?
5) What is your investment philosophy?
6) What are the fees to buy, operate and sell shares of this fund?
7) How do you get paid?
8) You are having lunch with a prospective client discussing what could be your biggest sale ever. During the conversation a blonde walks into the restaurant and she is so absolutely stunning that you draw your client’s attention to her and describe in detail what you would like to do with her in your motel room. She approaches the table and introduces herself as your client’s daughter. You should:
a) Ask her to marry you.
b) Pretend that you are choking and scream for an ambulance.
c) Repeat the conversation to the daughter and hope for the best.

 

[Asfas1000]

Well the case with member BBW, if it is confirmed as scam, is not typical. I don't think Namepros should overreact to a rare instance like this one, and create a restricting policy. It is not common for a 10-year member to throw their 10 years on NP out the window for a relatively small amount of cash. JMO.