Discuss your Epik Experience!

[Dandelion]

I think Epik is building the best ever Domain Lander in the history of domaining, and it really needs to be talked about extensively. That's why I am creating this discussion thread. A lot of thought process really goes into the project. And I can see (for the first time) a landing page that is built from the stand point of domainers rather than for just the marketplace itself.

Everything you have ever dreamt of getting or seeing in a professional landing page can be found in the new Epik marketplace landing page design.

Some of my Favorites Features:

1. The ability to optimize your "domain for sale" landing page to actually rank on Google, displaying your sales pitch/domain description. I just did that with few of my generic domain names such as ASAP.TV, targeting certain keywords, and they are showing pretty well on Google. That's a huge plus in my marketing effort.

2. Being able to change background image is another huge one for me. If you are good with pictures and images, you will surely find this very useful. I did that with Nagasaki.org and the result was truly amazing, showing the city of Nagasaki right at the background.

There are too many positive features and I don't want to mention all of them, all alone

So I am leaving you guys to share and discuss what you loves most or dislike about the new Epik marketplace and the landing pages.

The only negative for me is the checkout process. There are too many terms and conditions buttons to tick before checking out. It will be nice if they can streamline those into one beautiful big button

They also need to place the checkout button directly under the payment options. Right now it is awkwardly place somewhere below at the sidebar, which I don't find cool at all.

Sales experience is also welcomed in this discussion. I haven't had any sells so far at Epik because I started using the marketplace just recently, but the future is looking so bright.

 

[NicTraders]

"Start a payment plan for $151.52 + own in 11 months" is misleading,

Good pickup @Grilled. I haven't looked at all these options yet, but I definitely wouldn't be keen on selling with misleading wording like that.

 

[Grilled]

Good pickup @Grilled. I haven't looked at all these options yet, but I definitely wouldn't be keen on selling with misleading wording like that.

I'm looking at it from the buyers perspective. A buyer might think:

It should be straight forward. None of this, I thought it was $151.52 to start, why is it now telling me the first installment is $833.34?!

Can I trust these guys to a 12 month contract, with seemingly misleading pricing statements?

IDK.

And while the difference between $151.52 to $833.34 may be miniscule to some, to others wanting to start a business, $151.52 might even be a stretch, for those living pay check to pay check, aspiring to build a business, with a suitable domain, to hopefully, one day not have to worry, or at least feel such a gut punch, when they are mispriced from a $151.52 start to instead a whopping $833.34 to start.

...

Yeah-yeah, it may not mean much to most here. But the the penny pinching entrepreneur, or aspiring college student, every little bit can matter, hence why words, and specifically words referring to pricing, matter.

 

[Gube]

I'm looking at it from the buyers perspective. A buyer might think:

It should be straight forward. None of this, I thought it was $151.52 to start, why is it now telling me the first installment is $833.34?!

Can I trust these guys to a 12 month contract, with seemingly misleading pricing statements?

IDK.

And while the difference between $151.52 to $833.34 may be miniscule to some, to others wanting to start a business, $151.52 might even be a stretch, for those living pay check to pay check, aspiring to build a business, with a suitable domain, to hopefully, one day not have to worry, or at least feel such a gut punch, when they are mispriced from a $151.52 start to instead a whopping $833.34 to start.

...

Yeah-yeah, it may not mean much to most here. But the the penny pinching entrepreneur, or aspiring college student, every little bit can matter, hence why words, and specifically words referring to pricing, matter.

We will check to implement this on the landers. But it's already present on the marketplace

As for the trust part, We are fully transparent on the Details page.
All details are there, and in case the buyer, the seller or both would like to add any other custom contract term, they can by contacting us prior to the transaction.

Gube

 

[7363824]

Epik was a registrar I wanted to like. There is a lot that is great about them. Honestly the one thing that has turned me off to them is renewal pricing for non .com's. Some even the initial registeration fee too. Take .io for example a great ccTLD on fire (imo) but $50/yr just put me off when others offer it for under $35. Also .net and .org prices seem find on initial registration but jump on subsequent renewal to $35! I like how accessible @Rob Monster is but $35 for .net and .org renewals....at that price you're making Godaddy's non discount club pricing look good.

 

[Gube]

Epik was a registrar I wanted to like. There is a lot that is great about them. Honestly the one thing that has turned me off to them is renewal pricing for non .com's. Some even the initial registeration fee too. Take .io for example a great ccTLD on fire (imo) but $50/yr just put me off when others offer it for under $35. Also .net and .org prices seem find on initial registration but jump on subsequent renewal to $35! I like how accessible @Rob Monster is but $35 for .net and .org renewals....at that price you're making Godaddy's non discount club pricing look good.

It's a lot cheaper for namepros members..
Can you PM your account username so I can enable you NP renewals ?

Thanks,
Gube

 

[Grilled]

As for the trust part, We are fully transparent on the Details page.
All details are there, and in case the buyer, the seller or both would like to add any other custom contract term, they can by contacting us prior to the transaction.

Gube

Granted, the trust part might have sounded piercing, and may have seemingly warranted a defensive response, it was meant as feedback. Not meant for an opportunity to explain why epik is trustworthy, or why my proposed feeling, and exact reason of untrust was stated (albeit hypothetically from a customer perspective) to be invalid.

Respectfully, please process feedback accordingly, and don't try to twist everything as being fully transparent, when in fact, it was written in detail how the landing page and pricing wasn't transparent by opening statement. It might have held factual if it read, start a payment plan for XXX/month, if it strategically wanted to leave out the down payment (or first installment for those who don't like layman terms) and show a monthly price, it needs to be more transparently stated, or at the very least better wording. Why allow improper or misleading wording give our potential buyers a weary (or caught off guard) first impression?

With respect, some things are defensible. Other times, it's best to just acknowledge the feedback, and not risk insulting the intelligence of the person by responding to feedback in such a way that might seemingly attempt to admonish responsibility.

I trust the team will look into it. And despite any above piercing nature, please don't take it personally. I like you, and feel you are an asset to namePros. But I wasn't too fond of the response, given the time it took me to articulate in a way I thought would be best understand.

Thank you.

 

[7363824]

It's a lot cheaper for namepros members..
Can you PM your account username so I can enable you NP renewals ?

Thanks,
Gube

Thanks. I PM'd you. I'm interested to see how this changes things. But quick replays like this are another thing I've always heard about Epik, great support so I have been kind of keen to try until I saw that pricing.

EDIT: thanks is for the change. Actually impressed with the namepros pricing. .net and .org are even better than my current choice of registrar. .io still a little bit higher but better than previously. I'm going to definitely move forward with transferring some domains over to epik now and see how things go. Also interested to try your marketplace lenders, as I've yet to find any I really like.

 

[Gube]

Granted, the trust part might have sounded piercing, and may have seemingly warranted a defensive response, it was meant as feedback. Not meant for an opportunity to explain why they are trustworthy, why a feeling, and exact reason of untrust was stated (albeit hypothetically from a customer perspective)

Respectfully, please process feedback accordingly, and not try to twist everything as being fully transparent, when in fact, it was written in detail how the landing page and pricing wasn't transparent by opening statement. It might have held factual if it read, start a payment plan for XXX/month, if it strategically wanted to leave out the down payment (or first installment for those who don't like layman terms) and show a monthly price, it needs to be more transparently stated, or at the very least better wording. Why allow improper or misleading wording give our potential buyers a weary (or caught off guard) first impression?

With respect, some things are defensible. Other times, it's best to just acknowledge the feedback, and not insulting the intelligence of the person by responding to feedback in such a way that might seemingly attempt to admonish responsibility brought up proposed wording mistake.

I trust the team will look into it. And despite any above piercing nature, please don't take it personally. I like you, and feel you are an asset to namePros. But I wasn't too fond of the response, given the time it took me to articulate in a way I thought would be best understand.

Thank you.

We appreciate your feedback.

And actually, what I was trying to say in my last reply was that on the Epik marketplace, when a name has a payment plan set with a different First payment, it's showed :

(Example with one of mine)

Adding the First payment + monthly payment on the landers is entirely possible.
Ala, our designer, will review it as soon as he have the time.

Sorry for the misunderstandings, on the details page, is there anything you would like to add?

Gube

 

[Grilled]

We appreciate your feedback.

Thank you.

And actually, what I was trying to say in my last reply was that on the Epik marketplace, when a name has a payment plan set with a different First payment, it's showed :

(Example with one of mine)

With more respect, and even limited patience due to lack of sleep, I'm referring to the ever so marketed LANDING PAGES. I could give a rats ass about epik marketplace. Selling to domainers, ummm cool. But, why do I need epik marketplace, when there is larger sedo, afternic, etc. I need LANDING PAGES for inbound with accurately advertised payment options.

Your screenshot is much more transparent than mine...

Adding the First payment + monthly payment on the landers is entirely possible.
Ala, our designer, will review it as soon as he have the time.

And again, not to be too piercing, but to reiterate, not only is it entirely possible, but the current (hopefully unintended) pricing is very misleading to somebody who is under the impression they can start a payment plan without a 33% down payment (which is possible in the example I showed where it was 12 equal payments, instead of a larger down payment, followed by smaller payments) but not possible when the seller states a 33% down payment.

Without knowing what went behind the thought of the coding, this seems like an easy to make, yet ripple effect glitch in wording or code, that may not have any technical error, is misleading in nature, and can, as demonstrated above, cause uncertainty for somebody attempting to make a large purchase from a company they might not have heard of before. Should this be a glitch, or simple easily fixable error, we are wasting time over addressing this.

I assume this will be the last of this exchange, until hopefully, the glitch is patched, or it is worded better, For now, I bid you ado, and wish the best to your Thursday.

 

[Ategy]

• They can't start a payment plan for $151.52

• $151.52 x 12 = $1,818.24, thus explaining the $833.34 first installment + (11 monthly x $151.52) 1666.72 equating to $2,500.06 (only a $0.06 surcharge to opt for a payment plan?)

@Grilled .. sometimes it's not so much about conspiracies (lol) and trying to be misleading, as it is a miscommunication between various teams in a company.

In this case, the page developers were probably quite innocently told "Make a box for BIN and a box for Monthly Payment Plans". The developer building the page sees "monthly payment" as a field in the database and pulls that info instead of the "down-payment" amount. Fairly innocent mistake and likely unavoidable when things are rushed and build quickly.

These are the types of things (communication bugs more than technical bugs) that can be found all over the place on new systems. Communication bugs are the hardest to find because things still work properly, however the wrong information is displayed.

The good thing here is that you noticed it and reported it. With Epik it could take a day or two, but they usually correct the issue. I've found a few things like that and mentioned them to @Rob Monster and it usually wasn't long before he forwarded the info to the correct person on the team and corrected soon enough.

This type of problem is far and away the most overlooked problem or platforms/websites. But they are far and away the sources of biggest problems and frustrations. Giving wrong information can suck up a ton of support man-hours and be a huge problem with overall customer satisfaction. As much as I complain about GoDaddy's platform being full of bugs, GoDaddy is probably worse when it comes to communication errors.

These sorts of "information integrity" issues are unavoidable when developing new systems and platforms .. even worse when modifying existing systems as usually development teams focus on changing and improving usability, but then nobody ever thinks of changing the FAQ or pop-up help/info.

The real difference that matters is how companies handle it .. 2 hour fixes is only usually possible in tiny companies where there is only one-two people who are both owners and developers ... lol. 2 day fixes is a sign of a good company that looks into the issue and corrects it. 2 months-years unfortunately is the usual standard (looking at you GoDaddy .. lol). Epik's not perfect .. like every ever registrar they will never be .. but they're usually pretty quick to fix issues like this when they are discovered.

 

[Grilled]

@Grilled .. sometimes it's not so much about conspiracies (lol) and trying to be misleading, as it is a miscommunication between various teams in a company.

In this case, the page developers were probably quite innocently told "Make a box for BIN and a box for Monthly Payment Plans". The developer building the page sees "monthly payment" as a field in the database and pulls that info instead of the "down-payment" amount. Fairly innocent mistake and likely unavoidable when things are rushed and build quickly.

These are the types of things (communication bugs more than technical bugs) that can be found all over the place on new systems. Communication bugs are the hardest to find because things still work properly, however the wrong information is displayed.

The good thing here is that you noticed it and reported it. With Epik it could take a day or two, but they usually correct the issue. I've found a few things like that and mentioned them to @Rob Monster and it usually wasn't long before he forwarded the info to the correct person on the team and corrected soon enough.

This type of problem is far and away the most overlooked problem or platforms/websites. But they are far and away the sources of biggest problems and frustrations. Giving wrong information can suck up a ton of support man-hours and be a huge problem with overall customer satisfaction. As much as I complain about GoDaddy's platform being full of bugs, GoDaddy is probably worse when it comes to communication errors.

These sorts of "information integrity" issues are unavoidable when developing new systems and platforms .. even worse when modifying existing systems as usually development teams focus on changing and improving usability, but then nobody ever thinks of changing the FAQ or pop-up help/info.

The real difference that matters is how companies handle it .. 2 hour fixes is only usually possible in tiny companies where there is only one-two people who are both owners and developers ... lol. 2 day fixes is a sign of a good company that looks into the issue and corrects it. 2 months-years unfortunately is the usual standard (looking at you GoDaddy .. lol). Epik's not perfect .. like every ever registrar they will never be .. but they're usually pretty quick to fix issues like this when they are discovered.

Too tired to read all those words... Now I know how it feels when I do it to others

Anyways, I assume what you wrote was in good intention, so I'll read it after some rest, and leave you with a thank you.

 

[Gube]

Thanks for you kind comment Ategy
@Grilled - I forwarded the issue to the right person, it shouldn't take very long to be fixed

Have a great Thursday

Gube

 

[NicTraders]

I'm looking at it from the buyers perspective. A buyer might think:

It should be straight forward. None of this, I thought it was $151.52 to start, why is it now telling me the first installment is $833.34?!

Can I trust these guys to a 12 month contract, with seemingly misleading pricing statements?

IDK.

And while the difference between $151.52 to $833.34 may be miniscule to some, to others wanting to start a business, $151.52 might even be a stretch, for those living pay check to pay check, aspiring to build a business, with a suitable domain, to hopefully, one day not have to worry, or at least feel such a gut punch, when they are mispriced from a $151.52 start to instead a whopping $833.34 to start.

...

Yeah-yeah, it may not mean much to most here. But the the penny pinching entrepreneur, or aspiring college student, every little bit can matter, hence why words, and specifically words referring to pricing, matter.

I agree entirely.

 

[Grilled]

I agree entirely.

I have no doubt Epik will address this quickly. Ategy is right about their response to bugs and feedback. Always best to give the benefit of the doubt. Nonetheless, I will continue to push Epik as hard as they'll allow me to push, to try and encourage, or at least point out areas I think might need extra attention.

Maybe, I'm jumping the gun a little bit, but it's kinda nice to deal with a communicative registrar, where you don't feel lost in an overwhelmingly large customer base, a registrar that listens, considers, and attempts to improve through feature inclusion and service innovation. I mean, these simplistic financing options are great, just a little buggy. Same with a few other features. Not sure how willing, obviously depending on the sensitivity, Epik will be to have it dished publicly, but thus far they've been mighty transparent, and something tells me they'd welcome most lemony feedback, even the really sour ones, if it ultimately helped their lemonade taste better.

 

[Rob Monster]

@Dan

I have no doubt Epik will address this quickly. Ategy is right about their response to bugs and feedback. Always best to give the benefit of the doubt. Nonetheless, I will continue to push Epik as hard as they'll allow me to push, to try and encourage, or at least point out areas I think might need extra attention.

Maybe, I'm jumping the gun a little bit, but it's kinda nice to deal with a communicative registrar, where you don't feel lost in an overwhelmingly large customer base, a registrar that listens, considers, and attempts to improve through feature inclusion and service innovation. I mean, these simplistic financing options are great, just a little buggy. Same with a few other features. Not sure how willing, obviously depending on the sensitivity, Epik will be to have it dished publicly, but thus far they've been mighty transparent, and something tells me they'd welcome most lemony feedback, even the really sour ones, if it ultimately helped their lemonade taste better.

Will review with @Ala Dadan about the page layout.

When we first designed that page, we assumed fixed payments, starting with payment #1. However, since then some folks started to do exotic things with higher first payments and annual increases, etc. It has become versatile but this edge case still needs to be reflected in the landers.

All that said, you guys should seriously consider doing these as Make Offer pricing and shooting the moon assuming you don't mind reviewing inquiries. Or do what some folks do and just show a low lease price, e.g. like this guy does:

He also includes a phone number, which you are welcome to do if you don't mind fielding calls from prospects. I do believe that consultative selling is an essential skill when shooting the moon, i.e. you have to be prepared to make your business case for why the investment is logical and will bring them ROI.

 

[Grilled]

Or do what some folks do and just show a low lease price, e.g. like this guy does:

Ok I love the lease + make offer / contact domainer option.

And while this quirk is way less important than my initial suggestion, I still feel the above landing page wording has room for improvement, in that, is $39.88 really a Payment Plan, or could you give us the ability, or modify depending of option selected, to state something more specific such as lease the domain today for $XX/month (for when leases are selected as default)?

Assuming you guys already have this in the works, and something that could nullify the above paragraph, but it sure would be nice for us (the domain seller) to select multiple options (such as lease, up front sale, monthly installment sale, etc) and give potential buyers the power to select pre-approved financing/leasing options. Despite if more correspondence needs to occur to work out the intricacies with a buyer, I think it would be fantastic if we could first present potential buyers with multiple options for them to mull over prior to contacting us. Just a thought. But, boy would that be cool to empower the seller by empowering the buyer.

 

[Rob Monster]

Ok I love the lease + make offer / contact domainer option.

And while this quirk is way less important than my initial suggestion, I still feel the above landing page wording has room for improvement, in that, is $39.88 really a Payment Plan, or could you give us the ability, or modify depending of option selected, to state something more specific such as lease the domain today for $XX/month (for when leases are selected as default)?

Assuming you guys already have this in the works, and something that could nullify the above paragraph, but it sure would be nice for us (the domain seller) to select multiple options (such as lease, up front sale, monthly installment sale, etc) and give potential buyers the power to select pre-approved financing/leasing options. Despite if more correspondence needs to occur to work out the intricacies with a buyer, I think it would be fantastic if we could first present potential buyers with multiple options for them to mull over prior to contacting us. Just a thought. But, boy would that be cool to empower the seller by empowering the buyer.

It really is a rental. See the detailed terms:

We do also offer the option of a Financing. It is just a toggle in the dialog:

This seller had set "Rental" as opposed to "Financing". You can also configure rate increases, and the % that accrues towards principal, e.g. a lease might allow some contribution to principal.

I think we have seen most of the curve balls. If it gets too exotic, we just have buyer and seller execute a purchase and sale agreement and we enforce the terms.

 

[Grilled]

It really is a rental. See the detailed terms:

Show attachment 136523

We do also offer the option of a Financing. It is just a toggle in the dialog:

Show attachment 136524

This seller had set "Rental" as opposed to "Financing". You can also configure rate increases, and the % that accrues towards principal, e.g. a lease might allow some contribution to principal.

I think we have seen most of the curve balls. If it gets too exotic, we just have buyer and seller execute a purchase and sale agreement and we enforce the terms.

I'm way ahead of that, and am aware of the features. This was probably my mistake as I didn't articulate it well enough for you to catch my drift. Probably could be best said like this, "I would like to enable, pre-approve, and list multiple purchase/rental templates (A-N) to include as a drop down for the buyer to see on the landing page, rather than me unknowingly selecting one option that may or may not entice the buyer enough to contact for more info.

I want to select and set multiple buying options, to include options to sell with a downpayment, without a downpayment, to lease, or to BIN. By setting as many possible options, and if landers allowed for a drop down once viewing more details, and rather than the seller dictating the featured sales options, the seller can opt for and preapprove multiple payment options, just so they buyer knows of all options, prior to contacting rather than leaving it up to whatever singular option the seller randomly decided to select.

....

And NO, while more details may show it to really be a lease. The landing page says, buy, finance, yet more options shows only a rental option. What happened to the buy, or finance options that I read on the landing page. Sure would be nice to know off hand what the price to buy outright or finance would be. Oh well, if I really want it, I'll contact them. But it's probably too expensive if they're only offering leases.

I can see how that example helps shoot the moon, by helping to gather more information about your buyer, rather than those ah man moments, if only I know what a gem I had, I wouldn't have priced a BIN or purchase agreement so low. But that's also in hindsight. And not taking into account the feeling of seeing a completed sales agreement that randomly hits your inbox, because, well you priced it right in a buyers impulse purchase zone.

Hopefully you get the jist, otherwise, I'll come back another time with screenshots to try and explain myself better. Anyways, excited to see what's introduced next!

Thanks for taking feedback.

 

[Rob Monster]

I'm way ahead of that, and am aware of the features. This was probably my mistake as I didn't articulate it well enough for you to catch my drift. Probably could be best said like this, "I would like to enable, pre-approve, and list multiple purchase/rental templates (A-N) to include as a drop down for the buyer to see on the landing page, rather than me unknowingly selecting one option that may or may not entice the buyer enough to contact for more info.

I want to select and set multiple buying options, to include options to sell with a downpayment, without a downpayment, to lease, or to BIN. By setting as many possible options, and if landers allowed for a drop down once viewing more details, and rather than the seller dictating the featured sales options, the seller can opt for and preapprove multiple payment options, just so they buyer knows of all options, prior to contacting rather than leaving it up to whatever singular option the seller randomly decided to select.

....

And NO, while more details may show it to really be a lease. The landing page says, buy, finance, yet more options shows only a rental option. What happened to the buy, or finance options that I read on the landing page. Sure would be nice to know off hand what the price to buy outright or finance would be. Oh well, if I really want it, I'll contact them. But it's probably too expensive if they're only offering leases.

I can see how that example helps shoot the moon, by helping to gather more information about your buyer, rather than those ah man moments, if only I know what a gem I had, I wouldn't have priced a BIN or purchase agreement so long. But that's also in hindsight. And not taking into account the feeling of seeing a completed sales agreement that randomly hits your inbox, because, well you priced it right in a buyers impulse purchase zone.

Hopefully you get the jist, otherwise, I'll come back tomorrow with screenshots to try and explain myself better.

Thanks for taking feedback.

The system already lets you present a lot of options on the page already.

That being said, if you want to test out other layouts, just work with us via private messaging to design a testable experiment and we'll help to test it. @Ala Dadan is a good design resource for mockups.

My gut says that more options is bad, which is why I skew towards 1 or maximum 2 options but for folks who want to "set it and forget it", and just generate passive income I can see the logic.

 

[NicTraders]

I'm way ahead of that, and am aware of the features. This was probably my mistake as I didn't articulate it well enough for you to catch my drift. Probably could be best said like this, "I would like to enable, pre-approve, and list multiple purchase/rental templates (A-N) to include as a drop down for the buyer to see on the landing page, rather than me unknowingly selecting one option that may or may not entice the buyer enough to contact for more info.

I want to select and set multiple buying options, to include options to sell with a downpayment, without a downpayment, to lease, or to BIN. By setting as many possible options, and if landers allowed for a drop down once viewing more details, and rather than the seller dictating the featured sales options, the seller can opt for and preapprove multiple payment options, just so they buyer knows of all options, prior to contacting rather than leaving it up to whatever singular option the seller randomly decided to select.

....

And NO, while more details may show it to really be a lease. The landing page says, buy, finance, yet more options shows only a rental option. What happened to the buy, or finance options that I read on the landing page. Sure would be nice to know off hand what the price to buy outright or finance would be. Oh well, if I really want it, I'll contact them. But it's probably too expensive if they're only offering leases.

I can see how that example helps shoot the moon, by helping to gather more information about your buyer, rather than those ah man moments, if only I know what a gem I had, I wouldn't have priced a BIN or purchase agreement so low. But that's also in hindsight. And not taking into account the feeling of seeing a completed sales agreement that randomly hits your inbox, because, well you priced it right in a buyers impulse purchase zone.

Hopefully you get the jist, otherwise, I'll come back another time with screenshots to try and explain myself better. Anyways, excited to see what's introduced next!

Thanks for taking feedback.

Cool idea, but like in Rob's comment below, I feel that simple is better. I think too many options bring in a confusion and a buyer decides it's all too hard. For me, I want a lander to just inform the buyer that they can do a deal. Really just something that says:

The domain xxx is for sale.
Make an offer
We are also open to discussing payment plans and leasing options
Click here to contact the owner

Even though Epik's system is very powerful already I value simplicity much more as I believe that is better for the potential buyer.

With that said, your idea for various options may be handy for particularly high value domains. Probably still not an option I'd take up, but some might like it.