legal Domain Broker Suing For Commission on FF.com deal

[Silentptnr]

Faraday Future Hit With $210k Lawsuit Over its Domain Name

Faraday Future has been hit with a lawsuit alleging that it failed to pay a broker for acquiring FF.com on behalf of the electric automaker.

It is alleged that Faraday’s former head of corporate communications, Marcus Nelson, employed the help of Suraj Rajwani from Domains Cable to think of a name for the start-up automaker and to register an appropriate domain name.

During negotiations, Nelson said that Faraday would give Rajwani a fee on top of the domain’s purchase price.

Rajwani soon began negotiating with Bank of America to purchase the domain FF.com and put forward an offer of $150,000. Bank of America counter-offered with $2.5 million. Rajwani ultimately told Faraday that he had got the asking price down to $1.5 million.

Unbeknownst to him, the electric automaker took matters into its own hands and went directly to Bank of America to purchase the domain for $1.4 million, cutting out the middle man (Rajwani).

In the lawsuit, Rajwani asks for no less than $210,000 alongside miscellaneous costs and expenses of the suit.

Source: http://www.carscoops.com/2017/02/faraday-future-hit-with-210k-lawsuit.html

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

yea, when they realize how many crappy domains there are they can package them and sell them as digital derivatives and bankrupt the internet.

It's funny though, they won't respond if you try to sell them something, not even Bank.com but if you want to buy their name or any of their names, "they are always interested"
Hahaha banks

 

[nothere]

It's funny though, they won't respond if you try to sell them something, not even Bank.com but if you want to buy their name or any of their names, "they are always interested"
Hahaha banks

They do own Loans.com and Citi owns mortgage.com so they are somewhat domain savy. FF.com was probably part of bank or company they bought. First Financial or whatever ...

 

[LarryDomain]

They do own Loans.com and Citi owns mortgage.com so they are somewhat domain savy. FF.com was probably part of bank or company they bought. First Financial or whatever ...

The bought First Franklin a few years back. Lucky they were savvy enough to hold onto the domain. That would have been a massive drop.

 

[deez007]

yea, when they realize how many crappy domains there are they can package them and sell them as digital derivatives and bankrupt the internet.

Bwhahhaha and give off massive loans on cr@p virtual property to people who can not afford to payback the loans... package them all into derrivatives.

 

[Kenny]

The bought First Franklin a few years back. Lucky they were savvy enough to hold onto the domain. That would have been a massive drop.

Good catch.

Peace,
Cy

 

[JoeE]

This can not end well for Faraday. The broker was authorized to negotiate on their behalf and I don't think they can deny that. And they cut him out while they claim integrity/Honesty is a major pillar of their business. They'd better compensate the broker very quickly before this escalates and maybe throw in some equity in their otherwise ruined business PR if they don't. The broker should expect a good payday through settlement.

 

[Silentptnr]

Bwhahhaha and give off massive loans on cr@p virtual property to people who can not afford to payback the loans... package them all into derrivatives.

Domain backed securities...nice!

 

[Kenny]

There was a rather heated thread concerning a similar (although not on such a grand scale) topic last year.
Lots of differing opinions about the ethics involved in bypassing brokers.

Peace,
Cyberian

Notice I said Similar

 

[Silentptnr]

There was a rather heated thread concerning a similar (although not on such a grand scale) topic last year.
Lots of differing opinions about the ethics involved in bypassing brokers.

Peace,
Cyberian

Notice I said Similar

How did that one turn out?

 

[biggie]

when borkers start suing domain owners, then you know the script has flipped


kinda like a piz-zimp suing a hiz-zooker cuz he didn't get a cut from the jiz-zohn.



the potential fallout:

such actions, and depending on the outcome, could make domain owners reluctant to engage such services, in the future.

just saying....


imo....

 

[Silentptnr]

borkers

Everytime you say that it cracks me up.

 

[DN Invest Ltd]

Faraday Future Hit With $210k Lawsuit Over its Domain Name

Faraday Future has been hit with a lawsuit alleging that it failed to pay a broker for acquiring FF.com on behalf of the electric automaker.

It is alleged that Faraday’s former head of corporate communications, Marcus Nelson, employed the help of Suraj Rajwani from Domains Cable to think of a name for the start-up automaker and to register an appropriate domain name.

During negotiations, Nelson said that Faraday would give Rajwani a fee on top of the domain’s purchase price.

Rajwani soon began negotiating with Bank of America to purchase the domain FF.com and put forward an offer of $150,000. Bank of America counter-offered with $2.5 million. Rajwani ultimately told Faraday that he had got the asking price down to $1.5 million.

Unbeknownst to him, the electric automaker took matters into its own hands and went directly to Bank of America to purchase the domain for $1.4 million, cutting out the middle man (Rajwani).

In the lawsuit, Rajwani asks for no less than $210,000 alongside miscellaneous costs and expenses of the suit.

Source: http://www.carscoops.com/2017/02/faraday-future-hit-with-210k-lawsuit.html

We lost almost $100k as a commission last year because we did not have exclusive domain brokerage agreement. Lesson learned.
It was a LL.com domain. We had a $1M offer and the seller wanted at least $1.6M. The next day our man in Hangzhou should be present on a summit where we would most likely get $1.6M offer, or at least $1.2M. We arranged all and then, only one day before the summit, the whois changed and we noticed the domain was sold! Aghhhh! Later we get the info it was sold for $1.2M. Since then, we are forcing exclusive domain brokerage agreement wherever we can.

If the broker had exclusive domain brokerage agreement in this case (and if it was well written), then he will get his commission Agreements are not used because someone is bored and wants to place some ink on paper.

 

[Kenny]

How did that one turn out?

It turned ugly.

Peace,
Cyberian

 

[nothere]

what if FF says that that specific employee didn't have authority to enter an agreement withe the broker? We have lotsa employees etc etc

Maybe they fear discovery and might offer him $100k to drop it.

 

[168]

what if FF says that that specific employee didn't have authority to enter an agreement withe the broker? We have lotsa employees etc etc

Maybe they fear discovery and might offer him $100k to drop it.

Here's a portion of the complaint,
Nelson—who departed FF in October 2015—allegedly told Rajwani the deal transpired in such a fashion because his “bosses were getting freaked out that things were taking too long.”

Rajwani’s complaint then points to a statement on Nelson’s LinkedIn page that said, while he was running communications for FF, he negotiated and acquired “a new domain purchase (TBA) — saving $400,000,” which Rajwani claims “that much of these alleged savings resulted” from him “not being paid his commission on the transaction.” Nelson’s current LinkedIn profile now mentions that he negotiated and acquired the “new FF.com domain purchase.” (It wasn’t immediately clear where the $400,000 figure originated.)

 

[idomainappraisal]

Treble the award against auto dealer it was intentional

The broker should have asked BOA for a 1 time right to sell

Another reason to not like BOA as well

Business etiquette they should have told the auto dealer they were already in a deal with them via their 'broker'

Plus the broker should have a written agreement about that specific term giving him authority to work on the project

 

[Micklepickle]

I'm interested in seeing how this lawsuit settles.

I hope this guy had a seasoned transactional lawyer, who provided an unbreakable agreement covering all angles of the client/broker arrangement. However, from reading the above posts it sounds like no agreement, only verbal and a few text messages.

Now the sh*t show begins. The broker needs to run out and find a new lawyer who specializes in litigation. Unfortunately, this is entering into the most expensive practice of law. I hope he has deep pockets, because if this company is willing to circumvent an agreement (verbal or written) and go directly to the seller and thereby spend $1.5 million on a domain name, then the broker is in for a long fight, against a company with deep pockets. A fight that the CEO will have no issues in prolonging the battle and effectively bleeding the broker dry....which in litigation can happen a lot faster than you might think.

Until all facts are known its hard to jump on any one side, but in the shadow of full disclosure, the CEO of the buyer side appears to be an unethical character in his business dealing. Too bad a deal has to end this way when basic steps could have been taken to protect the integrity of the deal.

Remember, take the necessary steps and precautions to protect yourself: trust/escrow accounts, privacy agreements, broker agreements and most importantly map out the reasonable steps when attempting to connect buyers and sellers, it's called a strategy. The tools are out there, it might take a little (or a lot) of extra work by adding a couple of additional steps, but in the end, you minimize the risk of a bad deal ultimately costing you money.

The domain industry might be relatively new, but consulting and brokering agreements/strategies are not.

I hope the CEO grows a conscience and does the right thing and settles the account in good standing.

A good example of how not to engage a business agreement. I wish the broker luck and success.

 

[mvl]

Can't really judge without knowing both sides of this story.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

assuming he has a bona fide case I wish him all the luck in the World WTG!

 

[lock]

His word against theirs. Company could have paid commission to the employee that actually closed the deal.