status-monitor Feedback on domains selling elsewhere during an auction

[Eric Lyon]

We've published:

• What if a domain in my NamePros Auction has sold elsewhere or may sell elsewhere?

Please share any comments, concerns, suggestions, or thoughts about it below.

Thanks!

 

[Name Trader]

I have a question with your example 4 (allowed). Lets take an example of a 12 domain multiple domain auction. I presume, it is not acceptable to state "If any domain is sold outside this auction, then it will be replaced by one.com" because it is not specific enough. What happens if more than 1 domain is sold outside the auction? So every domain must have a specific alternative domain. In this case 12 different alternative domains. Not less. Is that a correct interpretation of this example? If so. I think it should be clarified in your example. Because, in you example is it is implied, but non-specific, that every domain should have a different alternative domain where bulk auctions are involved. ie: It would make the example clearer. My suggested addition would be to add. "Every domain in the auction must have a different alternative domain in the event it is sold outside the auction". Or words to that effect.

 

[RJ]

Sellers could avoid this awkward situation by removing their domains from other marketplaces before auctioning them. If this is not possible--don't auction them!--and list the domains in the NamePros marketplace as Make Offer instead.

The examples are well thought out, but there may be some potential for abuse to watch out for. As an potential auction bidder today, I would be weary of any auctions that had explicit terms like the examples provided. (I have been participating in domain auctions for almost two decades and have seen buyer and sellers find many creative ways to try to manipulate auctions prices or weasel out of deals.) For instance, a seller using terms like in examples 1, 2, or 3 could falsely claim a domain is "sold elsewhere" for the retail price, just to jack up the bids by thousands of dollars. Or use the "alternative domains" as a way to get out of selling me the best name in a package. It's the kind of thing I wouldn't want to touch as a potential bidder, but others may fall for it.

 

[DU]

The time-frame and money transfer also needs to be clearly laid out.
i.e. Payment will be made within 24-48 hrs or payment will be reduced from winning bid.

Other venues may not shift and move that quickly, not all buy-now actually are pay-now.

If a haircut on the bid, the sellers are taking on a risk doing this as the transaction unit is split across venues and one half may be canceled - potentially by the bidder in the thread.

If it's actual payment (which makes no sense but is the way your examples are laid out) the buyers are taking on a huge risk I can see someone winning an auction for $4K because it includes $3K sale but who's going to ensure that $3K sale actually gets paid to the bidder at some later stage?

You can't say - payment is due once my other sale settles as that's non-specific.

I really think the simple answer is better - if you list a name here for auction it must be available for sale

BUT

I commend you on trying to write up the rules and be clear but I agree with RJ in that there is too much room for movement.

Luckily I don't buy much here - my concerns are more for the general public

 

[Name Trader]

I would add my own vote to both @RJ and @DU, that you are making these rules to complicated, in the interests of having an open market. My comment would be that you can't list a domain for auction, which has a Buy Now on another platform, just in case it sells during the auction. The unpredictable standard.

It might even sell after the auction. Whilst this might not have much consequence for the buyer. It could have big consequences for the seller. It might not concern NP's either. But if it happens a few times, it could easily reflect on NP's good reputation. Rightly or wrongly.

 

[Eric Lyon]

The idea behind the examples is to illustrate that it is the sellers' responsibility (this has always been the case) to deliver on their obligations that are set forth by their auctions. They will need to cover all of their bases when they get creative with their sales listings. The edge cases (or unforeseen circumstances) would not exempt sellers from their commitments.

We'll update the examples (and add more) to help sellers plan ahead for less common scenarios, but at the end of the day, everything is still the same (rule wise) and we haven't made anything more complicated. However, the rules do allow for sellers to make their auctions as complex/elaborate, or as simple, as they wish. Some sellers will come up with ingenious ideas with this freedom, such as Winner's Choice auctions, and others may not.

There are pros and cons to everything.

If we notice a particular type of auction is causing a lot of issues, then we will investigate and determine whether something needs to change. I think we've shown that we won't hesitate to roll up our sleeves and take action promptly when it's necessary.

We really appreciate the feedback. It helps us improve the rules/guides and prepare for the unexpected.

 

[Aamsra]

The idea behind the examples is to illustrate that it is the sellers' responsibility (this has always been the case) to deliver on their obligations that are set forth by their auctions. They will need to cover all of their bases when they get creative with their sales listings. The edge cases (or unforeseen circumstances) would not exempt sellers from their commitments.

We'll update the examples (and add more) to help sellers plan ahead for less common scenarios, but at the end of the day, everything is still the same (rule wise) and we haven't made anything more complicated. However, the rules do allow for sellers to make their auctions as complex/elaborate, or as simple, as they wish. Some sellers will come up with ingenious ideas with this freedom, such as Winner's Choice auctions, and others may not.

There are pros and cons to everything.

If we notice a particular type of auction is causing a lot of issues, then we will investigate and determine whether something needs to change. I think we've shown that we won't hesitate to roll up our sleeves and take action promptly when it's necessary.

We really appreciate the feedback. It helps us improve the rules/guides and prepare for the unexpected.

Very descriptive. Else cases to be taken into swift consideration will surely handle any issues before they emerge. Thank you

 

[Name Trader]

OK. For example 4 (allowed). What happens if one.com and ten.com are both sold at Buy Now prices. What does the winner of one.com receive? That is both unpredictable and unfair.

 

[Eric Lyon]

You have added all these good and bad examples, which were not there before, in order to better explain how somebody can auction a domain, which has a Buy Now price at another venue.

The presence of these examples only helps. Many sellers were still holding these types of auctions, but they were not protecting themselves or being transparent with buyers. If something went wrong or the unexpected happened, the sellers would be held accountable.

The examples exist to help sellers realize that they need to think ahead when they get creative. Otherwise, they might find themselves in an unfortunate situation that could have a serious impact on their reputation and account.

What happens if one.com and ten.com are both sold at Buy Now prices.

In that example, ten.com (the backup domain) cannot be sold elsewhere under any circumstances, because that is not defined in its terms. Since ten.com is not a domain name that can be sold elsewhere, according to the seller's terms, that means the seller must make sure it is not a possibility (remove its Buy-It-Now price from marketplaces, reject offers for it, etc.) until the auction is over. Sellers are responsible for failure to meet their commitments if they sell their backup domain(s) and are unable to meet their terms as a result.

 

[davin riera]

Sellers could avoid this awkward situation by removing their domains from other marketplaces before auctioning them. If this is not possible--don't auction them!--and list the domains in the NamePros marketplace as Make Offer instead.

Simple enough!!

 

[Name Trader]

I think its the death of multiple domain auctions where there are buy now prices elsewhere. It's just too complicated, IMHO. But I could be wrong. We will see over time.

 

[mad409]

And then there are auctions that had NO BIN but sold and closed without an explanation.

No bin auction, couple LLL.xyz domains that closed over night, bigger concern to me..

https://www.namepros.com/threads/sold.937858/#post-5457085

https://www.namepros.com/threads/sold.937859/#post-5457083

I don't like multiple listings at marketplaces but it's going to happen but I really don't like deception.

What happened here bigger offer came in, low bids and auction was closed.

 

[Eric Lyon]

And then there are auctions that had NO BIN but sold and closed without an explanation.

No bin auction, couple LLL.xyz domains that closed over night, bigger concern to me..

https://www.namepros.com/threads/sold.937858/#post-5457085

https://www.namepros.com/threads/sold.937859/#post-5457083

...

What happened here bigger offer came in, low bids and auction was closed.

Back in April, both of those sold at BIN, but the seller did not follow the proper BIN procedure (the first post was updated with the BIN but a new post was not made to notify everyone of it). We informed the seller of the correct procedure once it was brought to our attention. If it is reported to us promptly using the Report link underneath posts, then we can re-open the auction and make sure proper procedures are followed.

Let's please keep this thread on topic.

 

[mad409]

Let's please keep this thread on topic.

No problem..

 

[equity78]

@Eric Lyon shouldn't all auctions now place what they will do if they sell ?

 

[Eric Lyon]

@Eric Lyon shouldn't all auctions now place what they will do if they sell ?

It's their choice. If they don't state what will happen, then they must sell to the winner on NamePros no matter what. If they fail to sell to the high bidder on NamePros once the auction ends, then they will jeopardize their reputation and account on NamePros.

As moderators, we can suggest that they do it (before the first bid), but it's currently not required.*

* We may make it a requirement in the future.

 

[equity78]

Well then we are potentially looking at a lot of possible Doron situations. All these auctions are just open to potential to problems, why would anyone bid ? IMO it needs to be a requirement.

 

[james haw]

IMO, either the seller wants $2,500 for a brandable domain at a brandable marketplace so they leave it listed there, or they want whatever it'll go for at auction in NP. Allowing some kind of wiggle room (as per the examples) is not "exclusivity" and is not "final bid is binding and the domain name must be sold to the winning bidder".

An auction is somewhere I can obtain the name for myself, not go into some joint venture on a sale

Sure, I could not bid, but aren't you robbing Peter to pay Paul? So sellers get some wiggle room, but buyers suddenly lose exclusivity to obtain the domain name they're bidding on.

If one.com is sold elsewhere, then the winner will receive ten.com instead. If two.com is sold elsewhere, then it will be substituted for eleven.com and eleven.com will be awarded to the winner.

Seems very complicated and potentially messy to me. And that's just one scenario.


What about potential cons? Where a seller lists a name and an alternative. Bidders plod on, and based on the bids coming in, the seller can decide to get a friend to "BIN" on the other platform and the seller then get's $xx for whatever name they want.

 

[james haw]

Domain names are very specific, and offering an alternative name is hardly ever going to be ok. Which makes this pointless in nearly all cases.

How can bids on a specific name with a specific value suddenly be for another name with a different value? Possibly even a different niche (yes this will happen a lot!). Who decides if the two names are equal in value?

Sure, I could not bid, but many auctions already get very little bids, and sellers listing poor "alternative" names will just cripple the job and auctions become dead


Namepros auctions should simply be:
"Bid on this name, highest bidder gets the name"

However, with the new rules NP auctions instead become:
"Bid on a domain name, you might get that, or a different domain name, or win some cash"
huh?

 

[james haw]

If this is going to be official, how about a new marketplace forum for auctions with these new rules. .
Then keep the original marketplaces and auctions as they are: Bid and win that domain if not outbid.

Then those who think this is pointless can just stay away from that area, as I for one won't likely ever be "blind bidding" on domain names

 

[Justin Matmor]

If a domain happens to sell on a different platform before the auction on NP ends then the seller should have the ability to cancel the NP auction. As long as this condition is stated before any bids are made what is the problem with this action?

 

[james haw]

If a domain happens to sell on a different platform before the auction on NP ends then the seller should have the ability to cancel the NP auction. As long as this condition is stated before any bids are made what is the problem with this action?

bidders time wasted bidding and researching a name they could never obtain.
Worse, if the seller doesn't like the final bid they'll just claim its sold. Without specifics they can just cancel with no way to contest it.

 

[RTM]

I've been in the IT and domaining world quite a while now... My only addition to the conversation would be "simpler is better"... As a buyer, if I won an auction for one. com I would never accept ten. Com.... I say, auctions here are exclusive and binding for the duration of the auction.

If list something at eBay and it sells there, yet I also sold it prior or during offline or elsewhere, my rep at eBay will suffer for being unable to deliver the said (exact) item... Sounds like a good, straightforward model to me.

Offer and fixed price / negotiations sales are a different thing...

Just my 2c

 

[Eric Lyon]

As a general comment (not to anyone in particular):

If you don't like it when sellers do it, then don't bid on their auctions. The sellers will either get the hint, or you may not have been their target audience. Either way, everyone has a choice.

The only reason to impose restrictions or rules on listings would be to help buyers and sellers. We aren't going to take away everyone's ability to choose until it is evidently clear from consequential data that doing so is best.

Once again, nothing has changed. Sellers have always defined their terms and all bidders are agreeing to them when they place a bid.

Please do not discuss specific 3rd-party marketplaces in this thread. Our rules are not specific to any external marketplace, and discussion about them will be removed or moved.

Thank you,