GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers

[Rob J]

From Slashdot: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/29/0625249

"A GoDaddy Vice President has been caught bidding against customers in their own domain name auctions. The employee Adam Dicker isn't just any GoDaddy employee; he's head of the GoDaddy subsidiary that controls the auctions. Dicker won some of the domains he bid for, and pushed up the bid price on auctions he didn't win. The conflict of interest is unethical, but could this practice also be illegal? Said a representative for a competitor, 'Even if controlled, that practice has bad news written all over it.' This comes hot on the heels of news that despite earlier promises to ICANN to end their 60-Day ban on transfers, GoDaddy quietly circumvented it by forcing customers to agree to the ban anyway. ICANN doesn't appear to be investigating or asking follow-up questions about this. What can be done to force ICANN to police the registrars for which it is responsible?"

 

[fonzie_007]

spyware.us is one of the domains Dicker won. So, yes, Dicker did bid and win domains that were auctioned off on TDNAM.

What the article is trying to suggest is that he is bidding against other bidders for godaddy's benefit. Which isn't the case. He's bidding with his own money for his own benefit.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but you have no proof of this just like the author of the article has no proof that there was any bad faith on behalf of Dicker or GD.

Assuming Dicker bid at arms-length, did not receive any benefits (e.g. discounts) from GoDaddy, and did not know what others were bidding (e.g. through going in the TDNAM system and looking at the high bid), AND GoDaddy did not encourage Dicker to bid or provide Dicker with any benefits that were not available to the general public, there is nothing wrong that occured.

However, the fact is that GD stood to profit off of Dicker bidding and winning (or bidding up other auction participants). Thus, I reiterate the problem does not lie with Dicker as it does with GoDaddy needing a policy that expressly states employees are not allowed to bid on TDNAM auctions. At the very least, GD should provide a full disclosure of its practices.

 

[dgridley]

Ever hear of guys like Pete Rose.. it's not allowed but it happens. Dicker shouldn't be allowed to bid on TDNAM auctions IMO.

Betting against your team and throwing the game isn't allowed.

 

[jeremyp]

This should be judged on a case by case basis.

Dicker bidding on names is no big deal.

Dicker purposefully running up auctions WOULD BE a big deal if proven.

I think this is a Godaddy.com in-house issue. They should, provide the results of their investigation, and disclose their position on in-house bidding.

By the way... Don't be shocked that guys who work in the domain name industry are often domainers.



Jeremy Padawer
Jeremy.com

 

[unholygod]

lool, poor Adam - kudos~kanoodles

this looks like a plot, everyone does that, like pool bidding on its own names or schwarzes "buying" fowers.mobi at their own auctions etc etc etc

somebody wants to discredit the guy

looks like Internet world war "battle for the power" has started "horror" %%-

 

[duceman]

This is a non issue IMO. If Adam pay's more than they highest bid the auction is legit. The only way there would be impropriety would be if a bidder was denied the chance to bid.

my 2c

 

[Rob J]

he has enough money to play fair.

So since he has enough money to play fair he must be an honest guy? Does this apply to the guy from Pool who kyped all the super premiums .asias without them going to auction? I'm sure he's got enough money to play fair too.

There are crooked rich people everywhere, in fact i'd argue the more money someone gets the more crooked they become.

What does it matter? If the person bidding bids more money and pays, they win..

Well the argument is that he has access to private information that would give him a pretty significant advantage, like who is bidding against him (i think all bids are anonymous), their proxy bids, etc. How would you like to be up against someone like that?

Whether or not he used it to his advantage, who really knows. That's the problem with it, we don't know.

 

[unholygod]

There are crooked rich people everywhere, in fact i'd argue the more money someone gets the more crooked they become.

yea, more money you have, more greedy you become- i can confirm the Fact

 

[Rob J]

Ever hear of guys like Pete Rose.. it's not allowed but it happens. Dicker shouldn't be allowed to bid on TDNAM auctions IMO.

Pete Rose didn't bet against the Reds, he bet for them to win. It's still against the rules, but there is a huge difference between that and throwing a game on a bet.

 

[Name Trader]

Dicker shouldn't be allowed to bid on TDNAM auctions IMO.

Agree. No employee or VP (or surrogate) of any GoDaddy related company should be allowed to bid in TDNAM auctions. There's probably nothing wrong been done. But it's just the perception. It's common sense.

 

[onlinedomains00]

no wonder I always get out bid for those good names... Its unethical and in corporate america there are rules and regulations against this sort of thing for insiders to make sure nobody has an unfair advantage. It doesn't matter who he is, or how rich he is, it is wrong, if he is so rich, he should quit his job, and stick to registering domain names. Godaddy is profiting from an employees bids, he has knowledge of the industry, and it can be questioned if he knows if a domain is bidding low, the value could be deemed higher, and the fact of activity on that domain could entice another bidder into the auction.... could be borderline shill bidding, which is illegal

 

[Michael]

As long as he doesn't have any information that would give him an advantage (i.e. - knowing the max proxy bid of other bidders), then I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Adam is a stand up guy and I refuse to believe he would ever do anything unethical.

 

[GF]

Does this mean Reece can't bid on domains @ BQB.com? I think that'd be lame to prevent Reece from going after a neat domain just because he is the owner.

I don't see anything wrong with what the VP did unless he were being a shill.

 

[bmugford]

This whole story depends on a couple factors.

1.) Did working for GoDaddy.com give Adam Dicker an advantage in bidding? Was he able to use inside information to his advantage?

2.) Was he bidding on these domains for himself or for GoDaddy? Did he pay for the domains he won?

As far as I am concerned if he is bidding on the domains representing himself, and no GoDaddy it is fine as long as he didn't have any inside information and paid for the auctions he won. The only problem is if his role was either shill bidding for GoDaddy, or using insider information to his advantage.

Brad

 

[Name Trader]

It doesn't really matter if he had inside information or not. It's the perception that he might have had. Which is why lotteries don't let their employees buy tickets, et al.

 

[bmugford]

It doesn't really matter if he had inside information or not. It's the perception that he might have had. Which is why lotteries don't let their employees buy tickets, et al.

I agree with that. It certainly doesn't look good for Adam, or GoDaddy regardless of the facts.

 

[JMJ]

Does this mean Reece can't bid on domains @ BQB.com? I think that'd be lame to prevent Reece from going after a neat domain just because he is the owner.

I don't see anything wrong with what the VP did unless he were being a shill.

Or RJ in the auctions here?

 

[GF]

Or RJ in the auctions here?

Exactly!

 

[deleted984054565403]

Dicker won some of the domains he bid for, and pushed up the bid price on auctions he didn't win.

Sounds to me like a bit of spin by the writer. :gl:

Assuming Dicker bid at arms-length, did not receive any benefits (e.g. discounts) from GoDaddy, and did not know what others were bidding (e.g. through going in the TDNAM system and looking at the high bid), AND GoDaddy did not encourage Dicker to bid or provide Dicker with any benefits that were not available to the general public, there is nothing wrong that occured.

However, the fact is that GD stood to profit off of Dicker bidding and winning (or bidding up other auction participants). Thus, I reiterate the problem does not lie with Dicker as it does with GoDaddy needing a policy that expressly states employees are not allowed to bid on TDNAM auctions. At the very least, GD should provide a full disclosure of its practices.

Sums up my viewpoint exactly.

 

[Easydoms]

Surely there must be terms and conditions in his employment not allowing this sort of practice, if this had been joe blogs in a normal job then would he be sitting at his desk today?

If he is guilty of something then let the appropiate people take action, then we will see how serious people take this issue.

 

[weblord]

where will you report the vp of one of the huge registrar btw? if icann is very slow in following up little complaints of end users how much more if they're dealing with godaddy?