Half-Million Dollar Transaction Lands Atop This Week's Domain Sales Leader Board

[Ron Jackson]

The new weekly domain sales report is out at DNJournal.com. A $500,000 deal, the 11th largest sale reported so far this year, led the way and helped Sedo pile up 10 of 20 entries on this week's leader board. .Coms had one of their most dominating outings of 2010, taking 17 of 20 positions on the all extension chart. You can get all of the details here:
http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/domainsales/2010/20101110.htm

 

[HeyNow]

With Snapnames' results still given credibility at DNJournal, I wonder if other results there are tainted. Obviously, to me, the publisher doesn't care, as long as some seemingly impressive sales results can be published. IMHO the publisher is more concerned with his own portfolio than thoroughly vetting the results. It flys in the face of logic to publish auction results from an admitted mass-fraudster, right?

Whatever, "caveat emptor."

 

[John Slaney]

With Snapnames' results still given credibility at DNJournal, I wonder if other results there are tainted. Obviously, to me, the publisher doesn't care, as long as some seemingly impressive sales results can be published. IMHO the publisher is more concerned with his own portfolio than thoroughly vetting the results. It flys in the face of logic to publish auction results from an admitted mass-fraudster, right?

Whatever, "caveat emptor."

It is not Ron's job to police domain sales. It's his job to report them.

Are some sales questionable? No doubt. But it how is he to know. His job is to publish the data he receives.

I don't see how he is "more concerned with his own portfolio".

 

[HeyNow]

I don't see how he is "more concerned with his own portfolio".

That's not my problem.

 

[shopperx]

I wouldn't take any of the information on these charts seriously, specially if you see the word "snapnames" next to the sold price.

Of course many sales are real but i have seen so many times, domains registered 1 or 2 weeks (even days) before the list is published "sell" for +$2K, the whois doesn't change or shows pending transfer forever.

Sometimes domains on those lists are available for registration like HIPACompliance.org which supposedly sold for $2,700 this week.

You can't contact every seller/buyer and ask them if the sale went through and for how much but at least you can check if the domain is available for registration.

 

[Archangel]

Some sales seem too outlandish to be true (CamRoulette.com, anyone?). Others fall through. It isn't his job to assure all sales went through or anything similar. He publishes data. That's it.

 

[Ron Jackson]

Sometimes domains on those lists are available for registration like HIPACompliance.org which supposedly sold for $2,700 this week.

Just saw this post. When you see an error like that it is almost always a typographical error made on our part when transcribing the data onto our charts. The domain that actually sold was HIPAACompliance.org. It was correctly reported to us by the AfternicDLS but we inadvertently dropped one of the A's when transcibing the information to our chart. We try to avoid such errors but when dealing with thousands of weekly sales they will inevitably happen from time to time. I don't have much time to read the forums anymore so often miss posts made here - so when errors like this are spotted it would be very helpful if they were called to my attention with an email to editor at dnjournal.com so we can get them corrected. My sole interest is in producing the most accurate report we possibly can from the mountain of sales reports that come in each week.

Regarding SnapNames results it is of course understandable if people have some trust issues with the company following the Nelson Brady scandal, but what people forget is that there never was a problem with the sales prices they reported - what was reported was what was paid for those names - the problem was that a lot of people paid more than they should have because of Brady's shill bidding activity.

 

[HeyNow]

Regarding SnapNames results it is of course understandable if people have some trust issues with the company following the Nelson Brady scandal, but what people forget is that there never was a problem with the sales prices they reported - what was reported was what was paid for those names - the problem was that a lot of people paid more than they should have because of Brady's shill bidding activity.

The fact that you refer to it as "... the Nelson Brady scandal ..., instead of "the Snapnames scandal," is very telling. Ron, in case you've been living under a rock, it flies in the face of logic that a reputable company would let a single employee perpetrate thousands of individual auction frauds over at least a four year period, without a clue that something was amiss.

To those domainers and other individuals defrauded by a company you continue to protect and deem reputable, you appear to consider your readers and current Snapnames customers idiots.