discuss Has Anyone Had HugeDomains Purchase their BrandBucket Names?

[The Rover]

This actually happened to a domain that I had listed on BB for a fair price. I say "fair" because I would have actually liked to have listed it for higher, but obviously BB puts a limit on the price for any particular domain. For obvious reasons, I won't disclose the domain, however, I'm curious if anyone has recently had any of their BrandBucket domains purchased by HugeDomains? When this happened to me, immediately after they purchased the domain, it was then listed on their Hugedomains marketplace for literally 3X the price than what was allowed to be listed on BrandBucket.

Things are really beginning to look increasingly wicked in this industry as of late. If others have experienced this, it would make me wonder how often they deploy this type of strategy. After reading this thread, it certainly appears that we need more transparency regarding TurnCommerce. With the (alleged) business practices of bidding up their own listings at DropCatch using foreign bots or whatever else, if proven true, would really explain how they would be able to pay higher prices for other domains, in addition to bidding up auctions on both GoDaddy and paying "premium" prices on BB.

We should be greatly concerned that literally 50-60% of the active, expired GoDaddy inventory is being snatched up (and artificially bid up) by TurnCommerce. With those type of numbers, this ain't capitalism at this point, folks. It would simply be a rotten monopoly at best (and at worst) potentially violating antitrust laws if any of the other alleged business practices are ever found to be true.

Thoughts?

 

[myfavorite]

, I'm curious as to what the significance would be in you knowing the specific domain?

Verifying what you said.

 

[The Rover]

There are many domains I dropped HD snapped, I dropped it because I changed my opinion about. They probably caught it because they see some value in it.

I was actually asking who else has had a domain purchased by HugeDomains, directly from BrandBucket, not whether they had picked up dropped domains.

 

[The Rover]

Verifying what you said.

Again, I don't have to disclose anything. However, if others wish to contribute and disclose a domain that was acquired by Hugedomains via BrandBucket, then they are obviously welcomed to. However so far, this thread has turned into "Hey, let's be skeptical of the very person who is asking honest questions". So in other words, it's a regular sh*tshow and business as usual.

Honestly, the mere fact that you and others seem so "skeptical" are actually validating my reasoning of why I even started this post. I too, found it a little odd..which is why I opened with asking if anyone else had experienced the same. Pretty straightforward.

 

[wurdd]

Was just wondering what it was and, who knows, might could've answered your question, moving on now.

 

[myfavorite]

The mere fact that you and others seem so "skeptical" are actually validating my reasoning of why I even started this post.

Here people mostly want information based on verifiable facts. I'm not necessary referring to you, but there are occasion where claims made by some were later discovered to be false.

 

[karmaco]

People are just happy when their domain sells and generally don’t care who bought it from a brandable marketplace. HugeDomains has somewhat of a monopoly. Not news and not anything that can be done about that.

 

[The Rover]

Here people mostly want information based on verifiable facts. I'm not necessary referring to you, but there are occasion where claims made by some were later discovered to be false.

Understandable, but is it really that difficult to believe that HugeDomains purchased a domain from BrandBucket? Sure, I find it a little odd, which is again why I was asking if anyone had the same happen to them. But at the end of day, I don't feel as if I have to have them validate or disclose the exact domain in order to validate the premise or possibility of other odd things going on.

 

[The Rover]

People are just happy when their domain sells and generally don’t care who bought it from a brandable marketplace. HugeDomains has somewhat of a monopoly. Not news and not anything that can be done about that.

I agree. It's sort of like the middle ages where the peasants are just happy to have crumbs. "Just be happy that you made that sale!" That's actually scarcity mentality. People are so blinded with ANY type of sale these days, that they run the risk of losing sight of a different strategy that could, in theory, be in play (if the accusations are true, that is) which could be hurting the industry in the long run. It's very naive, selfish, and short sighted thinking, imo.

As for TurnCommerce allegedly being a genuine monopoly, if they are indeed a serious monopoly, why should we be "ok" with that? This might sound like a crazy notion on this forum, but couldn't it very well be this "look the other way" thinking that allows monopolies to proliferate in the first place? At the very least, it certainly doesn't prohibit a corporation from growing dangerously large, if people continue to not care or feel as if there's nothing that can be done.

Again, I hope the accusations that we all have read over the years are false, but there's nothing wrong with discussing whether a corporation is out of bounds or not.

 

[domainer111]

...
3.) Many domain names with higher bids on DropCatch seem to be of shockingly poor quality.

Most likely those names have high backlinks, page rank or some other SEO thing going for them.

...
4.) Many here on NP (and other blogs) have expressed their concerns about TurnCommerce
5.) After reading these threads, I am now equally concerned and I wonder whether there's any validity to the accusations that others (not I) have directly accused them of.

I think they are only concerned because they can't get the domains they want, as Huge have grabbed them first.

 

[biggie]

I don't have to disclose anything

above, you don't have to disclose anything, when asked "what domain was sold"

yet, no one should be skeptical about what you're saying

so far, this thread has turned into "Hey, let's be skeptical of the very person who is asking honest questions". So in other words, it's a regular sh*tshow and business as usual.

you feel your questions are honest, but they are based on allegations posted by others who did not substantiate them or prove them to be true, as being a fact.

I haven't seen a posted list of names they supposedly won in GD auctions, or seen a list of names they supposedly bid the prices up on, within their platform.
so, there is reason to be skeptical

Honestly, the mere fact that you and others seem so "skeptical" are actually validating my reasoning of why I even started this post

one has to be skeptical of the allegations, until they are proven to be true.
it's like convicting someone for a crime, without evidence.
and there is nothing reasonable about that

but is it really that difficult to believe that HugeDomains purchased a domain from BrandBucket? Sure, I find it a little odd,

no, it not hard to believe that HD bought or even buys names from bb
nor is it hard to conceive that other domainers, may have purchased names there too
so, taking that into consideration, I find noting odd about that, especially since BB is a marketplace for anyone to buy names from.

what's odds to me, is that you seem to think they don't have right to buy names from wherever they see one that they like.
and because they bought yours from BB, then we should be suspicious of their motive for buying it and for buying it from that place, in particular

that's something i don't get.

It's sort of like the middle ages where the peasants are just happy to have crumbs. "Just be happy that you made that sale!" That's actually scarcity mentality. People are so blinded with ANY type of sale these days, that they run the risk of losing sight of a different strategy that could, in theory, be in play (if the accusations are true, that is) which could be hurting the industry in the long run. It's very naive, selfish, and short sighted thinking, imo.

it's not selfish, naïve or short sighted for one to be happy they got a sale

strategies are sometimes made public, but very few will divulge their own strategy for what they have their eyes on and how they go about getting it.
their buying strategies may be as closely guarded as their selling tactics.
i'm sure you can agree that statement can apply to anyone in the domaining community.

therefore, if HD has a new strategy or has put their eyes on a different group of prizes, then it is inline with the evolution of domainer tactics.
and with most means of accomplishments, once known, they will be copied.

there is no monopoly in buying, because if you have the money, then you can always outbid.
but if you don't sell what you buy then you either have to renew or drop.

if HD is buying 50% of GD expiring names and buying in it's own auctions and buying from bb, they they will have more decisions to make if those names don't sell when it's time to renew.

imo...

 

[Arfy]

.

 

[The Rover]

above, you don't have to disclose anything, when asked "what domain was sold"

yet, no one should be skeptical about what you're saying



you feel your questions are honest, but they are based on allegations posted by others who did not substantiate them or prove them to be true, as being a fact.

I haven't seen a posted list of names they supposedly won in GD auctions, or seen a list of names they supposedly bid the prices up on, within their platform.
so, there is reason to be skeptical



one has to be skeptical of the allegations, until they are proven to be true.
it's like convicting someone for a crime, without evidence.
and there is nothing reasonable about that




no, it not hard to believe that HD bought or even buys names from bb
nor is it hard to conceive that other domainers, may have purchased names there too
so, taking that into consideration, I find noting odd about that, especially since BB is a marketplace for anyone to buy names from.

what's odds to me, is that you seem to think they don't have right to buy names from wherever they see one that they like.
and because they bought yours from BB, then we should be suspicious of their motive for buying it and for buying it from that place, in particular

that's something i don't get.



it's not selfish, naïve or short sighted for one to be happy they got a sale

strategies are sometimes made public, but very few will divulge their own strategy for what they have their eyes on and how they go about getting it.
their buying strategies may be as closely guarded as their selling tactics.
i'm sure you can agree that statement can apply to anyone in the domaining community.

therefore, if HD has a new strategy or has put their eyes on a different group of prizes, then it is inline with the evolution of domainer tactics.
and with most means of accomplishments, once known, they will be copied.

there is no monopoly in buying, because if you have the money, then you can always outbid.
but if you don't sell what you buy then you either have to renew or drop.

if HD is buying 50% of GD expiring names and buying in it's own auctions and buying from bb, they they will have more decisions to make if those names don't sell when it's time to renew.

imo...

You seem to be having difficulty grasping basic economic concepts, or worse, you have an agenda to blindly defend a company that may (or may not) be a monopoly. You also seem to not be able to get your head beyond "making a sale" on BrandBucket. It's almost as if you're nearly trolling at this point. You're certainly not adding any substance to this thread, and you're not definitely not contributing by indicating whether you have had a domain sold on BB that was purchased by HD, or not. Afterall, that was the opening question, right? Right. Instead of walking away, you seem really hellbent on defending TurnCommerce. It's actually becoming kind of weird. I, on the other hand, have not acted in a way that is out of the ordinary when compared to the dozens of other threads right here on NP that have similar concerns regarding TurnCommerce. I simply opened a post asking legitimate questions. That is all.

As for the "allegations" of whether TurnCommerce is or isn't buying a large % of the expired listings, is that up for debate still? Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. Either way, I'd suggest that you do your homework before attempting to act like I am behaving like some lone individual posting outlandish, nonsensical questions or statements. There are plenty of other threads that go into great details about that very topic, along with detailed analysis of specific domains that were allegedly acquired.

As I have already stated multiple times above, this has nothing to do with whether they have a "right" to purchase domains or not. Yet here you are, acting as if I said that they don't have a right. Try reading what I have typed as opposed to spouting the same tiring retorts that don't even address the specifics of what I have stated above.

In a final summary (because I'm done repeating myself to you) I was simply wanting to engage in a conversation that discussed whether anyone else has has a domain purchased on BB by TurnCommerce. PERFECTLY legit question and yet here you are, injecting nonsense into the thread and acting as if I'm some loon asking an outlandish question. I was also wanting to discuss the strategy of both "why" and "how" they have possibly changed their buying strategy, and perhaps how they are able to sustain such a strategy, if that is indeed true. I was also open to discussing whether anyone had any more insights into many of the alleged accusations of TurnCommerce behaving nefariously on their own DropCatch auctions. Yet here you are, swooping into the thread attempting to throw down a blind defense of this company. You literally typed that
"there is no monopoly in buying, because if you have the money, then you can always outbid." Do you know how asinine that statement is? Personally, I have no idea whether they are a monopoly or not. I need more evidence. Which is again, precisely why I wanted to engage with others to hear more about their experiences. Judging from other threads, things certainly look a little concerning, I will say that much. Another member here even stated on this thread "yeah that's not news, they have been a monopoly for a while".

Let's not get things twisted here. There is always a chance for monopolies to form, in virtually any industry. That is a simple fact. Regardless if you personally think that TurnCommerce is or isn't, when studying the history of other corporations that have turned into legitimate monopolies, I would suggest that you learn more about their origins, sales patterns, strategies, acquisition rates, and tendency to often funnel funds via unethical means. However, according to you, everything is 100% fine in this industry, right? Just be happy you made that sale and move on, right? Nothing to see here, right? That's hysterical stuff.

 

[The Rover]

If you're not going to disclose the name it is difficult to gauge the "practice" you speak of. Let me explain using the following scenarios, why disclosing the name matters:

1) If HD bought brandidlydoo.com for $2,000 and have it on sale for $6,000, then we might conclude that there is no dodgy practice going on here and you probably got a good deal.

2) Conversely, if HD bought a very good 3 letter .com for $20,000 and are listing it for $60,000 then we might investigate to see whether there is a similar pattern with other names as the name should have been listed for higher and HD got a great deal and they have a very good chance of making $40k in a short space.

If you just want to know who else has sold a domain to HD via BB then fair enough but I thought the whole point of the questions is to figure out if there is a systematic methodology behind this.

Thanks for replying but again, that's not really the point here. I have already addressed why disclosing this specific domain isn't necessary for engaging in this discussion. Also, I have already stated the pricing difference in regards to what they bought it for and what they are now selling it for on HD.

 

[The Rover]

Since I keep having to repeat myself, if anyone has had a domain sold via BrandBucket that was purchased by TurnCommerce, feel free to say so on this thread. If you'd like to post the specific domain, that's completely up to you, but obviously not needed in order to have a general discussion. As others have stated, most folks don't wish to disclose sales data, including myself.

For those skeptics out there, feel free to spend your time using one of the many nameserver history tools out there, and it's possible that you may find a few specific domains that were in fact acquired by TurnCommerce, or you may find more than a few. I don't have the data on this, which is why I even opened this post to begin with.

For anyone who wishes to propose any theories as to how TC could hypothetically sustain the strategy of buying "retail" en masse (if that's even true) considering their overhead, I'd be interested in hearing your opinions.

I'm also interested in hearing whether you think that they are purposely overpaying on GD auctions and/or whether you think they are able to do so via upping bids on DropCatch or not. Again, i want to be crystal clear that these are all allegations not by me, rather these are allegations that have been made by others on NP and various blogs etc. Personally, I don't have a solid opinion as of now, in regards to TurnCommerce. If some of the data found here on NP and other blogs is indeed true, then yes, I do think things look a bit concerning. I also understand that it's not really new "news" (which that in and of itself should be concerning). However, I am simply wanting more information, as I have noticed an sharp increase in strange activity on the auctions. Feel free to search other threads if you're needing more analysis specifically pertaining to the % of domains that are being acquired by TC via of the GD auctions.

 

[BrandCougar]

"Macro View" -

HD's aggressive acquisition strategy is creating scarcity and with scarcity (on a macro scale) will be a catalyst for market pricing increases over time. (sort of like in coin collecting)

@The Rover - Is this not a positive?

I agree - on the buy side it makes it more difficult to acquire inventory, but this economic impact would develop a vacuum and would increase prices in parallel on the sell side of a market.

The odds of HD imploding is more likely than the odds of HD becoming the only single source provider. (not in our lifetime)

Now if HD acquired BB and ALL the sales channels available on the market to us and THEN locked us all out from advertising on any available site on the internet, now that would be a concern.

Inventory acquisition does not constitute a monopoly, that's called a "collection".

However, sales channel access and the inability to participate (advertise or sell) in a market would be more concerning.

-Cougar

 

[branding]

Why would it be so hard for them to make the economics work on some retail purchases?

They may be doing it to cater to current clientele, owning similar domains. There are lots of reasons why this would make sense.

Anyway, never noticed them purchasing BB or other premiums so that's interesting. I'm not that harsh on them as they certainly are very end-user focused. Their names are affordable. Their pricing structure makes more sense than a lot of the prices you'd get quoted by domainers for names of similar value. In that sense they're actually helping the industry.

I read a lot about them over the years but the only thing that would concern me is if indeed they were bidding on backordered domains being auctioned within their own platform.

 

[The Rover]

"Macro View" -

HD's aggressive acquisition strategy is creating scarcity and with scarcity (on a macro scale) will be a catalyst for market pricing increases over time. (sort of like in coin collecting)

@The Rover - Is this not a positive?

I agree - on the buy side it makes it more difficult to acquire inventory, but this economic impact would develop a vacuum and would increase prices in parallel on the sell side of a market.

The odds of HD imploding is more likely than the odds of HD becoming the only single source provider. (not in our lifetime)

Now if HD acquired BB and ALL the sales channels available on the market to us and THEN locked us all out from advertising on any available site on the internet, now that would be a concern.

Inventory acquisition does not constitute a monopoly, that's called a "collection".

However, sales channel access and the inability to participate (advertise or sell) in a market would be more concerning.

-Cougar

Interesting points and I truly appreciate your comments.

On the flip side, I'm not entirely sure that creating the perception of scarcity is actually healthy for any market. Since .com's are a finite commodity (TC mainly seems to acquire .coms), it's a concern when one company is acquiring such a large % of the inventory. If one entity is acquiring 50% of the GD expired auction inventory, it can be argued that they are manipulating the market by creating the illusion that many lesser quality domains are worth much higher prices than they actually are.

Some of the accusations that have been thrown around, is that they are intentionally overpaying for this inventory. Which begs the question how and why would they do that? Organically speaking, a company would prefer to pay no more than they have to, and therefore wouldn't really be able to consistently artificially inflate prices en masse...unless there is a more dubious method to the madness.

There are several threads here on NP which claim to have evidence to believe that they are intentionally posting extremely high bids on very average names on GD auctions, and that the only reason they can afford to pay such ridiculously high prices, is directly due to the additional revenue TurnCommerce receives by unethically bidding up their own auctions on DropCatch. If that's true (again this is alleged) then essentially many domainers are funding their own competition and I can't see how anyone would be "ok" with that. Now, whether that is indeed true or not, there's no arguing that 50% of GD inventory is substantial.

I appreciate the discussion!

 

[BrandCougar]

@The Rover -

I agree - it's an interesting discussion.

Overpaying does not create scarcity, nor does overpricing..

Scarcity is based on supply, not pricing.

Along those lines, HD's collection of domains is like Jay Leno's collection of antique cars. Enviable - yes, but as long as the "collecting" practices does not prohibit others from selling their inventory, I don't see it as a limiting my assets value.

From my view, this is a simple Supply & Demand model. If they continue to collect, then scarcity (on a macro level) will likely increase the value of our assets, not reduce or hinder their value.

HD's acquisition of BB inventory would have a positive impact to listing and selling on the BB site. It would not reduce the value of the remaining inventory on BB.

If, however, HD purchased every sales channel that existed and then kicked us off every single site and, in the process, prohibited us from selling then oh-snap, that would be monopolizing access to customers (unfair benefit to HD and antitrust worthy).

Sales channel access is the kingdom. Inventory is an asset, not a market.

-Cougar

 

[biggie]

Instead of walking away, you seem really hellbent on defending TurnCommerce. It's actually becoming kind of weird.

you would probably like for me to just walk away
but I won't, until I've had my say
and I may keep coming back, depending on what you post after

You seem to be having difficulty grasping basic economic concepts, or worse, you have an agenda to blindly defend a company that may (or may not) be a monopoly. You also seem to not be able to get your head beyond "making a sale" on BrandBucket. It's almost as if you're nearly trolling at this point. You're certainly not adding any substance to this thread,

definitely not trolling, just expressing common sense
it's not about defending hd or tc or whoever you want to call them
it's about defending the principle, that you don't convict people based on allegations or rumors.

if you was the one that all the posts were about and folks were slinging unsubstantiated allegations against you and your practices, how would you like it?
maybe you would appreciate someone who said wait "lets get the facts first", before we condemn him or shun him or have someone oversee him

Let's not get things twisted here. There is always a chance for monopolies to form, in virtually any industry. That is a simple fact. Regardless if you personally think that TurnCommerce is or isn't, when studying the history of other corporations that have turned into legitimate monopolies, I would suggest that you learn more about their origins, sales patterns, strategies, acquisition rates, and tendency to often funnel funds via unethical means. However, according to you, everything is 100% fine in this industry, right?

what you're alluding to, by comparing tc with what other companies do or have done or may have done, and by use of phrase "often channel funds via unethical means" is, to again, make an unproven association in how they may be doing business.

i'm no lawyer, but i'm pretty sure that in a court of law, such statements would be objected to and certainly wouldn't be allowed in the record, without proof.

imo….

 

[The Rover]

@The Rover -

I agree - it's an interesting discussion.

Overpaying does not create scarcity, nor does overpricing..

Scarcity is based on supply, not pricing.

Along those lines, HD's collection of domains is like Jay Leno's collection of antique cars. Enviable - yes, but as long as the "collecting" practices does not prohibit others from selling their inventory, I don't see it as a limiting my assets value.

From my view, this is a simple Supply & Demand model. If they continue to collect, then scarcity (on a macro level) will likely increase the value of our assets, not reduce or hinder their value.

HD's acquisition of BB inventory would have a positive impact to those listing and selling on the BB site. It would not reduce the value of the remaining inventory on BB.

If, however, HD purchased every sales channel that existed and then kicked us off every single site and, in the process, prohibited us from selling then oh-snap, that would be monopolizing access to customers (unfair benefit to HD and antitrust worthy).

Sales channel access is the kingdom. Inventory is an asset, not a market.

-Cougar

Although I don't necessarily agree with every one of your points, I do appreciate your insight. When bidding up domain prices, if one particular company is found to be continuously posting ridiculously high bids (often times 2-3x the last highest bid when the clock is under 4 minutes) then I'm not sure I'm ok with that; mainly because that doesn't reflect an organic free market. You have a single company literally scooping up domains at prices that nearly everyone else is either not capable or willing to pay. If they are truly doing this, then I think you're skirting into dangerously close territory where antitrust laws would normally come into play, particularly If you compare those types of actions with the actions of corporations that have been historically slapped.

Do you have any opinions in regards to the allegations as to whether the only reason they can afford to pay such high prices and buy 50% of the inventory, is directly due to their alleged funneling via artificially increasing bids on their platform? (ie: DropCatch)

 

[The Rover]

you would probably like for me to just walk away
but I won't, until I've had my say
and I may keep coming back, depending on what you post after

I could care less what you do, this a public forum. imo, you're just acting like a child.

it's about defending the principle, that you don't convict people based on allegations or rumors.

No one here on this thread is "convicting" anyone. WTH are you even talking about?

if you was the one that all the posts were about and folks were slinging unsubstantiated allegations against you and your practices, how would you like it?
maybe you would appreciate someone who said wait "lets get the facts first", before we condemn him or shun him or have someone oversee him

Again, what exactly are you talking about? Would I "like it" if allegations were being discussed about me? What kind of question is that? Of course I wouldn't "like" it. I would make every attempt to be transparent about my operations the best that I could, in an effort to mitigate such controversy. However, that being said, if you genuinely read anything that I have posted, I have stated numerous times that I personally am not accusing TurnCommerce of ANYTHING. I have stated (feel free read above once again) that after having learned of these allegations made by others, I am simply wanting to discuss these claims in a public forum. There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing so, and myself and others have stated, there are many other threads that actually do directly accuse TurnCommerce of such practices, using all sorts of alleged analysis. This thread isn't an example of that. Yet here you are, injecting yourself into this thread like some sort of mini dictator claiming that I shouldn't be discussing a particular topic.

what you're alluding to, by comparing tc with what other companies do or have done or may have done, and by use of phrase "often channel funds via unethical means" is, to again, make an unproven association in how they may be doing business. i'm no lawyer, but i'm pretty sure that in a court of law, such statements would be objected to and certainly wouldn't be allowed in the record, without proof.

So I am "alluding" now? I thought you said I was "accusing and convicting" a minute ago? Again, you seem to be unable to grasp what has been stated. I personally did not make any claims. How many times does this need to be repeated before you grasp this? These claims were made (and have been made) on various other threads here on NP and various other sources. There is nothing wrong with me asking others "HEY DO YOU THINK THIS CLAIM IS TRUE?" I don't know if you've noticed, but it's a rather important question. So now I'm suddenly now allowed to ask the question? It's a simple discussion. It's legitimate commentary. I'm not accusing anyone of anything.

Just because I am legitimately asking for opinions of the concerns that have been posted by others, doesn't mean that I am accusing or even alluding. I am simply a concerned domainer. If they are purchasing 50% of the GD inventory, am I happy about that? Likely not. However, if everything is done legally, there's really nothing that me or anyone else can do about it, right? As far as I know, TurnCommerce could be as pure as the driven snow. I have admitted that I don't have all the facts, and that's why I wanted to ask others of their opinion about the rumors that are floating around in the ether. You have already made your opinion. Loud and clear. So, stop trying to turn this thread into something that it's not. If you're really wanting to attack th

 

[wwwulff]

I would make every attempt to be transparent about my operations

You refused to give us the name that HD bought from you so we could verify if you are speaking the truth - I doubt and think you have a different agenda, so maybe you should follow your own advice.

On another note, HD is welcome to buy all my BB names I don't care who buys my names as long as they pay

 

[Chris Hydrick]

When this happened to me, immediately after they purchased the domain, it was then listed on their Hugedomains marketplace for literally 3X the price than what was allowed to be listed on BrandBucket.

Did you request a price increase from BB? If so, when was the price increase request submitted and when was the sale? I'm asking this because BB has let it be known in instances when a trending keyword or what not is more valuable that day, then when they reviewed it, as depicted by the market.

You are not obligated to list with them. You could have listed it anywhere else if you felt confident enough to ask the 3X that HugeDomains is allegedly offering it for.

I say allegedly due to your refusal to provide the facts. You're looking at this from your prospective that you've fully vetted your side for errors. Everybody else, who doesn't know the domain, sales date and etc, hasn't been afforded the opportunity to validate the alleged domain went from BB NameServers to HD NameServers without any chance of HD acquiring the domain via expiration process to include registrar expired auction or fully dropped domain.

Or, do you have additional information such as BB giving you enough info to indicate the buyer was HugeDomains?

Look, you don't have to share the details. Just as President Trump isn't obligated to share his tax returns, but if you or him, would like to gain the support of the people, you're going to have to try and be as transparent as possible. You might be weary to share a hot hidden keyword or whatever your reasoning is, then blur that part out, yet still provide the details one would have looked up, if the domain name was known.

It's like telling tech support you plugged in your laptop and it won't turn on. You'll show them the laptop, but you won't allow them to troubleshoot the power supply.... How would tech support know if you are using (a) the right cord (b) the cord is plugged into the wall (c) the cord has a short in it (d) anything else that an extra set of experienced eyes might see.

 

[The Rover]

You refused to give us the name that HD bought from you so we could verify if you are speakit w the truth - I doubt and think you have a different agenda, so maybe you should follow your own advice.

On another note, HD is welcome to buy all my BB names I don't care who buys my names as long as they pay

You're really conflating things. Rather sad. Btw, the only "agenda" I have was to merely find out the opinions of others and what they thought about TurnCommerce, and whether they have indeed had any domains that were acquired via BB. That's all.

 

[The Rover]

Did you request a price increase from BB? If so, when was the price increase request submitted and when was the sale? I'm asking this because BB has let it be known in instances when a trending keyword or what not is more valuable that day, then when they reviewed it, as depicted by the market.

You are not obligated to list with them. You could have listed it anywhere else if you felt confident enough to ask the 3X that HugeDomains is allegedly offering it for.

I say allegedly due to your refusal to provide the facts. You're looking at this from your prospective that you've fully vetted your side for errors. Everybody else, who doesn't know the domain, sales date and etc, hasn't been afforded the opportunity to (a) Validate the alleged domain went from BB NameServers to HD NameServers without any chance of HD acquiring the domain via expiration process to include registrar expired auction or fully dropped domain.

Or do you have additional information such as BB giving you enough info to indicate the buyer was HugeDomains.

Look, you don't have to share the details. Just as President Trump isn't obligated to share his tax returns, but if you or him, would like to gain the support of the people, you're going to have to try and be as transparent as possible. You might be weary to share a hot hidden keyword or whatever your reasoning is, then blur that part out, yet still provide the details one would have looked up, if the domain name was known.

It's like telling tech support you plugged in your laptop and it won't turn on. You'll show me the laptop, but you won't allow me to troubleshoot the cord.... How would tech support know if you are using (a) the right cord (b) the cord is plugged into the wall (c) the cord has a short in it (d) anything else that an extra set of eyes might see

Jesus, so now suddenly Trump and taxes are being injected into this discussion? Wow..

I was simply inquiring as to whether anyone else here has had any domains acquired via BB by TurnCommerce. Easy question right? I was also curious as to how others felt (in general) about the curious rumors floating around. Regardless of what specific domain that I had purchased by HD, it's clear that this thread has turned strangely upside down.

The specific domain that I sold doesn't matter when I am simply wanting a macro view (as another member above nicely put it). The fact that I did indeed have a domain that was acquired, really has no bearing on whether anyone can post that they too, have had a domain purchased by HD, nor should it prevent a general discussion. If you don't "believe" that HD purchased one of my domains, then I can't help you, nor do I care.