IT.COM

discuss Have you ever been scammed by a domain broker?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Impact
139
For example:

A broker comes to inquire about one of your domain names and closes the deal for $5,000 (and takes your 20% commission)
In reality, the buyer paid $10,000 for the domain
You end up netting $4,000 and the broker gets a $5,000 difference and a $1,000 commission.


Several friends around me have personally experienced this kind of thing. After the transaction was completed,
They found the contact information of the buyer, contacted the buyer and learned the amount the buyer finally paid for the domain name, and found that they were scammed by the broker.

This may be the rule of the game in the domain name industry.

May I ask if you have encountered or heard of similar things, welcome to discuss.
 
12
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
How did you find out, where was it?
For the specific registrar in question, there was a section under "Buy and Sell" for Brokerage activities. That was a real surprise to me, as I didn't know about it until a few years ago. I never thought to check it, since I hadn't requested any brokerage activities.
Extremely unethical and dishonest, yes. Scam? No.
You are being paid as much as you asked.
In this case, I'm not sure about the unethical and dishonest part for the ones that weren't sold. It's possible that there are significant issues with some brokerages not being effective in reaching out to domain owners. There had been so much spam related to certain registrars and domains in the past, that that may have complicated issues.

For the ones that were sold without my knowledge and without my being paid, that's a very concerning matter. Did the brokerage actually do anything to verify that "negotiations were successful." Did they have any quality controls to make certain that actual correspondence happened?

And what happened with the payment that I was supposed to receive from the sale? Did the broker simply take that as well? I don't know, and the response from customer service was not at all reassuring. The incident apparently happened years ago, and there appeared to be no interest investigating any potential malfeasance here. My loss of the domain and any reimbursement appeared to be of no concern to them.

Brokerages would likely benefit by some basic quality assurance measures, to make certain that their brokers are doing their job properly. For the one successful brokerage transaction I had, I don't recall ever receiving a follow-up survey, to give feedback on the experience.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Use only trusted brokers. If they betray your trust, share it publicly. This is definitely extremely unethical and should not happen. A final transaction should definitely be visible to all parties.

The only situation where this would be okay in my opinion, is if someone finds a buyer themselves, contacts you as a buyer (not broker) and flips the name. Whether it's done in the initial transaction or a subsequent transaction wouldn't matter. In any other case it's dishonest and fraudulent.
 
19
•••
Use only trusted brokers. If they betray your trust, share it publicly. This is definitely extremely unethical and should not happen. A final transaction should definitely be visible to all parties.
So, other than using escrow.com with their transparency settings, are there any other brokerages that appear to have a clear track record of reliability and trustworthiness.

And, what are the qualifications for someone to become a domain broker? Is there any vetting, including criminal background checks? Do brokerage firms have quality management and fraud sections, to help eliminate any brokers especially who pretend that negotiations happened?

Again, there are probably some excellent, professional brokers on this forum. And they likely would appreciate if there were reasonable standards maintained in the industry.
 
0
•••
I think it happens all the time. We may be paying 2 or more commissions in most sales. Because endusers contact "trusted" companies, and let those middle guys handle everything. And this is why big marketplaces hide buyer info.
 
10
•••
For example:

A broker comes to inquire about one of your domain names and closes the deal for $5,000 (and takes your 20% commission)
In reality, the buyer paid $10,000 for the domain


*******************************************************

so please give us the names and the domains!
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I think it happens all the time. We may be paying 2 or more commissions in most sales. Because endusers contact "trusted" companies, and let those middle guys handle everything. And this is why big marketplaces hide buyer info.
That's a shame probably for the seller and buyer in some cases, if the markup is substantial. All the more reason that a service like escrow, with full transparency, makes sense.
 
3
•••
ITS CALLED FLIPPING ,SAME AS WITH HOUSES ,THEY CAN SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT TO YOU ,BUT BUYERS REALLY DONT CARE
If a real estate broker did this, it would be unethical. It's all about being up front and disclosing. No seller would sell through a broker for half of what the buyer is paying. Any "broker" who does this is unethical.
 
14
•••
If a real estate broker did this, it would be unethical. It's all about being up front and disclosing. No seller would sell through a broker for half of what the buyer is paying. Any "broker" who does this is unethical.
Agree.

The opening post here indicated the question of whether anyone had been scammed by a broker. Maybe an even more important question now is what brokerages, if any, are supporting full transparency? Are there any brokerages that now offer such reassurances? It seems to be an offering that would be welcomed for the industry, where the buyer and seller are fully informed and explicitly agree to the transaction.
 
0
•••
Agree.

The opening post here indicated the question of whether anyone had been scammed by a broker. Maybe an even more important question now is what brokerages, if any, are supporting full transparency? Are there any brokerages that now offer such reassurances? It seems to be an offering that would be welcomed for the industry, where the buyer and seller are fully informed and explicitly agree to the transaction.
That is precisely what I do through my firm, Brandovators. While there is full disclosure of pricing to each party, the principals do not always want to be identified publicly and the numbers may not always be publicly available. If either side was questioned independently, one would find the buy price and sell price to be the same. I can't imagine doing it any other way. It's the old, "do unto others" philosophy.

I know I would feel taken advantage of if a broker negotiated a price with me, and then negotiated a separate deal to get a higher price that did not benefit me while acting as my broker. On the other hand, if the broker is representing the buyer, then it is not unrealistic for the broker to negotiate the best price for the buyer client and their compensation could be added to the price that their client pays, but it would be unethical to represent both the buyer and seller in such a way as you cannot negotiate two clients against each other for the best financial outcome for both.
 
0
•••
That is precisely what I do through my firm, Brandovators. While there is full disclosure of pricing to each party, the principals do not always want to be identified publicly and the numbers may not always be publicly available. If either side was questioned independently, one would find the buy price and sell price to be the same. I can't imagine doing it any other way. It's the old, "do unto others" philosophy.
Yes, but even if you are an Eagle Scout and priest or imam, how can both parties be absolutely certain you are acting with integrity.

Would Escrow.com seems to be one of the best options to add, to allow for actual third-party independent verification? Or do you somehow manage to make the "honest transaction reassurance" some other way?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Yes, but even if you are an Eagle Scout and priest or imam, how can both parties be absolutely certain you are acting with integrity.

Would Escrow.com seems to be one of the best options to add, to allow for actual third-party independent verification? Or do you somehow manage to make the "honest transaction reassurance" some other way?
I guess I should have said that, but for me, it was a given that broker transactions go through a third party escrow service. My current choice for escrow is escrow.com.
 
6
•••
I guess I should have said that, but for me, it was a given that broker transactions go through a third party escrow service. My current choice for escrow is escrow.com.
Escrow.com certainly sounds like a great way to build trust between both parties. Thanks for sharing your perspective as a broker.
 
1
•••
Hard to know who to trust when you have some brokers front running and triggering udrps (Lumis), some getting scammed when trying to charge crazy million dollar commissions (vpn.com) and others working with those scammers at Epik like Saw.com
 
Last edited:
10
•••
For example:

A broker comes to inquire about one of your domain names and closes the deal for $5,000 (and takes your 20% commission)
In reality, the buyer paid $10,000 for the domain
You end up netting $4,000 and the broker gets a $5,000 difference and a $1,000 commission.


Several friends around me have personally experienced this kind of thing. After the transaction was completed,
They found the contact information of the buyer, contacted the buyer and learned the amount the buyer finally paid for the domain name, and found that they were scammed by the broker.

This may be the rule of the game in the domain name industry.

May I ask if you have encountered or heard of similar things, welcome to discuss.
Not going to mention any names here, as both proposed seller and "broker" have apologized to me. But I was offered a name for $25,000 that the broker has received a directive from the seller to approach me at $5,000. Not cool, funny story about how I found out about it, I confronted both parties after I found out (seller was upset also) and no harm other than to the brokers reputation. I didn't buy it.
 
23
•••
Not going to mention any names here, as both proposed seller and "broker" have apologized to me. But I was offered a name for $25,000 that the broker has received a directive from the seller to approach me at $5,000. Not cool, funny story about how I found out about it, I confronted both parties after I found out (seller was upset also) and no harm other than to the brokers reputation. I didn't buy it.
GOOD FOR YOU!!!

If the broker worked for a company, hopefully the company they were associated with was duly informed. You could share how puzzled you were about the broker using such creative selling tactics!

Perhaps that broker would be more suited to flipping burgers rather than domains?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
it would be unethical to represent both the buyer and seller in such a way as you cannot negotiate two clients against each other for the best financial outcome for both.

Mind you, depending on where you are located, this could not just be unethical but illegal.
 
12
•••
GOOD FOR YOU!!!

If the broker worked for a company, hopefully the company they were associated with was duly informed. You could share how puzzled you were about the broker using such creative selling tactics!

Perhaps that broker would be more suited to flipping burgers rather than domains?
There was another incident a year later. I severed ties with the broker; stayed with the registrar, and the broker apologized and stopped what he was trying to accomplish, which was enter into a very competitive venture against one of my main businesses. I understand now that their corporate counsel demanded that the incident "go away." I had no desire to get the person terminated or sue the organization; but just a real eye opening experience.
 
16
•••
There was another incident a year later. I severed ties with the broker; stayed with the registrar, and the broker apologized and stopped what he was trying to accomplish, which was enter into a very competitive venture against one of my main businesses. I understand now that their corporate counsel demanded that the incident "go away." I had no desire to get the person terminated or sue the organization; but just a real eye opening experience.
That was very kind of you, to not have the desire to see the broker terminated. The question is whether that individual will harm others who aren't are savvy as you are.

Hopefully, the registrar put the necessary oversight to prevent this from happening again.
 
Last edited:
7
•••
Domain spoofing is a form of phishing where an attacker impersonates a known business or person with fake website or email domain to fool people into the trusting them.
A domain broker who who fools people into trusting them is no better than that. Thank heavens for the honest ones, though...and escrow.com transparency to help promote that trust!
 
Last edited:
0
•••
No, I have never encountered this. When a broker reaches out to me they have connected me directly to the buyer, we then close the deal and when the transaction is finished I wire the broker his commission. There have also been times when the buyer and myself split the brokers commission. In both cases I am in direct contact with the buyer and the sale amount is fully disclosed to all parties.
 
9
•••
No, I have never encountered this. When a broker reaches out to me they have connected me directly to the buyer, we then close the deal and when the transaction is finished I wire the broker his commission. There have also been times when the buyer and myself split the brokers commission. In both cases I am in direct contact with the buyer and the sale amount is fully disclosed to all parties.
You are very wise, to work with only with brokerage arrangements that have the full transparency. Glad to hear about your good experiences.
 
0
•••
I've heard there are brokers who take commission from both sides - sell & buy.

Isn't that unethical?
 
10
•••
I've heard there are brokers who take commission from both sides - sell & buy.

Isn't that unethical?
If both sides agreed to split or pay the commission, that would be fine.

If the broker is duplicitous, and unwittingly charging both, that would perhaps not simply be unethical, but also potentially criminally fraudulent depending on how the contract is worded.

Hopefully, there are standards maintained at brokerages that provide very clear guidelines AND appropriate oversight, to make certain that the expectations and contractual obligations are being met.

An independent third party, such as Escrow.com, could eliminate any concerns about duplicitous actions. Their full transparency option for use with a broker would be a good reassurance, especially if the buyer and seller do their transactions directly through the Escrow.com website, not through links in emails sent by the broker.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
This may be the rule of the game in the domain name industry
 
1
•••
Back