Let's discuss Andrew Rosener's idea of owners bidding in auctions

[equity78]

To give the idea it's own thread let's discuss the idea put forth by Andrew Rosener of @MediaOptions that owners would be allowed to bid on their own domain names at auction.

Andrew never stated to do it secretly or against an existing platform's TOS.

I don't see what Andrew sees, let's say I have a 4L.com Rayy.com, there are a bunch of backorders at $69 and the name is at $300 with Andrew in the lead.

I think $300 sucks, so I bid Andrew up, he counters back and this goes on in traditional bidding war style to $1,800. For this hypothetical no one else jumped in so it's just me the owner vs Andrew. I obviously have an advantage, I try to get Andrew to go to $1900 so I bid $1850 he has to go to $1900 to take the lead. He doesn't he says too much for that name I'll pass. I will the auction at NameJet. I pay them $1,850 and they send me back 90% of the $1,850.

I was certainly in an advantageous position compared to Andrew, without me, the owner, he wins at $300. No other person bid, only the person with a vested interest, the owner bid.

I have proposed a few exotic type auction ideas here at Namepros over the years, some have been allowed, some haven't. One I proposed that @Eric Lyon thought was interesting but decided against (I had no problem with that). Was an owner clawback option, where the owner does not participate in the auction but if it closes say at $500, the owner could say I want to callback my name and pay the winning bidder say 10 or 20%.

In that example the market would be fair, everyone bidding upfront would know that the owner had the option to clawback the name. It would be better than a reserve auction because there would be some monetary gain for participating and being top bidder as opposed to bidding all day on GoDaddy, not meeting reserve and the high bidder has nothing to show for their effort.

Just my opinion, what is your opinion?

 

[Chris Hydrick]

First and twotwo are proxy bidders for Chinese clients.

When the bid has not hit reserve any client of theirs can make a new bid. But when a reserve is met or the auction has no reserve they can only place a new bid only if the high bid is not already been made by one of their clients.

So according to the above hypothesis, the below example could be multiple people bidding as [first] trying to catch the reserve? Once the reserve is met, all other people bidding as [first] can no longer place a bid? If [first] wins, can their be an external bidding war on whichever chinese auctionhouse is using this alias? ie FIRST is the high NJ winner, but first1, first2, and first3 still must bid amongst each other to claim the domain? OR whomever made the high bid as first gets the domain, and no external auction is held?

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3710595

And in the below example, because boothcom keeps outbidding first, anybody bidding as first may place a high bid when first isn't winning?

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3696976

 

[Michael]

I don't believe NameBio records sales that don't meet reserve. Though there are still domainers, and services that may use this data, so there may be a trickle down effect.

I think NameBio does a pretty good job removing sales that don't go through. But as Tonecas said, they have a herculean task, so they also rely on tips from the public.

Notice the sale of Wi.com is not listed in NameBio?

Show attachment 71906


http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3903251&cat=
Show attachment 71905

Andrew states in the comments why the sale was cancelled. Notice there are no bids by first (besides a $69 backorder) More on the sale HERE

Show attachment 71904

Notice that XR.com isn't in NameBio? That's because It didn't meet reserve. There are a LOT of bids by twotwo, but only a $69 backorder by first.

http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3702841
Show attachment 71907


Every now and then you will notice cancelled auctions still listed in NameBio...
Show attachment 71911

This sale looks normal. Even 45 days after the auction ended.

Then the status changed to: We're sorry, this auction was cancelled.

http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3742705
Show attachment 71910


Another cancelled LL.com sale reported...
Show attachment 71913

http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3753443
Show attachment 71912


I don't believe NameBio reports sales under $100. But other sites such as DNPric.es do. So while you won't see sales reports for domains sold at $69 on NameJet such as where Seafoodman buys MediaOptions listing(s) at min. bid [example below] you will see these reported on sites like DNPric.es and other sales reporting services that report sales under $100. Example below.

Show attachment 71924

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3833209
Show attachment 71925
**I can't post any more images in this post. Limit reached.**

Other cancelled NJ sales still reported as sold on NameBio:

SOFT.com - cancelled - winning bidder: 20061218 - winning bid: $364,000
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3743497

UJE.com - cancelled - winning bidder: 20061218 - winning bid: $22,522
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3739873

CUFU.com - cancelled - winning bidder: 20061218 - winning bid $8,500
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3733992

The five cancelled (but still recorded) .com auctions above (JG, TP, SOFT, UJE, and CUFU) amount to over $2 million in reported NameJet sales.

****tagging @Michael so he can verify and remove from NameBio if these findings are confirmed.***

Thanks, I removed those records. Here are other auctions won by 20061218 that NJ hasn't marked as cancelled and appear to have actually gone through, and they're from around the same time period towards the end of 2015:

iSet.com: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3742085
ZiPao.com: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3742078
DGE.com: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3742006
JNB.com: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3734111
NYS.com: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3732710

All went to Baosheng Zhan shortly after the auction. There's a Chinese entrepreneur named Zhan Baosheng that registered the Tesla trademark in China and then sued Tesla Motors in the summer of 2014 for nearly $4 million and it was apparently settled out of court. Not sure if it was the same person, but seems likely as this "entrepreneur" lives in the same province as the WHOIS records show.

It's pretty hard to follow up on the cancelled auctions at NameJet because they take forever to update it, and sometimes just don't even bother. I have an auction that someone listed for me and the winner didn't pay, and it was four months ago and still doesn't show as cancelled.

We do record sales under $100 but we don't currently publish them. At some point we probably will, but the database of those just from the past two years is probably almost as large in terms of quantity as our entire database of $100+ sales from the past 20 years. So it isn't very practical to load them in when not many people will ever use them as comps. We also record NJ auctions that didn't meet reserve, but those aren't loaded into the site for obvious reasons.

So according to the above hypothesis, the below example could be multiple people bidding as [first] trying to catch the reserve? Once the reserve is met, all other people bidding as [first] can no longer place a bid? If [first] wins, can their be an external bidding war on whichever chinese auctionhouse is using this alias? ie FIRST is the high NJ winner, but first1, first2, and first3 still must bid amongst each other to claim the domain? OR whomever made the high bid as first gets the domain, and no external auction is held?

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3710595
Show attachment 71932


And in the below example, because boothcom keeps outbidding first, anybody bidding as first may place a high bid when first isn't winning?

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3696976
Show attachment 71933

The way it supposedly works is that people bidding on the Chinese proxy sites can continue bidding no matter what, so let's say they bid up to $2 million for an LL.com. But over on NJ, first is winning for $1 million, obviously first can't outbid itself so the auction ends there at NJ.

The Chinese marketplace gets paid $2 million by the winner, pays NJ $1 million, and pockets the rest. That's how they make money, when bidding on their own site exceeds the NJ bidding. It isn't like there's an external auction after the NJ auction is over, the auctions are happening simultaneously and that's how the Chinese sites know how much they can bid at NJ.

It still boggles my mind that auction houses allow this. The only one I know of that doesn't allow you to basically mirror their inventory on another auction site is GoDaddy, but I don't know if any accounts slipped through the cracks there.

 

[wwwweb]

Well looks like Media Options has acquired domain Sherpa for their own platform.

 

[NameOmnia]

Well looks like Media Options has acquired domain Sherpa for their own platform.

I was about to post the same....let's see

 

[Kingslayer]

Off subject but just looking on the Media Options site, obviously i know the company won't own all the domains on that site, but the company have got ties to some powerful domain assets, some of the best names I've seen linked to 1 company.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Off subject but just looking on the Media Options site, obviously i doubt the company owns all the domains on that site, but the company have got ties to some powerful domain assets, some of the best names I've seen linked to 1 company.

That's the kind of thing that makes one wonder, who are the real share holder(s) behind mediaoptions? And are they the same shareholder(s) behind internetrealestate.com?

Did you notice anything fishy about the testimonials listed on mediaoptions.com? I mentioned one of the possibly fishy testimonials HERE

I mean, if you are going to suggest owners bidding in their own domains, shouldn't everything and/or everyone be transparent? IE when domain holding companies include silent or undisclaimed owner(s)/affiliate(s) how can you be sure other representatives or owners of the domain aren't also bidding in the domain? Should there be a limit to how many of the domain owners / affiliates can bid on said domain?

 

[Chris Hydrick]

I know the Chinese during there uphill hype, often asked if this could be reported for a larger sum than paid.

If you sell domains for 5-7 figures, you would want to have domains sell for as high as possible, win win.

Would they ask you this directly or...? And/or do know you how a sale would go about being reported for more?

This got me thinking about the history of cancelled sale JG.com. It had a $4.5 million ask, then was pending sale prior to being auctioned on NameJet. Does the high ask make the buyer think they are getting a deal at $1 million? And how common is it for a buyer to disclose a previous asking price of a domain, and not actual purchase price?

[for JG.com] when you click here for more domains from this seller. It redirects to this featured auction: http://www.namejet.com/featuredauctions/1eeq2wcr

This sale looks normal. Even 45 days after the auction ended.

Then the status changed to: We're sorry, this auction was cancelled.

http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3742705

Prior to being auctioned on NameJet, on August 1st, 2015 JG.com was listed for sale on BrokerageFirm.com for $4,540,909



On August 23rd, 2015 JG was pending sale on brokeragefirm.com


On December 16th, 2015 JG.com sold on NameJet for over $1 million. This sale has since been cancelled.

April 15th, 2016 JG was parked with: as-drid-2891204616997147

WHOIS History from October 2015 for JG


At some point prior to the above WHOIS screenshot, JG was forwarded to Big Foot Ventues. (screenshot from 2009. Later screenshots appear to be BigFoot Venture affiliates)


BigFoot Ventures appears to be on HallOfShame.com for reverse domain name hijacking HERE

To recap asking price $4.5 million > pending sale > listed on NJ Auction > sells for $1.035 million > sale later reported as cancelled. > ??

Did the previous $4.5 million ask/pending sale influence a bidder and/or future buyer? Did the $1 million+ auction sale influence any other LL.com sales and/or any other possible sales of JG that may have occurred after the 2015 auction?

The reverse LL.com, GJ.com also has a brokeragefirm.com history.

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3710595

On August 1st, 2015 archive.or screen shot says, "This domain is no longer available."

On September 4th, 2015 GJ.com sells to bidder first for $694,095

On September 8th, 2015 Archive.org shows a screenshot of a $4,540,909 asking price from BrokerageFirm.com.

GJ WHOIS from November 2015



TP.com also has a BrokerageFirm.com history.

http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3753443

November 1st 2015 Archive.org has a screenshot of brokeragefirm.com asking $4,995,000


Historical WHOIS for TP.com


More about BrokerageFirm.com HERE at thedomains.com

 

[offthehandle]

This sort of market manipulation is probably the tip of the iceberg too.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

****tagging @Michael so he can verify and remove from NameBio if these findings are confirmed.***

Domain: Xiao.com

[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3562095
Winning Bid: $67,566
Winning Bidder: Jigga

Domain: Tuscany.com

[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3746127
Winning Bid: $25,100 according to NameJet now. $157,500 according to NameBio
Winning Bidder: Not sure, as the winning bid appears to be $157,500

Domain: Erotica.com

[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3746125
Winning Bid: $27,600 according to NameJet now. $80,000 according to NameBio
Widding Bidder: Not sure, as the winning bid appears to be $80,000

MD.org is still reported as sold on DNPric.es but it's not on NameBio.com.
[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3474643
History of the sale:
[the comments are interesting as always]
April 12th, 2013: [domainnamewire.com] HERE update that MD.org hit's $500k.
April 12th, 2013: [domaininvesting.com] HERE update that MD.org hit's $500k

Prior to the auction ending (according to the below comment that says it will end in a few minutes), Andrew Rosener vouches for both bidders by publicly commenting on domainnamewire.com, "This is a real sale. I know who both bidders are and they are both serious buyers who will pay if they win."



July 11th, 2013: NameJet files lawsuit over nonpaying bidder HERE [thedomains.com]
December 23rd, 2014: According to [thedomains.com] HERE Lawsuit is withdrawn; domain transferred.

March 1st, 2015: Parked. as-drid-2589541274288142
October 30th, 2017: Parked as-drid-2276071254012347

 

[domain hacks]

You have a lot of free time in your hands @Grilled
Good for you man, I hope you pull a big one from the swamp

 

[offthehandle]

No subsequent end user sales at all. That's sad. Great names too.

TP . com - Parked with a Trump Pense logo- no website

xiao . com - Parked

MD . org Parked.

Tuscany . com parked.

Erotica . com -Parked

jg . com china broker page "may be for sale"

regarding MD . org

from thedomains article:

"Although Ross was the buyer who agreed to purchase the domain name at issue, Plaintiffs believe Ross was a straw man acting as a proxy, agent, and co-conspirator with and for other undisclosed parties who are named as Does in this complaint.

 

[tonyk2000]

You have a lot of free time in your hands @Grilled

@Grilled you a doing a great job. Unfortunately many members do not pay enough attention to the results...
I was shocked to notice this after reading another related thread ("big news" reported) which appeared earlier today. Even thought of a fine French song "Tout va très bien, Madame la Marquise":

(translated from French, the beginning)

All Things Are Fine, My Fair Lady

Hello, hello, James any news?
I was away for fifteen days,
That's the reason why I'm calling
What will I find when I came back?

Everything is fine, my fair lady,
Business is good and life is well
We do not have any surprises
Apart from a tiny thing so far:

An incident, a small mistake,
The death of your favourite mare,
Apart from that, my fair lady,
Everything is fine, everything is fine!

... <some similar news missed to save forum space>

Hello, hello? Pascal, Pascal,
I think I'm losing my mind
Oh, what a shock
Tell me the truth at once
When the stable was a fire?

Everything is fine, beautiful lady
And we have good case
But you fate, as seen from a whim
Another surprise has presented

Burned down your house with stables together
When was burning all manor
And the rest, beautiful marquise
All right, all right


Full: http:// wikitranslate .org/wiki/All_Things_Are_Fine,_My_Fair_Lady

Sorry if offtopic, mods are very welcome to delete this post in this case...

 

[Michael]

Domain: Xiao.com
Show attachment 71978
[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3562095
Winning Bid: $67,566
Winning Bidder: Jigga

Domain: Tuscany.com
Show attachment 71980
[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3746127
Winning Bid: $25,100 according to NameJet now. $157,500 according to NameBio
Winning Bidder: Not sure, as the winning bid appears to be $157,500

Domain: Erotica.com
Show attachment 71983
[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3746125
Winning Bid: $27,600 according to NameJet now. $80,000 according to NameBio
Widding Bidder: Not sure, as the winning bid appears to be $80,000

MD.org is still reported as sold on DNPric.es but it's not on NameBio.com.
[Cancelled] http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3474643
History of the sale:
[the comments are interesting as always]
April 12th, 2013: [domainnamewire.com] HERE update that MD.org hit's $500k.
April 12th, 2013: [domaininvesting.com] HERE update that MD.org hit's $500k

Prior to the auction ending (according to the below comment that says it will end in a few minutes), Andrew Rosener vouches for both bidders by publicly commenting on domainnamewire.com, "This is a real sale. I know who both bidders are and they are both serious buyers who will pay if they win."

Show attachment 71979

July 11th, 2013: NameJet files lawsuit over nonpaying bidder HERE [thedomains.com]
December 23rd, 2014: According to [thedomains.com] HERE Lawsuit is withdrawn; domain transferred.

March 1st, 2015: Parked. as-drid-2589541274288142
October 30th, 2017: Parked as-drid-2276071254012347

The Tuscany.com confusion is probably related to how they handle NamesCon sales when the bidder is in the room and not actually bidding on the NameJet platform. I was in the room for that auction recording all the sales on a spreadsheet, our number is definitely correct.

NameJet listed it as complete in their monthly report they send to us and Ron Jackson, it said $157,500 paid on 2016-03-04 at 12pm. WHOIS changed around a week later.

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/domainsales/2016/20160413.htm

Same for Erotica.com, I personally watched it sell, they listed it as complete in their monthly report paid on 2016-03-04 at 2pm for $80k, and WHOIS changed about a week later.

Actually I just went back and checked my old NameJet reports, and TP.com was in there showing a payment date of 2016-02-09 at 5am for $929k. So I'm pretty sure that one actually did complete, not sure why NameJet has it listed as cancelled. I added that one back in. The other ones you mentioned in your previous post never actually showed up in any NameJet monthly reports so I left them out.

I removed Xiao.com as that was never in any NameJet monthly report and can't confirm from WHOIS history that it ever changed hands near the auction close date.

We had already removed MD.org a while ago thanks to a tip from Raymond Hackney. The winning bidder didn't pay, seller sued, and it was settled out of court so we'll never know if they paid the full amount or if they settled on another amount. Felt it was better to just not include it.

I think that covers everything you mentioned. Clearly the historic auction pages on NJ are not always accurate, I'm going to defer to the monthly reports they send of closed transactions $2k+.

 

[offthehandle]

Thank you for your valuable assistance @Michael and detailed responses.

Are there any databases you keep on sales to end users for development? It seems to me that the vast majority of NJ sales are made from domainer to domainer or to china.

Keep up the good work.

 

[Michael]

Thank you for your valuable assistance @Michael and detailed responses.

Are there any databases you keep on sales to end users for development? It seems to me that the vast majority of NJ sales are made from domainer to domainer or to china.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks for the kind words. It's often difficult to know when a sale is wholesale or retail, but they all get recorded to the same database regardless. I did a fairly long post below estimating that around 75% of our recorded sales are wholesale in terms of quantity (29% in terms of dollar volume):

https://www.namepros.com/threads/lo...word-domain-names.1045621/page-3#post-6398441

We've been playing around with ways of flagging sales as wholesale or retail to make it a searchable field, or at least putting them on a spectrum since it isn't always black and white, but haven't landed on anything really useful yet. It's especially difficult for venues that are a good mix of wholesale and retail like Sedo, not so hard when it is something like Drop Catch or Uniregistry.

That was part of the reason we created our game, to try and make sense of data like this. For example if there's a Sedo sale that all the best players guessed too low on, that could be an indicator that it was retail. Conversely if everyone guessed too high it was probably wholesale.

Retail sales on traditionally wholesale venues like NJ are definitely extremely, extremely rare though. That's good though, otherwise that would mean the market is getting too efficient to have us as middle-men

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Actually I just went back and checked my old NameJet reports, and TP.com was in there showing a payment date of 2016-02-09 at 5am for $929k. So I'm pretty sure that one actually did complete, not sure why NameJet has it listed as cancelled. I added that one back in.

Not sure why either TP.com is listed as cancelled either. Looking closer at it...

According to WHOXY, WHOIS updated 2016-02-11 to DomainCapital. (in line with the 2016-02-09 purchase date)

According to DomainCapital's director of operations Vince Harasymiak via domainsherpa HERE Domain Capital rarely buys domains on their own. He explains three main sets of services DomainCapital offers:

• Debt financing: Their max loan to value is around 60%. ie $100k financing = 60% ($60k) by domain capital and 40% ($40k) by the client. The buyer gets complete use of the domain while they are making payments. When the payment is complete ownership of the domain transfers from DomainCapital to the domain buyer.
• Portfolio Leveraged Loans: If a client needs capital for another investment such as real estate, they can go to domaincapital, agree to loan terms, transfer domain ownership to domaincapital, client retains full use of the domain, when payments are complete (or agreement is paid off in full) ownership transfers back to the client and/or new buyer.
• Partnered Deals: Client + DomainCapital does a deal together. No loan paid by client. DomainCapital lays down the lionshare of the capital. They try to sell the domain at a reserve. Once initial terms expire, they might flip it to a regular lease with monthly interest payments, or renew their partnership agreement and (assuming) continue to try to flip if for a profit.

Per DomainCapitals partner page HERE they have teamed up with NameJet to provide professionals, clients and companies the ability to acquire domain names including those that have expired.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Not sure why either TP.com is listed as cancelled either. Looking closer at it...

According to WHOXY, WHOIS updated 2016-02-11 to DomainCapital. (in line with the 2016-02-09 purchase date)

According to DomainCapital's director of operations Vince Harasymiak via domainsherpa HERE Domain Capital rarely buys domains on their own. He explains three main sets of services DomainCapital offers:

• Debt financing: Their max loan to value is around 60%. ie $100k financing = 60% ($60k) by domain capital and 40% ($40k) by the client. The buyer gets complete use of the domain while they are making payments. When the payment is complete ownership of the domain transfers from DomainCapital to the domain buyer.
• Portfolio Leveraged Loans: If a client needs capital for another investment such as real estate, they can go to domaincapital, agree to loan terms, transfer domain ownership to domaincapital, client retains full use of the domain, when payments are complete (or agreement is paid off in full) ownership transfers back to the client and/or new buyer.
• Partnered Deals: Client + DomainCapital does a deal together. No loan paid by client. DomainCapital lays down the lionshare of the capital. They try to sell the domain at a reserve. Once initial terms expire, they might flip it to a regular lease with monthly interest payments, or renew their partnership agreement and (assuming) continue to try to flip if for a profit.

Per DomainCapitals partner page HERE they have teamed up with NameJet to provide professionals, clients and companies the ability to acquire domain names including those that have expired.

DomainCapital has history with other LL.com's such as RH.com per a comment on domaininvesting.com HERE

The 2nd and 3rd subsets of the above screenshot are in response to somebody pointing out a possible conflict of interest. I think the commenter thought MO was brokering the domain for the seller, then bought it from the seller, then sold it to an enduser. Per the 1st comment subset, this wasn't the case.

 

[NameOmnia]

@Grilled

you are a machine!!!!!

 

[Name Trader]

My head's hurting with all this depth of concentration/understanding. Which in some cases is also contradictory. But thanks @Michael and @Grilled for this overload of information. There is also definitely a strong smell of fish.

 

[offthehandle]

https://www.namepros.com/threads/lo...word-domain-names.1045621/page-3#post-6398441

I am seemingly missing these important threads buried in all the hundreds of NP sales auctions in search. Or when I sort by domain discussion they don’t appear. I have to find a better way. Sorry about the duplicate question! Thank you.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

DomainCapital has history with other LL.com's such as RH.com per a comment on domaininvesting.com HERE

domaininvesting.com initially mentioned the sale of RH.com in a previous article that has since been removed. Archive.org cached that article HERE

In the article, Andrew declined to give the sale price, citing an NDA. That enduser sale price was later revealed to be $304k.

My head's hurting with all this depth of concentration/understanding.

My heads hurting as well. You've got around 10+ years more experience than me in this industry. I'm trying to piece together history based off of historical digital footprints. Obviously not as accurate as somebody who was actively engaged in the industry during those times.

The sale / trading / history of Pug.com confuses me.

WHOIS History:

Jul 13, 2015: Pablo Castro [[email protected]] - domaintools
Jul 14, 2015: Andrew Rosener [[email protected]] - domaintools
Aug 6, 2015: registrant: Andrew Rosener / Media Options [[email protected] / Oliver Hoger] - domaintools

Aug 17, 2015: Oliver Hoger [[email protected] / Oliver Hoger] -domaintools
Aug 24, 2015: Vince Harasymiak [Vince@DomainCapital.com] -domaintools
Nov 6, 2015: Oliver Hoger [[email protected]] - domaintools
Mar 21, 2016: Oliver Hoger [[email protected]] -whoxy
Mar 31, 2016: WHOIS Privacy -domaintools
Apr 30, 2016: WHOIS Privacy -domaintools
May 9, 2016: Oliver Hoger [[email protected]] -domaintools
Jun 2, 2016: WHOIS Privacy -domaintools

545 days ago - around May 4, 2016 [auction didn't meet reserve at $58,888]
http://www.namejet.com/pages/auctions/standarddetails.aspx?auctionid=3789138
Sold from NJ featured auction mediaoptions


540 days ago - around May 10, 2016 [private auction: reported sold on NameBio @ $61,000]
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3791922

There was a lively exchange on thedomains.com HERE where Andrew states (among other things) he traded 400 6N.com for Pug.com

While Pug.com was being sold from MediaOptions featured account, several 6N.coms were being sold from mediaoptions account as well. Including 396695.com which seafoodman bid his own auction up (essentially setting a $100 reserve on his no reserve auction)

**attached domaintools historical WHOIS report of PUG.com**

 

[offthehandle]

Wow @Grilled , sure seems you have uncovered a lot of skeletons in the closet. On Halloween too. Pun (Pug) intended. Will these revelations continue to haunt those involved? Did the 50x increase prediction made for 6N later become a nightmare for the buyers caught up in the hype?

 

[offthehandle]

http://paauctioneers.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/673/files/2011/08/a_closing_look_at_ucc_section_2.htm

UCC SECTION 2-328

Does the law allow sellers to bid on their own goods without disclosing this intention to the other bidders? No!

 

[offthehandle]

http://paauctioneers.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/673/files/2011/08/a_closing_look_at_ucc_section_2.htm


UCC SECTION 2-328

“A. Sellers Don’t Bid Without Notice.

When it comes to auctions, I think I’m pretty much like the next fellow. I always enjoy going. I get a charge from the thrill of the "hunt" for some new treasure to add to my collection, or closet, as the case may be. My competitive juices flow freely when I’m bidding on an item my wife or I really want. And I like things to be done fairly. I always obey the rules and I want everyone else to obey them, too.

Would you feel you were being treated fairly if the person you were bidding against for the bachelor’s chest you covet is its owner, the seller, and the seller’s intention to bid on her own goods was never announced to you and the other bidders at an auction? I certainly wouldn’t.

Do you think sellers should be able to bid on their own goods without revealing their intention to the other bidders at an auction? I don’t.

Does the law allow sellers to bid on their own goods without disclosing this intention to the other bidders? No!

"Says who?" asks a perturbed seller.

The drafters of the UCC do, and that’s the first rule, and by far the most important rule, in paragraph (4) of Section 2-328.”....

————

http://www.fasttalkingpodcast.com/n...tion-law-understanding-ucc-2-328-mike-brandly

Podcast at 18:00 talks about section 4.

=======/

Eat Your Own Dog Food; Sherpas Review Drew Rosener's Portfolio

https://www.namepros.com/threads/ea...herpas-review-drew-roseners-portfolio.847313/

We're joined by three Domain Sherpas: Adam Dicker, Andrew Rosener and Shane Cultra.

http://www.domainsherpa.com/review-20150209/

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Is SeaFoodman confirmed to be Andrew Rosener/MediaOption rep?

@anantj - Pretty sure you meant /MediaOptions (plural). Not sure what relevance this adds, but there is a NameJet bidder alias of singular MediaOption.

We have already seen examples of one person having multiple NameJet bidding alias, so it is possible mediaoptions [seafoodman] and mediaoption are connected. But it's also possible the singular bidding alias of MediaOption is completely unrelated to the plural. Nor do I think (or know) if this deserves much attention because I only found four examples of MediaOption alias bidding in NameJet public auctions.

http://web.archive.org/web/20160425...ctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3786155

All auctions (that I know of) where MediaOption bid. (I don't know who the seller was or which featured account it sold from)

http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3786517
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3790135
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3790140
http://www.namejet.com/Pages/Auctions/StandardDetails.aspx?auctionid=3786155