.mobi RE-DO SEDO Mobi Auction !

[tophatter]

RE-DO SEDO Mobi Auction

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some may have fire in their eyes after reading the title of my thread.
I got screwed,had a meeting 5 minutes before auction end(extended) couldn't bid anymore.I blocked out time for this auction and as a result was unable to up my bid so was outbid in the end by $100. for the only name I wanted.Would the $$$ result for the name I bid on been different ,Yes ,however would I have won ??not sure...
Who thinks sedo should redo ????
I'm not saying it's a good idea I'm just tossing it out there to hear your opinions on a Friday evening.

Regards, Tophatter

 

[tophatter]

Very Interesting post Bald One. I will read this one a second time.

Regards

 

[allnicksgone]

.....provide the number of users that apparently suddenly logged on with 5 minutes to go to the end of the auction and show how this vast number (most probably less than 100 by the way) would bring their servers to crash (Sedo's term).

There were many more than 100 people viewing the auctions.

 

[TheBaldOne]

There were many more than 100 people viewing the auctions.

The problem required for a 'crash' is sudden influx, otherwise a 'slow down' would occur. But now it seems Sedo are saying neither of the above happened, obviously because they are aware that both can be proved not to have happened!

Sedo is clutching at straws, no doubt trying to get some kind of defence together, in the meantime, as always it would seem with Sedo, they are constantly contradicting themselves. Obviously that will not help their defence in court one little bit.

 

[allnicksgone]

The problem required for a 'crash' is sudden influx, otherwise a 'slow down' would occur. But now it seems Sedo are saying neither of the above happened, obviously because they are aware that both can be proved not to have happened!

Sedo is clutching at straws, no doubt trying to get some kind of defence together, in the meantime, as always it would seem with Sedo, they are constantly contradicting themselves. Obviously that will not help their defence in court one little bit.

The auction site was inaccessible during the last moments of the auction. I know because I tried. I'm sure it wasn't my imagination because I was in contact with others at the same time and they couldn't access it either. Nobody was able to place their last minute bids.

 

[dalem]

I won two names initially, Got confirmation of being the highest bidder on both names with two seperate emails. Although I did bid again and only got one of the names when they decided to RE-AUCTION(Illegal). Im not paying until this is sorted out.

 

[TheBaldOne]

allnicksgone, but what you describe is not 'a crash' and even sedo are now not claiming their system 'crashed'. This then brings into question what bids were being placed on the system (Sedo says they were) if nobody could get onto the system to place bids. They (Sedo) are contadicting themselves.

I am not disputing that you and others could not get onto the system, that I fully accept. What I am saying is that it proves 'negligence' on Sedo's behalf, firstly on the equipment being employed was faulty, secondly that they allowed the original auction to complete, thirdly that they then without authority or in law decided to auction goods (the domain names) that they were not empowered to do so thus being negligent. There are many other aspects as well where Sedo fall flat on their faces on this one. But please accept that I am not disputing your version of events that happened to you and others, I am saying that Sedo was in the very least negligent and subsequently acted in 'bad faith'.

Forgive some typing errors it is gone 3:15 am here in the UK!

 

[briman1970]

BaldOne,

This is one fantastic post! If I was one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs, I would base my case on this post! Rep left!

The only issue I don't think you covered is whether or not Sedo received warnings from it's customers (or anyone for that matter) that scheduling so many premium auctions to end at nearly the same time could be detrimental to everyone involved. We all know how Sedo tends to ignore the domaining community when it comes to taking even the simplest of suggestions. I hope Sedo wakes up on this one and realizes exactly who they are supposed to be serving.

Sedo will now try and pull the wool over peoples eyes, it is a common practice when lawyers have been brought in and we know Sedo lawyers have already tried via telephone to disuad one prospective plaintiff. (Strange that by the way that Sedo's lawyers know how to use the phone to contact winning bidders from the auction but Sedo staff running the auction don't seem to know how to contact the winners by using a telephone!)

All the plaintiffs have to do is prove negligence, and I am sure 90+% of us domainers can see negligence coming out of Sedo's ears on this one. However, Sedo will have been advised by their lawyers not to even contemplate re-running the auction because in a court of law that would be seen as an admission of guilt on the charge of negligence.

The 'system' is meant to have crashed some 5-10 minutes before the end of the auctions, but evidence is being brought forward suggesting there was not a crash but a slow-down in server speed (this could and likely would appear to some users as if the system wasn't working). However taking the crash scenario why was not an automated system in place to immediately 'halt' the auction and this displayed to users? Also the fact that Sedo's postings following the end of the auction time encouraged 'NEW' bidders to come to the auction and bid, this is damning evidence of 'bad faith practice'.

All it will take is one plaintiff ...

 

[allnicksgone]

allnicksgone, but what you describe is not 'a crash' and even sedo are now not claiming their system 'crashed'. This then brings into question what bids were being placed on the system (Sedo says they were) if nobody could get onto the system to place bids. They (Sedo) are contadicting themselves.

I am not disputing that you and others could not get onto the system, that I fully accept. What I am saying is that it proves 'negligence' on Sedo's behalf, firstly on the equipment being employed was faulty, secondly that they allowed the original auction to complete, thirdly that they then without authority or in law decided to auction goods (the domain names) that they were not empowered to do so thus being negligent. There are many other aspects as well where Sedo fall flat on their faces on this one. But please accept that I am not disputing your version of events that happened to you and others, I am saying that Sedo was in the very least negligent and subsequently acted in 'bad faith'.

Forgive some typing errors it is gone 3:15 am here in the UK!

Arguing over what is or isn't a crash, slowdown, or whatever, is a matter of meaningless semantics. Whatever it was prevented people from bidding.

But, yes, you are right. Sedo is negligent for allowing the problem to happen.

 

[accent]

All the plaintiffs have to do is prove negligence, and I am sure 90+% of us domainers can see negligence coming out of Sedo's ears on this one. However, Sedo will have been advised by their lawyers not to even contemplate re-running the auction because in a court of law that would be seen as an admission of guilt on the charge of negligence.

Two excellent points. But if they were negligent in emailing the contracts then are those contracts valid?

.....
At this moment Sedo will try and get the second auction winners to pay and to transfer the domains to them as quickly as possible so as to create the legal argument that the original winners should in essence sue the secondary winners and not Sedo

Another excellent point - and Alvaro, the winner of nearly half the dollar value in the auctions has posted that he wants to communicate with the first winners. It appears that he is reluctant to pay with this cloud hanging over the domains, probably has spoken to attorneys himself. If he can withhold payment because title is in dispute (bet he can) then Sedo has nothing to fight for.

The question is will this lead to the collapse of Sedo? I think it more than likely will.

I do not think so. Alvaro does not want to be the bad guy here and without him Sedo has no incentive to fight the first buyers. They will then have a negligence dispute with Mtld for less than a million, unless Mtld can claim that their, Mtld's, reputation was damaged by this mess. I think Sedo can take a million dollar hit and remain standing, perhaps they could even work it out with Mtld in barter for additional auctions.

The problem at the moment is that Sedo's management is in denial that they have made a major blunder. Of course they are - they have to keep their jobs above all else.

 

[DomainTalker]

Very well said, TheBaldOne...

Sedo should award the domains to the original winners NOW....

Its the lesser of the evils for them...

See my Post #69 here:

http://www.namepros.com/403721-i-feel-cheated-considering-legal-action-3.html

.

 

[connections]

Very well said, TheBaldOne...

Sedo should award the domains to the original winners NOW....

Its the lesser of the evils for them...

See my Post #69 here:

http://www.namepros.com/403721-i-feel-cheated-considering-legal-action-3.html

.

yet then if they award the domains to the original winners, the new winners would then sue SEDO.

The best option would be to re start all actions which had different winners at both points imo.