Located in Domain Registrar Reviews, started by HDmarketing, Jun 29, 2020
We just used "they" to refer to this user in a generic way.
Nick with upto 10 days of auction any user can create a lot of mess for other users before the 2 high bids are declined.
Automatically charging the next higest bidder kind of encourages people to take advantage of the system. Dont you think some other mechanic needs to be in place?
@Arfy made some very nice and practical suggestions, I think me and all other users would appreciate if you consider his suggestions
I confirm that Sav payment system is bugged as hell.
Yes Nick and others seem to be nice guys and many times they have jumped to solve different problems with their system for me. Which doesn't repeal the fact the payment system lags big time. I had few cases when my payment didn't go through and the auction was lost for the 2nd bidder, although the cards were working! Also many times adding new card doesn't work, etc etc.
Yeah, then ban me right away, because your payment system bugs are what causes my declines. Very fair business.
I hope someone finds out the identity of this shill bidder and clears sav from any alleged illegal activity
Hello All. Members in this thread have made some great suggestions that we will definitely take a look into for future improvements into the system.
If anyone is concerned about their card getting flagged by our fraud detection system like @golan is referring to, just reach out to our support team and we can lift that check for your account pending some additional verification.
Here, right now:
Whom shall i be bidding against?? Why start min 6.88?
How can I check past auctions in which I participated? No direct links in e-mail, no history in the panel.
Google it. Lookup your username/bidder id and Google for this:
I used it to track actions s_n_7cf63f was involved it.
Thanks, but it just so happens that the auction I was most looking for is not indexed...
lol, tough luck :P maybe try:
it never ceases to amaze me how certain crap names io or other across basically all markets
often end up with final price that makes no sense... and if bought by supposed reseller, then certainly ends up with price that leaves his with zero room for profit reselling it,
i think thread like this may offer some explanation why such things happen,
I have seen the user s_n_7cf63f in many auctions at Sav. In fact I was bidding against him for few names but I didn't go higher as I had a fixed price in my mind for each name which I guess saved my card from being (over)charged. I have won many names at Sav auction and my highest winning bid has been $12. So I think it is up to us to decide what is the maximum we ought to bid for any name. But I support the concerns raised by hagop and others & these must be properly resolved. BTW I can recall some auctions (specially for .co names) where bidding looked insane and made no sense to me, obviously s_n_7cf63f was involved in a few.
I'd suggest Sav team to take corrective measures for the present issues else we'll stop participating in its auction. Additionally I have two suggestions (which I had already conveyed to Sav over call)
1. Immediately incorporate the full time chat support on your website (it was available for few hours on random days).
2. Add paypal as a payment method to avoid card related issues.
The guy is alive and still bidding, not banned. Here are few current auctions:
a_k_santa monica_c78 $100.95
We pulled all the logs and saw that the majority of the auctions s_n_7cf63f bid on complete successfully, without any payment issues. Because of that, we have only banned the user from participating in any new auctions moving forward.
isnt the premise of this thread that he mostly did not pay? your statement contradicts op
We pulled the logs for every auction bid on by s_n_7cf63f and can confirm that the majority of auctions they bid on did complete successfully and s_n_7cf63f paid as expected. This thread only mentions a select number of auctions where that was not the case. Since we do require all bidders to be able to pay for the auctions right as they close we opted to prevent this user from participating in any future auctions.
How many times paid, as opposed not pay?
Anecdotal evidence seems point otherwise.
We are unable to release any specific auctions, numbers, success rates, etc... However we do understand the need for clarity on our policy so we be doing a new code push to auto ban anyone who wins an auction but is unable to pay upon completion more than once.
The user is exposed; The user is banned;
The user is a repeated non-payer
Why refuse to divulge; how many times, paid?
Leads me to believe; was a chronic non-payer.
Yikes! Who in their right mind would join a SAV auction now? Automatically charged the second highest bid amount if the winner doesn't pay? Madness! Have to question the legality of this practice but I guess the Ts and Cs negate that.
you expect anyone to take your word for granted after keeping a violator that happened to act in a way that financially was profiting SAV?
I asked @Nick R to disclose all the financial gains received from the immoral and illegal activities of this user and he chose to ignore that.
SAV also so far has not made any commitment to refund everyone that has been wronged by this user.
You fail to understand that banning him and not allowing this is just one issue. The other one is returning every penny to users that you charged the violators bid minus 1 dollar or in cases where he "lost", you pocketed all the money difference between the winning bid and the third bidder.
This is why I stopped bidding in SAV.
If they didn't hear customer's feedback then we should stop using them. That's it.
They should change the auction model.
Right after they add; Paypal, afternic, Sedo, and maybe, just maybe, update on DAN.
Didn't DAN permanently block them from the platform for some funny business?
I think SAV calls for one of those memes "how I see myself" vs "how others see me".
Yes, they won't do business with them. They started bad by somewhat copying Dan's landers which set some bad blood.
They supposedly sent them a cease and desist.
Separate names with a comma.