Spaceship.com - Marketplace Thread

[DomainRecap]

Spaceship.com recently launched a new Marketplace section, and as NamePros has given me the go-head, I think the company deserves its own thread for NP domain marketplace users to converse in.

https://www.spaceship.com/sellerhub/

Personally speaking, I will be setting up a new Spaceship.com account this weekend and going to work investigating its various features, options and policies.

 

[silentg]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1965395608816234957

 

[Marina Savina]

Can confirm this happens to me every time, too.

Hello, just tested and checked with our QA and manual import works as expected. The for sale page may not be turned on if the pricing is skipped, but in other scenarios should be enabled. If you still experience the issue, please share the username with me or report to our support when importing, so that dev team can check right away.

 

[Marina Savina]

What is "BrandStore"?

In a Login form, is option to login with Spaceship or Namecheap.

It's a searchable marketplace for sellerhub domains. It's in the early stages at the moment, will be coming soon:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1921100371516064065

 

[Marina Savina]

Hi @Marina Savina

Your webservers at 34.216.117.25 and 54.149.79.189 currently accept only HTTP connections on port 80 and do not support HTTPS on port 443. This creates a critical issue for TLDs on the HSTS preload list, such as the entire .app & .dev namespace, where HTTPS is mandatory.

As a result, customers with .app and .dev domains pointed to your webservers find that their landers fail to load. Even HTTP requests are blocked by browsers, as these TLDs require HTTPS, yet your infrastructure currently rejects (upgraded) HTTPS connections entirely.

Can you confirm when HTTPS support will be implemented on your landers to ensure compatibility with HSTS‑enforced TLDs? In 2025, providing HTTPS by default for sales landers should be considered standard practice anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Strict_Transport_Security

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Reference/Headers/Strict-Transport-Security

https://hstspreload.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.app_(top-level_domain)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.dev

Trying 34.216.117.25...
^C

Trying 54.149.79.189...
^C

Hello, our For sale landers support HTTPS by default from the very beginning, so a domain pointed to our SellerHub for sale page will have HTTPS. I have asked the team to look at the default HTTPs support for our default page which you referencing here.

 

[campout]

Do the LTOs show up in the reg path?

Also, I think down payment & other complications should be off by default. The default should be like Afternic and Dan, where the payments are spread evenly across the term. If people want down payments, let them click a box and further tweak things if they want.

 

[King]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1965504321069744398

 

[silentg]

You can sell a TLD that isn't supported by Spaceship:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1965536929945965011

 

[Jannes]

Aside from the fact that I couldn't save LTO settings, I was wondering why I need to specify the Full Price again. That's cumbersome. BIN is already present for all my domains, and it should take those values.

If full price = BIN, then I'm offering an interest-free payment plan. I'm not sure I want to do that, but if I do, I would like the system to emphasize (advertise) that aspect.

 

[Future Sensors]

If full price = BIN, then I'm offering an interest-free payment plan. I'm not sure I want to do that, but if I do, I would like the system to emphasize (advertise) that aspect.

That's indeed why other marketplaces maintain an automatic markup percentage for longer LTOs. But then that markup is calculated by the system, and I don't have to repeat my BIN price again. The way it's currently set up at SellerHub is quite cumbersome.

 

[Future Sensors]

I'd also suggest implementing pre‑filled dropdown menus, allowing LTO setup to be done entirely with the mouse rather than typing in every number.

 

[Future Sensors]

(I'm still holding out for a CSV option to configure LTO in bulk, but I'm happy to contribute to improving the current, cumbersome manual setup, even if I won't be using it myself.)

 

[Future Sensors]

In fact, only 1 LTO setting is important, and that's the number of months. With downpayment as an additional option. Therefore, try to configure the interface to focus solely on these main values. More settings are welcome of course, but these are advanced options and shouldn't unnecessarily hinder the basic setup.

Just a pull-down with months and an optional pull-down with downpayment% would be so much eassier.

Combined with my earlier suggestion:

• In General LTO Settings, you can define multiple default LTO configurations with different tiers, including the number of installments and any predefined down payments. When (manually) enabling LTO for a specific domain, these general defaults are populated/applied automatically, but you can override them as needed.

 

[Marina Savina]

Hello. For what purpose do already sold domains still remain on the "Domains" tab and are not moved to the "Sold" tab? Because of this, they keep showing up when I apply a filter - for example, when I search for domains with For Sale page → Off. Then already sold domains appear there, which are no longer mine and which I cannot change anyway. I think this is not logical, and this filter should not display already sold domains:
Show attachment 282422

Thanks for reporting. This is not an expected behavior. Passed to the team to check and correct it.

 

[Marina Savina]

In fact, only 1 LTO setting is important, and that's the number of months. With downpayment as an additional option. Therefore, try to configure the interface to focus solely on these main values. More settings are welcome of course, but these are advanced options and shouldn't unnecessarily hinder the basic setup.

Just a pull-down with months and an optional pull-down with downpayment% would be so much eassier.

Combined with my earlier suggestion:

• In General LTO Settings, you can define multiple default LTO configurations with different tiers, including the number of installments and any predefined down payments. When (manually) enabling LTO for a specific domain, these general defaults are populated/applied automatically, but you can override them as needed.

@Future Sensors Will reply here as summary to a few earlier suggestions on LTO:

1. General LTO settings will be added in the next iteration
2. LTO in .csv will be available as a part of bulk options that are coming next.
3. We will also make final and down payment optional.
4. Automatic BIN price use is under consideration at the moment
5. LTO terms will be embedded into the flow shortly both for seller and buyer.

 

[Marina Savina]

Also bulk name search for editing.

If Afternic is good at anything, it's their filter and bulk options.

Yep, our team is finalising LTO and will start looking into bulk search and sorting/filtering options in a couple of weeks.

 

[Marina Savina]

That's pretty darn ridiculous. I'm not comfortable manually handing over my bank account numbers and routing numbers. Why would they NOT have the option to store payout details??

it will be possible to add and store the details in the account, team is targeting to release in a month or so.

 

[Dane]

it will be possible to add and store the details in the account, team is targeting to release in a month or so.

Great, but it seems like quite a few core elements are just afterthoughts. Or no thoughts at all until we requested them here. Why is that?

 

[Marina Savina]

Great, but it seems like quite a few core elements are just afterthoughts. Or no thoughts at all until we requested them here. Why is that?

It may look like this, but that's not how it works. Most of the items that are mentioned here are defined and are consciously cut out of the initial scope to deliver core functionality faster. We deliver in stages and monitor both feedback and actual usage to define what needs to be picked up next. So by sharing the feedback here or via our feedback form on the site you actually help defining the roadmap and the next items that are important to you and other users. The more votes we get the faster item moves out from backlog to in progress.

 

[Future Sensors]

@Marina Savina If you allow me, I will only use this forum for suggestions.

 

[Dane]

It may look like this, but that's not how it works. Most of the items that are mentioned here are defined and are consciously cut out of the initial scope to deliver core functionality faster. We deliver in stages and monitor both feedback and actual usage to define what needs to be picked up next. So by sharing the feedback here or via our feedback form on the site you actually help defining the roadmap and the next items that are important to you and other users. The more votes we get the faster item moves out from backlog to in progress.

But some of these items are so simple. Like being able to sort our names. Seems odd that you would need to monitor feedback and usage to determine that we would like the ability to sort our names.