Geaney.com acquires SS.com for $1.25 million - Page 9 - DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars

**gorlov** · 03-18-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EG.domains

- Why ss.com whois still pointing to the seller?

It hasn't cleared escrow yet, as mentioned earlier in this thread.

**EG.domains** · 03-18-2008, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorlov

It hasn't cleared escrow yet, as mentioned earlier in this thread.

So if it hasn't cleared yet. Why he announced the sale and start receiving offers for domain he doesn't own it yet.

**acronym007** · 03-18-2008, 06:01 PM

All I know is that there is no way someone offered $2.5 mil the same day or a day after. Someone is lying. This goes beyond hype.

**PREDATOR** · 03-18-2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EG.domains

So if it hasn't cleared yet. Why he announced the sale and start receiving offers for domain he doesn't own it yet.

Because he's a freak, as established

**gorlov** · 03-18-2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EG.domains

So if it hasn't cleared yet. Why he announced the sale and start receiving offers for domain he doesn't own it yet.

Possibly because they had a contract. If looking at the information in this thread and the ss.com sales thread, it looks as if it went into escrow two days ago, max.
It doesn't clear escrow that fast. The earliest I would expect the new ownership to reflect in the whois is 2-3 days from now, if any previous experience with escrow.com is of any value.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acronym007

All I know is that there is no way someone offered $2.5 mil the same day or a day after. Someone is lying. This goes beyond hype.

We know the buyer is a freak. It's way too early to accuse the seller for being one (or the same). There is absolutely nothing so far that in my mind points towards the seller in this...

.

**wmloz** · 03-18-2008, 06:09 PM

It was [i]almost[i] clever. Also, has either seller or buyer posted about this anywhere? Another fraud is CLEK MEDIA who supposedly sold www.FUND.com. Yeah, FUND.com sold, but all indications are CLEK MEDIA didn't have anything to do with it. FRAUDS!!!

**acronym007** · 03-18-2008, 06:14 PM

Point we all know is that we don't need people or things like this to happen in our industry, especially now at this important juncture with the Snowe bill looming. Transparency is critical to our industry, we might as well all sign the Snowe bill ourselves if we don't have rules & ethics to keep ourselves in check. If industries don't police themselves then someone has to do it.

**Focus** · 03-18-2008, 06:35 PM

If I owned this name it would have been sold for a milly a looonnnnng time ago, lol
Hope it all works out for the seller..

**EG.domains** · 03-18-2008, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PREDATOR

Because he's a freak, as established

Sure he's a freak. Why someone register/acquire domains such as :

worldinternetwar.com
whatthe****areyoulookingat.com
ripoffmerchant.com
killsports.com
mindyourown****ingbusiness.com

**domainicanicanica** · 03-18-2008, 06:45 PM

So this "buyer" is already pumping a name he doesn't yet own. Golly. Certainly sounds like he's banking on some fool to complete his flip so he can pay off the current seller and make a few bucks too.

It'll never happen.

**wmloz** · 03-18-2008, 06:56 PM

Has Ron Jackson of DN Journal chimed in on this "alleged" sale?

**TheLegendaryJP** · 03-18-2008, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmloz

Has Ron Jackson of DN Journal chimed in on this "alleged" sale?

Why would he ?

Ron reports what has been given him after a deal is done, secondly at this level he would need solid proof, whois can change, both parties can say what they want but the fact is unless money changed hands and it can be proven its a no deal to dnj. Besides Ill go as far to say money can change hands on any sale domain or not and it still means nothing. This whole things casts doubt on the transaction regardless of proof.

**gorlov** · 03-18-2008, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLegendaryJP

This whole things casts doubt on the transaction regardless of proof.

I respect you when investigating stolen domains and domain fraud, but what do you base this on? The buyers behavior? If so, we need to start select buyers very carefully, if the buyers behavior is the measure of the legitimacy of a deal.
I reserve my judgment until I see something that implies shady behavior on the sellers part. So far I have seen none at all, only from the buyer.

.

**TheLegendaryJP** · 03-18-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorlov

I respect you when investigating stolen domains and domain fraud, but what do you base this on? The buyers behavior? If so, we need to start select buyers very carefully, if the buyers behavior is the measure of the legitimacy of a deal.
I reserve my judgment until I see something that implies shady behavior on the sellers part. So far I have seen none at all, only from the buyer.

.

I see where you are coming from, I tend to be sceptical. I statred out by saying many pages ago I hope they are not in on it together. The sellers silence and stupidity needed to go along with this stunt also tells me he is not involed. Why ? It would be a stupid way to get attention and his silence could just be his hope he will get paid. I do however stand behind my personal opinion any report on this name will not be met without some doubt.

He the seller allowed someone to make releases and advertise racist names based on nothing other than what exactly ? If it turns out and I think it may the seller got royally screwed I will say again as above he should sue the " buyer " .

**gorlov** · 03-18-2008, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLegendaryJP

I see where you are coming from, I tend to be sceptical. I statred out by saying many pages ago I hope they are not in on it together. The sellers silence and stupidity needed to go along with this stunt also tells me he is not involed. Why ? It would be a stupid way to get attention and his silence could just be his hope he will get paid. I do however stand behind my personal opinion any report on this name will not be met without some doubt.

He the seller allowed someone to make releases and advertise racist names based on nothing other than what exactly ? If it turns out and I think it may the seller got royally screwed I will say again as above he should sue the " buyer " .

Seller hasn't been online in this forum for almost 24 hours, he hasn't had a chance yet to reply in this thread to the accusations made. All outspoken accusations regarding seller has been made since he was last online, not before. I agree that the seller might be screwed, but not in it himself to hype the domain.

.

**wmloz** · 03-18-2008, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLegendaryJP

Why would he ?

Ron reports what has been given him after a deal is done, secondly at this level he would need solid proof, whois can change, both parties can say what they want but the fact is unless money changed hands and it can be proven its a no deal to dnj. Besides Ill go as far to say money can change hands on any sale domain or not and it still means nothing. This whole things casts doubt on the transaction regardless of proof.

Exactly why I asked if he'd chimed in on it ;-)

WmLoz

**Rockefeller** · 03-18-2008, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorlov

Seller hasn't been online in this forum for almost 24 hours, he hasn't had a chance yet to reply in this thread to the accusations made. All outspoken accusations regarding seller has been made since he was last online, not before. I agree that the seller might be screwed, but not in it himself to hype the domain.

.

He logged in yesterday and replied to the initial sales thread. This thread had 78 replies at the time. He's had a chance to reply.