An important message from Snapnames

[ilovedomains]

poll results: more than 50% will continue to use snapnames/moniker/domainsponsor/etc...

lol, what a big surprise...

not !

Thats a badly worded poll. I'll use Moniker and Domain Sponsor, but I will only believe Snapnames arent crooked when I see the prices go down.

 

[stewie]

Let's hope the police are involved,or this guy is going to walk free maybe take a bonus for being a fall guy.


Snapnames is being investigated by Oversee.net ??? ound:

 

[zymic]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/181731/domain_auction_site_faces_shill_bidding_lawsuit.html
http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-...t_with_Class_Action_Lawsuit_for_Shill_Bidding
http://www.socaltech.com/snapnames_scandal_gets_first_lawsuit/s-0025116.html

 

[Credit]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/181731/domain_auction_site_faces_shill_bidding_lawsuit.html
http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-...t_with_Class_Action_Lawsuit_for_Shill_Bidding
http://www.socaltech.com/snapnames_scandal_gets_first_lawsuit/s-0025116.html

There's the first..

 

[Bill Roy]

I agree the poll is so badly worded it is all but useless except for propaganda for Oversee who will say that over half of domainers trust them, trust SnapNames, etc. I wonder how different the poll would be if it were worded something like "Do you think you will bid in auction on SnapNames within the next 12 months?"

One thing does strike me as odd about the poll results, the 'Yes' answer just keeps above the 50%. Now I would imagine that movement should be far more fluid than the approx. +/- 1.5% it has been for some time now, after all this is a very small sample being used (presently just 117), it just seems that as soon as the 'No' vote approaches the 50% then a few more 'Yes' votes suddenly are recorded. Perhaps I am just being over cautious, but in life I have learned that generally when you start smelling rats about it generally means they are lurking very close by.

Also it is noted that 'Oversees Rob' seems to be conspicuous by his/her lack of presence here today. Perhaps a change of heart might be occuring now that court papers have been filed and it looks like the federal agencise as well as the police might become involved.

 

[JMJ]

....

 

[south]

Perhaps my last post got lost in the shuffle. Anyone know who snap username "admin" is?

Noticed at least a few auctions I was in there he/she was bidding against me. It stikes me as very odd that any developer would allow that username by a standard user.

 

[denny007]

All big buyers do continue and will continue to buy at Snapnames. Maybe some $59 Joe will not, but nobody give a fok about him really.

 

[ydnaemsti]

I implemented my drop catching software in the last 3 days and it looks like I will use less of SnapNames.

Don't make fun of the $59 Joe, those domains if you have a head on your shoulders pay for itself in 1 month.
BTW, if the above is true, 50% drop in sales for any company is huge.

 

[Mike Cruz]

Don't make fun of the $59 Joe, those domains if you have a head on your shoulders pay for itself in 1 month.

YEAH! :upset:

:lol:

Although I have been spending alot more lately, mid xxx their and namejet high xxx

BTW, if the above is true, 50% drop in sales for any company is huge.

Exactly...

 

[denny007]

Don't make fun of the $59 Joe, those domains if you have a head on your shoulders pay for itself in 1 month.

Domain making $2/day RARELY remains undiscovered. And still it is usually just expired traffic which can live few weeks or few month, rarely years.

BTW, if the above is true, 50% drop in sales for any company is huge.

Well more likely remaining buyers will simply buy more. Most buyers is not limited by amount of money but by amount of opportunities. Should those 50% bugger off that will only mean there will be more opportunities for the rest.

There likely was a fall in sales but it was due to parking revenue falling off the cliff. If I want certain ROI and now the RPM is half I bid also half.

 

[ydnaemsti]

Domain making $2/day RARELY remains undiscovered

You would be surprised, but even if it lasts for 5 months that is investment * 5
On top of that I always sell those high to lawyers. Those are the ones where companies complain the most lol.

Well more likely remaining buyers will simply buy more

You seem to know what you're doing, but that statement was way off from a business stand point. "Remaining buyers" could buy more now if they had the money. They will buy 10% more max.

 

[Theo]

Strength is in numbers. Get your rebate money now that you can.

 

[denny007]

"Remaining buyers" could buy more now if they had the money. They will buy 10% more max.

I could be buying >500% more, the problem for every larger buyer I know is not lack of money but lack of oportunities in last couple of month.

One $100K/month buyer replaces 200 of $500/month buyers.

BTW not many people knew that Snapnames were tasting big chunk of the drop (thousands of domains every day) and those were available to buy mostly for $9 (some $19, some $29) I bought in 2 and half years over 6 thousands of such domains mostly for $9 (no one else bid) and the ROI was about 6 month (on type-ins

 

[Theo]

Anyone has a link to the actual lawsuit filing?

 

[Bill Roy]

There are several problems with the idea that high-rollers will simply take up the slack left in SnapNames customer base.

1) The number of domains that were not worth buying in the past have generally purchased by small buyers, those not yet used to the intricases of valuing domains, etc.. These, let us say 1/3rd of these rather than 1/2, will now not be bought by the high-rollers because they do not want to waste their money on them.

2) The fact that one shill account was reponsible for inflating so many domains valuations means that the income from these domains has effectively been cut by the removal of the shill bidding account. This has an immediate knock-on effect on other domain values because in our market a high percentage is based on relative values of domains.

3) Why would high-rollers in the industry suddenly be willing to 'lose' money by risking bidding at SnapNames where a problem is now known to exist rather than going to a competitor and using them.

4) The general executive of SnapNames has been shown at the very best to be absolutely incompetent in managing their company. Further more it is apparent that Oversee executives were totally nieve in not carrying out appropriate due diligence when taking over SnapNames. Combine these two facts and there is really no room for high-rollers to invest in SnapNames.

5) Parking revenue generally is going through the floor, therefore relative values of domains using this revenue as a guideline to valuation means that many domains are technically worth less now than they were a year ago. Therefore income for SnapNames was likely to fall anyway this year.

6) Both SnapNames and Oversee have already ended up in the civil courts with fillings of claims against them. It is likely that both will now become the centre of criminal investigations as well. These two facts do not augre well for either the parent or daughter company. Many valuable employees are likely to make sure that other companies are made aware of their willingness to transfer their experience and knowledge should the opportunity arise. Any such loss would further injur the ability of SnapNames/Oversees to operate effectively in the market.

7) High-rolling buyers are thus unlikely to chose SnapNames given any other reasonably similar opportunity for investment via a competitor of SnapNames/Oversee.


Having said this it is likely that many domainers, including high-rollers, will use this opportunity to grab individual opportunities that arise through SnapName's/Oversee's painful demise in this particular marketplace. These opportunites are likely to become fewer and fewer as time goes on as SnapNames/Oversee start having to use their financial resources/reserves to buy-off/settle at ever higher rates of compensation to those that have been defrauded and pay ever increasing legal bills, this will restrict their ability to operatre in the market against their competitors.

Just a few simple thoughts on points raised in the above posts.

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

Youd think 1 or 2 big buyers would have just bought out the registrars and auction spots themselves lol


No really....

 

[Equalizer]

There is a PR realese form the law firm somewhere in the net...
The news made it to pcworld.

 

[fab]

What a crazy poll!

 

[petrosc]

not crazy at all. I voted Yes, because I do not believe that Moniker had something to do with it and I will continue to do business with them. There would have been different results if the poll was asking specifically about SnapNames