For Sale Pool.com changes their auction mechanism

[mole]

I think this will discourage even the big players. Its good if you are after one or two specific names a year, but if you do this as a day on day hobby with 10+ names a day, you are essentially screwed. No games, just show your cash, win or die.

 

[GeorgeKGeorgeK is verified member.]

If other people overbid, that's fine by me, as eventually they'll run out of money, unless they're being funded by daddy. More money that they squander at Pool means less money that can be used in other venues....

 

[Edwin]

Yes, but the additional variable is transparency. If Pool has been getting whispers from the deepest pocketed players that they don't like the peanut gallery being able to see what they're bidding, this new system might be the solution.

Frankly, it probably only has to make sense (on average) to most of the top 5% of Pool "players" for Pool to come out a winner - regardless of the impact on the bidding strategies and patterns of the other 95% of their customers.

 

[GeorgeKGeorgeK is verified member.]

Right, I agree with you, Edwin, that there are too many peanut gallery non-bidders. But, their 'solution' sucks.

A better solution might have been to charge a non-refundable $1 fee to add domains to one's account. Credits can be issued if one has a track record of being the highest bidder (e.g. for every $10 spent, one can get one $1 credit --- a $500 purchase would give one 50 $1 credits to use to add names).

If 100 people were all in on an auction, that would be an extra $100 in income to Pool, minus the freebie credits. Multiply that by the hundreds or thousands of names that are worth catching each day....and it begins to be real money. arty:

 

[fxdogg]

If other people overbid, that's fine by me, as eventually they'll run out of money, QUOTE]


doesnt work like that
thats wishful thinking,
keep wishing... i did once

 

[DomainOgre]

Wow, is GoDaddy the only dropcatcher who hasnt changed anything recently? The last month or so has seen the drop catching game change drastically. Probably the most I have seen yet in over 2 years.

If GoDaddy changes or even if Club Drop raises their minmum bid from $10 plus reg fee, the little guy can pretty much pack up his things and go home.

Still not a fan of it yet, but surprised nobody has mentioned WLS in this thread yet lol.

 

[Anthony Ng]

I guess it could also lead to "surgical strike over-bidding" tactics by the big players ... and effectively stopped their competition gradually warming up to that particular name and bidding it all the way ...

Actually this is a VERY useful auction tactic that without a deep pocket like the big players I only use occasionally for some of the most beloved drops ... and very often succeed. But hey, I really shouldn't say more. Shhh ...

 

[HLK]

I think the old system worked just fine. Maybee the next step is to have all bidders send in a sample of their DNA. Thumbs down Pool..

 

[chatcher]

Yes, but the additional variable is transparency. If Pool has been getting whispers from the deepest pocketed players that they don't like the peanut gallery being able to see what they're bidding, this new system might be the solution.

I think privacy is the key reason for the change. The new model may reduce their overall income, but that may not be their main concern.

I think a lot of people are leery about Pool's operations. An auction operated by people who themselves invest in domain names is bad enough. Add to that the fact that they activate the domains on their own DNS and hold them long enough to sample the traffic (I'm not making the accusation that they do, but they easily could), meaning insiders could know more about the value of domain names than outsiders. Insiders could also have access to the popularity of each name based on the number of people backordering it. And now they will presumably be hiding the sale price from most participants.

Except for one detail, most of Pool's customers might very well abandon them. That one detail, the fact that they are the only place you can buy the many names they catch, means they can set the rules pretty much any way they want. It's one of those cases, like the old mining town company stores, where you do business with them not because you like to, but because you have to.

 

[fxdogg]

I think a lot of people are leery about Pool's operations. An auction operated by people who themselves invest in domain names is bad enough. .

i've never heard of this...

 

[actnow]

This new auction model will only reduce my activity at Pool.

 

[HLK]

This new auction model will only reduce my activity at Pool.

Ditto. The more you complicate things the bigger the turn off...

 

[ExpireGuy]

most of Pool's customers might very well abandon them.

....a huge plus for Snap, Enom, GD and NW when it comes to future patrons I guess. Maybe even a few others if you checked Yahoo. :wink:

What I'd give for a souped up DeLorean or even a used Tardis right about now.......

 

[internext]

Here is what Pool said to me when I wrote them and complained:

Our intent is to provide our customers with a more
private process that requires less monitoring and will remove most of the
last minute scrambling that occurs as auctions close.

Here is the rest:

Discussion Thread
---------------------------------------------------------------
Response (Jonathan) - 08/20/2004 10:38 AM
Hello;

Thank you for using Pool.com.

Thank you for your feedback as we do try our best to consider our customers
and their suggestions. Our intent is to provide our customers with a more
private process that requires less monitoring and will remove most of the
last minute scrambling that occurs as auctions close. Your Sealed Bid is the
amount you are ready to pay for the domain.

Customer (Eric Verona) - 08/20/2004 07:05 AM
This is a terrible new system that benefits no one but Pool, by forcing
users to submit maximum, high blind bids in Phase I, the highest of which
will be the starting point for the actual auction!

Regards,
Eric Verona

 

[clickmaster]

Great thread for my first post I've been noticing that Enom has been getting a lot more drops lately and my overall cost with them is generally less than with Pool. I think if Pool keeps this system I will start concentrating more on Enom now. I don't believe the privacy argument. This is greed, pure and simple. I'm pretty sure it will do more to hurt Pool than benefit them in the long run. I guess time will tell.

 

[pleasedelete]

If a rational bidder was to use this system, they would specify the most they were willing to pay in the first round. Then, in the second round they wouldn't offer a penny more (so, there is no point in the second round). If you offered less than you were really willing to pay (in the first round), then you would risk losing the name to others. The first round seems like a big money making move for Pool (however, some people might get lucky and win some great names that others didn't bid on because they were scared to waste their time). The second round helps make even more money off of unrational bidders.

 

[chatcher]

....a huge plus for Snap, Enom, GD and NW when it comes to future patrons I guess. Maybe even a few others if you checked Yahoo. :wink:

If by future patrons you mean people who want domain names, I don't see it that way. For any given name you want, you can only get it from the service that successfully catches it. You don't have the option of shopping around. Anyone serious about catching a dropping domain is going to be using all the possible services where the price of admission is less than the perceived value of the name.

If by future patrons you mean registrars, it makes sense that registrars would tend to affiliate with services that pay them the most, and an efficient market would tend to favor services who get the highest sale prices on the largest number of names. (But the proliferation of accredited registrars means registrars will be seeing a smaller and smaller share of the pie anyway, eventually to the point that it isn't worth the price of accreditation.)

If a rational bidder was to use this system, they would specify the most they were willing to pay in the first round. Then, in the second round they wouldn't offer a penny more (so, there is no point in the second round). If you offered less than you were really willing to pay (in the first round), then you would risk losing the name to others. The first round seems like a big money making move for Pool (however, some people might get lucky and win some great names that others didn't bid on because they were scared to waste their time). The second round helps make even more money off of unrational bidders.

In the scenario you describe, the "rational bidder" gets screwed every time. In a normal auction, you only have to pay what the second highest bidder thinks the item is worth, not what you do. That first bid at Pool is not a proxy bid! If you bid a million and the number two bidder bids a thousand, say good bye to a million bucks.

I used to be in the military surplus business and attended a lot of auctions. My favorite type was called a spot bid auction. It was like an on-the-spot sealed bid where everyone wrote down what they would pay for each item as it came up for bid, and the highest bid won the item. If you absolutely had to have the item, you had to bid high because you didn't know what the next guy might bid. But if you didn't much care whether you won it and bid low, you could walk away with some real bargains. Much more uncertainty than a normal English auction. The difference between that and a real sealed bid is that you always knew how much working capital you had left and could quit any time. Under Pool's new system, you have to split your available capital among all the auctions underway because you never know which ones you might win. Those with deeper pockets may actually pay less by weeding out some of the competition who can't afford to bid on as many names.

 

[Jernet]

Great for Pool, sucks for us. As if schilling could be made any easier. Now they really can set their own prices. Not to mention, now you have to wait 4 DAYS to possibly get the domain after initial notification.

This business just gets harder and harder for us little guys ;0(

 

[Domainut]

Less, no way I'm putting my max proxy in on all domains.

It' not a proxy. Read the email, it's your actual bid.

 

[ExpireGuy]

If by future patrons you mean people who want domain names, I don't see it that way. For any given name you want, you can only get it from the service that successfully catches it. You don't have the option of shopping around. Anyone serious about catching a dropping domain is going to be using all the possible services where the price of admission exceeds the value of the name.

I agree whole heartedly. Some don't have the options. Leads me to believe there is a niche market just waiting to be snagged.
As I stated.......... Yahoo?

(Sigh) Yes, Yes my observation falls under the mantra of "the sky is falling. the sky is falling" .........

250% domain price drop in a few weeks you say?...... and still no time machine.