For Sale Snapnames Non-paying bidders policy is absolutely horrid

[hotsauce]

Was in a bidding war with another person today and bid up a domain to $1250. Turns out my credit limit was topped out with that bid so my account was suspended. No problem I thought, I'll just add a fresh card and have the domain charged on that account. Unfortunately, by that time (30 minutes post-auction) they had already assigned it to the next highest bidder.

However, the second bidders card also failed to authorize and so a third bidder wound up getting the domain for $60!!!

I would have gladly paid $1250++ for the name but their inane policy now nets them $60. Even called them up to try and get the name back (the auction just ended 30 minutes ago!) and they told me there was no recourse.

 

[websitedeveloper]

what a lucky person that third highest bidder is!

i would be mad if it happend to me, but i think it's very honorable of them to do this... wonder how long until the policy is changed

 

[Jack Gordon]

remarkable!

No wonder they are on the verge of extinction...

 

[cambler]

Now imagine if you and the 2nd bidder had been in cahoots with the $60 guy, and you just made sure that the $60 guy got the name cheap...

 

[ExpireGuy]

Now imagine if you and the 2nd bidder had been in cahoots with the $60 guy, and you just made sure that the $60 guy got the name cheap...

Then the need for a third independant (legalized and authoritative) body would be warrented that would oversee the drops from a non bias plane. One that would protect both the dropcatcher and honest bidders...

I do agree that collaborative schilling is possible, but those dropcatchers also from this angle seem to leave the door open to "cahootsing" behind the scenes, but we can't really tell since bidders are relatively blind folded during the process.......by them.

 

[cambler]

No, I don't think it needs oversight. If you feel that Snap has problems, take it up with Snap. Same with any other drop-catcher.

eNom's public auction format removes the incentive for shill bidding, for example. If the high-bidder doesn't pay, the second-bidder doesn't automatically get it. This eliminates any incentive for collusion.

 

[gariben]

just offer $100 for the domain to the 3rd buyer.

you might be able to save $1100 dollars!!!!

 

[Luc]

No, I don't think it needs oversight. If you feel that Snap has problems, take it up with Snap. Same with any other drop-catcher.

eNom's public auction format removes the incentive for shill bidding, for example. If the high-bidder doesn't pay, the second-bidder doesn't automatically get it. This eliminates any incentive for collusion.

but what stops a greedy dropcatcher f(ex: pool) from jerking the bids on
their bidders?

if pool knows my top bid on a domain is $20k, i'm sure they will do everything
in their power to make sure i pay that $20k, even if the second highest bid
is $500.

i guess talk is cheap unless we have proof ehh? too bad we'll never see it...

the only way to go about business is to have a trusted third party
oversee the auction bids. this ensures that no one gets ripped off.

i seriously doubt this will ever happen...

luc l.

 

[Steen]

but what stops a greedy dropcatcher f(ex: pool) from jerking the bids on
their bidders?

if pool knows my top bid on a domain is $20k, i'm sure they will do everything
in their power to make sure i pay that $20k, even if the second highest bid
is $500.

i guess talk is cheap unless we have proof ehh? too bad we'll never see it...

the only way to go about business is to have a trusted third party
oversee the auction bids. this ensures that no one gets ripped off.

i seriously doubt this will ever happen...

luc l.

Verisign!

 

[ExpireGuy]

but what stops a greedy dropcatcher f(ex: pool) from jerking the bids on
their bidders?

From my knowledge, nothing. They run the show and they police it as well.

In referance to the theme at hand....Snapnames did the right thing.
I'll be the first to admit I loathe them due to my own biases against a company which in a span of hours of changing their model turned my "Cash" into "Credits" with out even a forsight as to what I would think about it in that regard.
However, while I can only assume through this example by hotsauce; whose intentions appear to be quite honourable. That it would be safe to say that this thread in all likely hood wouldn't exist. Had your credit card. On a name you bid on. Been kept up to date to process the transaction to begin with?
The rules implied by this meandering dropcatcher were adhered to from their end in this instance. The 3rd bidder who had the capital to back his bid was awarded the prize......but knowing the catcher in question, I'm sure this policy will be swept under the rug in a matter of weeks.
One only has to venture through the vast halls of DNF to figure out, that when it comes to the drop business doing the right thing is by no means the norm.

 

[Whois-Search]

They handled it better than Enom did over Kinko.com anyway

 

[cambler]

They handled it better than Enom did over Kinko.com anyway

Yeah, what ever happened to your spit and venom campaign to contact the legal department of the trademark holder and have them sue eNom?

Give up?

 

[Whois-Search]

Just like your spit and venom campaign against Snapnames and ICANN ?


Give up ?

 

[cambler]

You honestly think your tilting at windmills regarding drops is in the same league as working to reform ICANN?

That's some hubris.

 

[Mr Webname]

Okay you two - stop bringing your arguments into everyone else's threads - you want to scrap with one another, go find your own forum and do it there, otherwise find the "ignore" button.

3. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. We take politeness very seriously. You are welcome to challenge others points of view and opinions, but do so respectively and thoughtfully. Users caught flaming other users will have their accounts locked on sight, possibly with a temporary ban.

 

[Steen]

Andrew what is your problem?
Is there some sort of chip on someone's sholder here?

 

[strongvis]

No, I don't think it needs oversight. If you feel that Snap has problems, take it up with Snap. Same with any other drop-catcher.

eNom's public auction format removes the incentive for shill bidding, for example. If the high-bidder doesn't pay, the second-bidder doesn't automatically get it. This eliminates any incentive for collusion.

Collusion ? If there were collusion going on the 2 bidders would just agree PRIOR to bidding that they would not raise each others bids.

There's PLENTY of room for shill bidding in enoms system since no one actually sees the "names" or 'screen names' even of bidders. How do we know that an enom employee isn't just adding bids to "entice" another bid . . PLENTY of names have been moved back into auction lately at enom which makes this person go HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

 

[Steen]

Collusion ? If there were collusion going on the 2 bidders would just agree PRIOR to bidding that they would not raise each others bids.

There's PLENTY of room for shill bidding in enoms system since no one actually sees the "names" or 'screen names' even of bidders. How do we know that an enom employee isn't just adding bids to "entice" another bid . . PLENTY of names have been moved back into auction lately at enom which makes this person go HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

I don't question it at all, because you see so many are not good for their word when bidding on auctions.

 

[Whois-Search]

Enom is just another company who wants to make money. - a quick buck.

Before they auction it off they own the name - so they can sell it how and to who they like.

If customers stay and trust the system is another matter.

 

[Steen]

Enom is just another company who wants to make money. - a quick buck.

Before they auction it off they own the name - so they can sell it how and to who they like.

If customers stay and trust the system is another matter.

I quite like eNom myself, however they've started to head a bit downhill. I imagine it's too do with all these new reseller programs undercutting themselves.

:emba: I just with domains were still $30/ea and only came from a few sources.