Auction for FT.net

[ERCollins]

I was in this auction and wanted to buy this name, but due to couple of idiots running the bid upto and beyond $40,000 in a matter of minutes I did not get the chance to even place a reasonable bid.

I emailed the following letter to Snapnames, wanting to know why the name was not put back up for auction.

Summary: I need some support acct: ##### allias: ######
Please verify your email address...: [email protected]
Date Created: 09/18/2005 02:32 PM
Last Updated: 09/18/2005 02:32 PM
Status: Unresolved
Registrar:

Internal Notes



Discussion Thread
Customer 09/18/2005 02:32 PM
I am high and utterly pissed.

FT.net was a fraudulent auction, and you all let it go to one of the
idiots that
ran the price up.

5 mins into the auction they ran it to 40K giving no one else a chance
to bid.

Then you let one of them have it at 10k.


Is this how snapnames is going to operate in the future for fraud
auctions?


I should of had a fair chance to make my bids when that person was
removed and
the other bidder should of been removed as well for running the auction
up.


I might not be vaxis or quervo spending 50k a week there, but I deserve
the same
fair rights to be in the auctions I back order as everyone else.

else I will take my money to pool or enom.


EDwin Collins
Account: ########
alias: ########

I got this email in response:

Basically they gave it to there long time friend and person instead of giving all other bidders a fair chance at the name.

THIS IS FROM : [email protected]

There was one fraudulent bidder in the auction that set a high proxy and
cause the bidder to whom we gave the name to big up. He was willing to
pay to the point where he bid. We know this because he is a long time
customer and had paid us many thousands for names many times.
To you he may be an idiot, but he is a successful idiot and his bids
were legitimate. We have 2 options in such cases. Give the name to the
next bidder at the point were the prices is supported by another bidder
we know is good for that price, or we can re-run the auction. In our
experience re-running the auction is of no value because the other
bidders have already seen what this bidder is willing to pay and so most
do not even bother. If you in fact were willing to pay more than $40k
for the name then we definitely made the wrong choice. If it had been
you in the same situation and we knew you to be good for the bid we
would have treated you exactly the same. We do not play favorites by
dollar volume, unlike pool who gives high volume discounts and other
special treatement. We also were the first company to have completely
observable bidding by those in the auction so that people could see all
that went on, including what occured in this auction.

I am sorry if you feel unfairly treated. It was certainly not our
intent. We are not happy with the outcome either as we expected to get
somewhere over $25k for the name but the situation did not work out that
way.

They are about as unethical of a bunch of low down scum as I have ever seen.!

I will see if pool will welcome me with open arms, maybe they do better check ups on who is bidding on names there.!

Quoted from last email from Nelson Bradley from Snapnames.com

I am not sure why you think we would consciously choose to deprive
ourselves of more revenue to do a favor for one customer. Most of the
big money pros know the bidder we gave the name too and know his bids
were serious. Since you think otherwise and would have been willing to
spend more than 10k then we screwed up is all I can say. It was an
honest judgement error, completely my fault, no one else to blame. If
you choose to think otherwise I can see your point of view. All I can
say is I am sorry.

You are mistaken on one thing. We did remove all the fraudulent bids
that had an effect. The point we rolled the auction back to was the
point just above another bidder we knew was good for that price. At
that point we had 2 bidders at a supported price point. This has been
done many times though usually the dollar amount is much smaller and has
been widely considered fair.

I also saw your other email. If you feel we have committed an conscious
injustice then I would certainly expect you to publish that. We have
the best reputation for fairness in this industry by a wide margin. One
reason for that is we are willing to say so if we screw up. In the
interest of total fairness, when you publish you may quote me as saying
that I screwed up. Note this was my decision. No one else at SnapNames
had anything to do with making this call.

 

[Wot]

If somebody got FT.net for $10K then I would consider it very dodgy, it is worth far more than that, to "give it " to someone we know at a giveaway price seems an odd way to go do business had a similar thing with Namewinner over another name, I posted on Namewinner.com here at DNF but as I expected there was zero response.

Definitely a case for an auction rerun IMO , but these guys have the market cornered so I doubt that will happen.

 

[ERCollins]

I am going to do the only thing I know I can do, I will send all my complaints to ICANN which should be regulating all this business but seems not to be.

If my complaints are still not heard I will take a look at legal recourse.

 

[mike031]

I am going to do the only thing I know I can do, I will send all my complaints to ICANN which should be regulating all this business but seems not to be.

If my complaints are still not heard I will take a look at legal recourse.

i found that statement to be pretty funny... come on, who are you kidding... nobody can help you now. you should of/could of worked out something with snapnames had you acted earlier but now it is too late and there is no going back unfortunately.

 

[ERCollins]

i found that statement to be pretty funny... come on, who are you kidding... nobody can help you now. you should of/could of worked out something with snapnames had you acted earlier but now it is too late and there is no going back unfortunately.

I can do something that most, do not care to engage in, I can make sure it does not happen in the future.

I know I have no recourse on said name, at this point. But I do have recourse in to not being fairly offered at auction as stated on many of snapnames.com webpages.

I think I have strong arguement for why ICANN should be monitoring the behaviors between drop auction companies and ICANN accredited Registars, at the point they control and make the release to the public, unfair and unbalanced.

 

[dmyre]

That is BS. If the name sold for $10k, who's to say that noone else would've bid higher, but didn't receive the opportunity. The fair thing to do would be to reauction the domain name, without the shill bidder.

 

[Theo]

You can try to contact the previous owner of the domain who'd have 60 days to object to the sale. I believe that's the term for domains that don't drop but are handed over with the registration date remaining intact. The sale has a great chance of being nullified. This is what Namewinner does, at least.

FT.net WHOIS info cached on 2005-07-26

France Telecom
CPRI St Amand
75731 PARIS Cedex 15 75731 PARIS Cedex 15
FR

Administrative Contact:
Gava, Bruno [email protected]
France Telecom
CPRI St Amand
9, rue de NANTEUIL
75731 PARIS Cedex 15
FRA
33 1 40 45 56 26 fax: 999 999 9999

Technical Contact:
Chaillot, Christophe [email protected]
France Telecom FTRSI/DPI
246, rue de Bercy
Paris Cedex 12
75584
FRA
+33 1 43 42 68 87 fax: +33 1 43 42 62 67

 

[katherine]

I really doubt ICANN will help or really care. Too busy setting up new crap TLDs I guess. What's more they might eventually come up with new rules which will only make matters worse or kill the industry. Welcome to the world wild web :angry:
ALso I am not convinced the process is so much more transparent elsewhere, especially with Pool.

BTW I am really astonished a company like France Telecom will let such a name drop. What a waste

 

[dmyre]

I noticed Kjel (from Snapnames) viewing this thread, and am surprised that he didn't respond to your claims. As others have said, it's probably too late to resolve this issue, but I think SN should find a way to remedy similar issues if they arise again, without favoring more established customers...

Although it's bad business practice, it won't prevent people from using their services.

 

[ERCollins]

They found a way to resolve the issue, they offered to close my account.

I dont spend enough money with them to matter.

I sent emails to both emails on record. Seems there technical contact no longer exsists, maybe the admin contact will care.

They are a very large company.

You can try to contact the previous owner of the domain who'd have 60 days to object to the sale. I believe that's the term for domains that don't drop but are handed over with the registration date remaining intact. The sale has a great chance of being nullified. This is what Namewinner does, at least.

FT.net WHOIS info cached on 2005-07-26

France Telecom
CPRI St Amand
75731 PARIS Cedex 15 75731 PARIS Cedex 15
FR

Administrative Contact:
Gava, Bruno [email protected]
France Telecom
CPRI St Amand
9, rue de NANTEUIL
75731 PARIS Cedex 15
FRA
33 1 40 45 56 26 fax: 999 999 9999

Technical Contact:
Chaillot, Christophe [email protected]
France Telecom FTRSI/DPI
246, rue de Bercy
Paris Cedex 12
75584
FRA
+33 1 43 42 68 87 fax: +33 1 43 42 62 67

 

[Kjel]

Sorry guys, I don't have much to add to what Nelson has already said in his email to Edwin. In retrospect, we probably should have re-run this particular auction. In the past when we've done this it hasn't worked out that well for us, but it sounds like in this case Edwin and others were prepared to bid higher than what we charged the registrant for the name. It was a judgment call on our part, and we made a mistake. Sounds like it was a several thousand dollar mistake in fact.

Again, Edwin, I'm sorry that you feel so mistreated, and think that we are "low down scum". We would have much preferred to take a higher bid for this name, but based on prior experience we didn't think it would happen. An incorrect assumption it now seems. I hope you'll be back, but it's understandable if you won't be, and I can't begrudge you your anger here. All I can say is that we'll try to do better next time.

 

[dmyre]

...It was a judgment call on our part, and we made a mistake...All I can say is that we'll try to do better next time.

I think it's good for companies to take a stand and state that they make mistakes. I, for one, appreciate the acknowledgment.

 

[denny007]

I do not understand, why was not started new auction with starting bid $10K from the $10K bidder. So still SN would get $10K for sure, but possibly more...

 

[ERCollins]

yeah you got me there, this is my lively hood, and I guess they figured they would do a favor for someone they knew.

Hey maybe oneday if you are on there system long enough they will offer you a 2 letter.net for 10k. How many domainers would not jump on that!

 

[Wot]

A friend in need!

 

[martialtiger]

any idea just exactly how much that domain could have or should have gone for?

 

[denny007]

I would appraise about double, $20K

 

[ERCollins]

Well I had already received a deposit of 7,500$ to secure the domain for one of my clients, with additional $500 for every thousand I could save them under $20,000.oo

So there is the reason I am madder then well you know over this whole ordeal Screw the guy trying to make a living.