For Sale Suspicious Bidding

[JuniperPark]

Is anyone else suspicious about some of the recent high bidding activity at both Namewinner and Pool?

I've kept an eye on several names which meet this criteria:
- marginal value based on the name itself
- little/no established traffic
- NW bids of $200 or more

I (and others) have won some of these names and posted them for sale at this and other places where they will be seen by other buyers at much lower prices, where they gained little or no interest.

As you all know, names that go to Pool.com almost ALWAYS get bid even higher than the Namewinner bids. I can see this happening occasionally, but nearly EVERY time? Today I noticed something else... if you click the "view all bids" link on auctions you lost, frequently the "winning" bid is not even in the list of bids. Sometimes the highest bid is still lower than the 'winning' bid, and sometimes it's MUCH higher.

How could this be an accurate reflection of the bidding? Where are all of these high bidders 3 days later? There are 2 companies that would profit greatly from phantom bidders. Do we connect the dots?

If there are people out there actually paying $500+ dollars for jelloshots.com, or $10,000 for some other marginal name, fine. But I'm not convinced that's what's happening.

This is EXACTLY how Enron used to get 4,000% rate increases, by the way. Not a new concept.

- Dale

 

[bidawinner]

another reason for WLS..will put an end to this kind of nonsense ..

 

[.com.net.org]

And they don't reveal the bidder. :-D

 

[DomainGoon]

Originally posted by .com.net.org
And they don't reveal the bidder. :-D

Who does?

 

[TurNIC.com]

I wish I had $3200 for climber.com........

 

[Bob]

This is why I rarely get into an auction.

I will "Pool" a name if it is worth $60 to me. If the name goes to auciton, I will bid maybe $80 - $90 MAX, and refuse to get caught up in the auction.

I have been very surprised over the last month that some GREAT names I had "Pools" on were not "Pooled" by other people, yet some marginal names I had, were bid into the hundreds and som, thousands. . . I have become VERY suspicious of of high bidding at both of these places for marginal names. It seems more and more to me that there are shill bidders used to raise the final auction prices. This would benefit both the chaser and the registrar, and is unethical if not outright illegal. But alas, unless we have an insider, we have no proof.

-Bob

 

[elequa]

guys there is no shill bidding etc etc its me and one more entity fighting for all the names.... i hope that clears thing out

 

[bidawinner]

Originally posted by elequa
guys there is no shill bidding etc etc its me and one more entity fighting for all the names.... i hope that clears thing out

:laugh: you're funny elequa

 

[elequa]

I dont know about NW cuz i stopped bidding on NW.

 

[cjmacd]

Originally posted by bidawinner


:laugh: you're funny elequa

maybe..

but what's even more funny that it is true

good luck to everyone with the pool

 

[Whois-Search]

No it is true.

Elequa is beating every bid buydomains make.

he spent 4k on wcd.com alone

 

[JuniperPark]

eh...

 

[cjmacd]

Different motives guys, it's as simple as that

Be proud though, it's shaping the industry

The fallout is raised domain prices

so just sit back and let it happen

It will anyway.


I commend Elequa for it

 

[JuniperPark]

Originally posted by elequa
guys there is no shill bidding etc etc its me and one more entity fighting for all the names.... i hope that clears thing out

Really? If that's true, why am I able to buy the Snapback on some fo these names a few days before the drop? And why are you unwilling to pay LESS than you were bidding a few days AFTER the drop?

 

[Bob]

Interesting. . . .

-Bob

 

[Edwin]

Perhaps - and this is SPECULATION only - the very biggest buyers have private deals with Pool and other players. The scenario might be something like this:-

Very Big Buyer: "Hey, Pool.com, I'm willing to guarantee that I'll spend at least $100,000 with you each month. In return, I want you to give me $250,000 worth of credit for my $100,000"

Pool: "Wow, that's a guaranteed $1.2 million a year. Done!"

In other words, when a V.B.B. bids $2,000 they might actually be paying only $700-1,000 in cash terms.

 

[actnow]

Edwin, I would hope that is "not true".

 

[Spider]

I am sure it is true and a great business plan. I would take the 1.2 million guarenteed without thinking about it.

 

[JuniperPark]

Originally posted by Edwin
Perhaps - and this is SPECULATION only - the very biggest buyers have private deals with Pool and other players. The scenario might be something like this:-

Very Big Buyer: "Hey, Pool.com, I'm willing to guarantee that I'll spend at least $100,000 with you each month. In return, I want you to give me $250,000 worth of credit for my $100,000"

Pool: "Wow, that's a guaranteed $1.2 million a year. Done!"

In other words, when a V.B.B. bids $2,000 they might actually be paying only $700-1,000 in cash terms.

This is pretty close to my suspicion as well. It may also be disguised as a "rebate", much like when a new car dealership "swears" you are paying the "invoice price", failing to mention they get a "rebate" of $2000 for selling that car.

No other theories for what's happening really wash. The "We just have to spend a lot of money to be respected, regardless of profit" theory of doing business died in 2000.

 

[Nexus]

As many have said, such a thing if true might feel unethical to us, but its not like it is illegal. They could effectively say "this is our high bidder", and for all intended purposes be true in saying it. The "high bidder" just has access to a mechanism we do not. Oh well. Let's have even more drop-services open up! Each new service adds to the fun. Yehaw.

~ Nexus