"The top offer is now......"

[Devil Dog]

Doesn't it seem funny that whenever you submit an offer to someone, there's always a higher offer of at least 10-25% of what you're offering? :lol:

I think it should be some sort of accountability for people making such claims, ie: screenshot, quote, etc...

What do you all think?

 

[cyberserf]

Well, a lot of the times, a starting offer is just that: starting. So, the disparity of the counter is just the opposite end of the starting point. It's a common haggling tool that just resorts to back-and-forth countering until you both reach a median you agree with. It's just a matter of feeling each other out.

The accountability is basically a non-issue as pretty much anyone who has a name can ask whatever price they want, whether one agrees with it or not.

 

[Rockefeller]

Doesn't it seem funny that whenever you submit an offer to someone, there's always a higher offer of at least 10-25% of what you're offering? :lol:

I think it should be some sort of accountability for people making such claims, ie: screenshot, quote, etc...

What do you all think?

I agree. If a potential buyer would like to know the highest bidders username then it should be given without hesitiation. If a buyer doesnt want a it public then they shouldn't be on a public forum.

 

[Devil Dog]

I understand the counter-offer and whatnot and don't mind that, but to fabricate a story and say you have a ghost bidder is unprofessional imo.

Well, a lot of the times, a starting offer is just that: starting. So, the disparity of the counter is just the opposite end of the starting point. It's a common haggling tool that just resorts to back-and-forth countering until you both reach a median you agree with. It's just a matter of feeling each other out.

The accountability is basically a non-issue as pretty much anyone who has a name can ask whatever price they want, whether one agrees with it or not.

 

[cyberserf]

Well, ghost bidder, sure thing I agree with that. I didn't know you were talking about things like that. Now that you mention it, with that in mind, I see that taking place all the time, and it's usually in the form of bumps.

I despise that.

 

[Focus]

we need a bidding system on dnf like the one on drop sites with maybe a 5-7 day expiration on the bid..and it should be secured by a credit card, account, etc and there should also be a fee charged if you do NOT complete a deal...I agree all this "High offer by PM" non-sense is total BS 90% of the time..and we all know when it is legitimate...here is a stunning example I caught from a newbie:

http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?t=234562


(I see he is now banned...I have no idea why but it was not from this thread)

 

[thevirtual]

I agree this is a very unprofessional sales method. As the buyer you can choose to ask for proof of offers, and choose whether to retract your offer. Otherwise there isn't much else you can do.

 

[Focus]

I would like to add, don't let other people's offers influence yours!
Who cares what "they" offer? You have to escape that mentality of competitive bidding against the mystery bidder and remember this is real business and real money and conduct it as such. Unless it is a smoking good deal, I never bid against the mystery buyer(s), I always say something like "Ok, then good luck with your sale!" (i.e. - I offer $2,500 then all of the sudden the high offer is $2,750 minutes later)Then sometimes they will come back with the "Well, they can't pay right now and it will be a few days, I need cash tonight...yada yada, so I will sell it to you for less money, blah blah, blah" at which point I tell them I don't do business with liars. I say keep it all transparent! Post offers.

 

[Deleted member 70408]

Although I think accountability and honesty is very important, I don't think any system is necessary. If you don't want to offer more than your current offer, you shouldn't be persuaded by whether someone truly made a better offer. If the seller says he has a higher offer and then doesn't sell it, you know he was either being dishonest or didn't want to sell. In either event, the seller didn't want to sell you the name at the price you offered. I frequently sell to people who don't want the sales price to be public knowledge. I have dealt with a couple of buyers on DNF who rarely post publicly and would probably be inundated with PMs if people knew who they were or what entities they represent. I would protect my client's privacy over any rule that requires full disclosure. My opinion is that if you don't trust me/my reputation, it would probably be best for us not to do business. This doesn't even take into account when I list a name for sale here and send an email to my clients or list in other forums.

Good intent behind the idea but I don't think it's necessary or enforcable.

 

[Onward]

I think the seller should post the member name with the bid if they are pm'ed...it's that simple.

If it is on a different forum...provide a link when asked. It should be verified. Period.

 

[Deleted member 70408]

I think the seller should post the member name with the bid if they are pm'ed...it's that simple.

If it is on a different forum...provide a link when asked. It should be verified. Period.

In what other business, during the course of negotiations, does the seller ever have to disclose the other parties that are negotiating? I can't name one, and I think it's silly that this should be expected.

Whether the seller has an actual offer or not, he is committing to not sell the name for less than that number. If he tries to, you know he is probably full of sh*t. It is your perogative whether to increase your offer to make it acceptable to him or pass on it.

I don't think it's ethical to lie about an offer, but I don't think it's reasonable for anyone to expect professional domain investors to disclose their clients.

 

[Johnn]

There are some 'legit' PM offers and...

There are 'fake' PM offers...

There are only a couple of members who ALWAYS doing the 'fake' offers..

And you know who you are....

Nothing is wrong with PM offers as many sellers wanted to remain unknown.

There is no need for new rules or anything. Just scan the threads and you will see who the fake ones.

 

[krossat]

Going offtrack a bit, there are those who need a domain and post their requirements.
Then comes a long list of people mentioning the domain names they have to offer. The list goes on and on, without any feedback from the buyer as to what he did shortlist of if the list is going offtrack etc.
I guess its human nature "to wait a bit longer so that a better domain gets listed"
There should be some sort of s deadline byu which the buyer needs to inform the prospective sellers that he / she has shortlisted / rejected / selected some domains being offered...!!!

Isnt that frustrating too??

 

[Onward]

In what other business, during the course of negotiations, does the seller ever have to disclose the other parties that are negotiating? I can't name one, and I think it's silly that this should be expected.

Whether the seller has an actual offer or not, he is committing to not sell the name for less than that number. If he tries to, you know he is probably full of sh*t. It is your perogative whether to increase your offer to make it acceptable to him or pass on it.

I don't think it's ethical to lie about an offer, but I don't think it's reasonable for anyone to expect professional domain investors to disclose their clients.

If you agree it is unethical to lie about an offer...what is your solution?

Maybe...Put the name on auction...gets rid of the BS.

 

[Deleted member 70408]

If you agree it is unethical to lie about an offer...what is your solution?
Put the name on auction...gets rid of the BS.

That doesn't answer my question and doesn't really make sense for the intent of this thread. IMO, auction-style bidding doesn't work either - take the following as examples: private auctions, proxy bids and/or phone bidders. Obviously transparency is ideal, but in the corporate world and almost every other business, transparency is a pipedream.

I don't have an answer. I don't really have a problem with people saying they have a higher offer either. If I believe someone is dishonest and the name isn't that important to me, I won't buy it from them. If I really want the name, I will increase my offer. It's pretty simple.

I get annoyed when people post "make offers in thread, and I will set a BIN later." Of course no matter what the high offer is, the person will set the BIN even higher. This is annoying, but I don't think it's something that should be regulated either.

 

[Onward]

That doesn't answer my question and doesn't really make sense for the intent of this thread. IMO, auction-style bidding doesn't work either - take the following as examples: private auctions, proxy bids and/or phone bidders. Obviously transparency is ideal, but in the corporate world and almost every other business, transparency is a pipedream.

So you do not have any suggestions or solutions...except do nothing.

Ok, I can buy that.

 

[dcristo]

The seller can make it a requirement to make all bids public. They may lose a few potential bidders, but at least everything is transparent.

 

[Deleted member 70408]

So you do not have any suggestions or solutions...except do nothing.

Ok, I can buy that.

My suggestion is to keep it the way it is. If someone posts their thoughts and only people in favor of it respond in the thread, it will look like there are no objections. I am in favor of keeping things the way they are.

 

[DomainMagnate]

reminds me of a clown that was selling some crappy domain here recently, he posted that he got like 5 private offers in 10 minutes

Usually you can spot the fake ones pretty easy

 

[Johnn]

reminds me of a clown that was selling some crappy domain here recently, he posted that he got like 5 private offers in 10 minutes

Usually you can spot the fake ones pretty easy

That was not true! He got 3 offers in 20 minutes.

John