May 13 I wrote about Tema.com closing at $128,938 on DropCatch.
The name is back on DropCatch so no one paid the first time. There just have to be better systems when you let people bid that high.
Want to bid $50,000 send us a deposit, something these just get ridiculous, make the industry look bad and that whole binding agreement a complete joke.
Why doesn’t DropCatch just award the domain to the next highest valid bidder?
Why does it need to be a re-auction? And why is the re-auction public? Are they really this greedy?
Don’t they realize that they are just embarrassing themselves and losing respect and credibility with all this Fraudulent activity like the issue that occurred last month where Natalie tried to use DomainInvesting as a way to attract new bidders to the re-auctions?
Natalie abandoned that dialogue which is a clear admission that they were guilty of trying to attract new bidders to the re-auctions by keeping them public.
Their bad-faith intent is obvious and readily apparent.
If the second highest bidder is also a joker, the third highest bidder may win the domain for only less than $50k.
> the third highest bidder may win the domain for only less than $50k
What do you mean by “for only less than $50k”?
What is so wrong with that? Are you insinuating that $50k is somehow too cheap or something?
It seems like you don’t mind if the winner ends up paying an inflated fraudulent price, is that correct?
There were two bidders bidding for that domain until the last moment they were 8bbb, namecatching and contact, the third bidder stopped bidding after 50-70k$ so they would still lose 50K$ on this domain. It is better to reauction the domain rather than losing that 50k
What do you mean by “they would still lose 50K?”
Why are you focused on awarding the domain to the 3rd bidder?
Shouldn’t you assume that the 2nd bidder “namecatching” should get the domain after removing all the inflated bids?
Are you insinuating that the 2nd bidder “namecatching” was also fraudulent?
This is really stupid for you say something like this.
The auction company would lose commissions that would come from 50k$, they might be aware that they could sell this domain for 6 figures hence they put for resale rather than awarding to the third bidder who bid 50k less than the winner.
Yes, i believe there were jokers bidding on that domain, i was watching this listing and waited until the end. The domain went from 25k to 128k$ in less than one hour
Hey Free IV Platform, let me clarify something. Since the winner is backing out of paying, the domain does not have to be offered to the 2nd highest bidder, however DropCatch can do so at their own discretion if they feel they are satisfied with the pricing. The only key is that DropCatch cannot obligate any of the subsequent bidders to pay for it, but it’s up to DropCatch to make the call if they are willing to offer or not, to the next highest bidder, one at a time. It would make sense that if DropCatch felt that price won by the next highest bidder was too low, and that the domain could fetch more at a natural auction, then they can determine not to offer it at all. Maybe DropCatch should just re-auction if the Winner defaults.
“Dear Responder,
If DropCatch tries to play the angles like this, then this would be outright manipulation and auction fraud.
As a result, the only credible action would be to award it to the next highest valid bidder regardless of whether they felt they could get more.
GoDaddy Auctions does it this way which is commendable, so why doesn’t DropCatch follow this same GoDaddy practice to maintain it’s integrity?
Natalie is usually vocal on the blogs, but conveniently, she is now MIA.
Does anyone know if Natalie quit the company because all of the sudden she is silent on all the blogs.”
You’re unable or unwilling to think through how a fraudster would use this to their advantage. I’ve always disagreed with names being awarded to the next highest bidder, and i’ve posted about it before.
Simply this; if you want a name on the cheap, you setup three fake accounts to bid the name up using using all three. Then after a certain price e.g. 10k, only the other two would lead the bids to a ridiculous number e.g. 50k. This scares away anyone who otherwise could have placed a genuine bid between the fraudulent bids, and the third ‘low bidder’ controlled by the fraudster would take the name for 10k.
This is why I put a bid in between battling bidders as they drive it up in case they are non-payers because the auction house might do something stupid like award the name to the next lowest bid. Then at least I’m on the podium.
If the second highest bidder is also a joker, the third highest bidder may win the domain for only less than $50k.
I don’t go to domain auctions because my gut feeling is they are rigger as follows:
– Expired doamins: to jack up prices
– Regular auctions – to either jack up or put a lid on the price
its 2020 and the domain game is still as wild west as ever.. love it.
Hey everyone, check out what @Jack said above.
@Jack says: “I put a bid in between battling bidders as they drive it up”.
Hey , what’s your alias so that DropCatch can ban you?
Why would Jack not be allowed to bid? Where did he say he would not honor his bid.
Yeah pretty sure Jack did not say he would not honor bid, domaining has gotten dumber and dumber.
He said he strategically inserts a bid “in-between” bids, which means he is not aiming to be the high bidder.
Hey Jack…if you think your actions are legitimate, then why don’t you just reveal your alias right here for everyone to see if you think you aren’t a fraudster?
I challenge you…
First, your being hysterical. Second, If I do try and record a final bid in third place, then the fraudsters lose (and unfortunately every other interested party). Third, this is not the only problem awarding the name to the next highest bidder, as others do bid up names simply out of frustration or spite. I think pre-registration would help with the problem, at least when it’s reauctioned the nonpayers are excluded so anyone that wanted to place a solid bid but held off because early fake bidding kept them away now have a chance. Fraudsters are able to create or acquire passable illegitimate documents, so trusted verification is not possible. That would mean the end if public auctions, and I doubt that would work until there is ICANN rule or similar that requires this.
Just to be clear, yes I do intend to purchase any name at my highest bid.
So then why haven’t you announced your alias so that the whole world can verify this?
Observer, I wasn’t a bidder on Tema, but if I was I wouldn’t identify my bidder alias as I buy many names in a sort of niche category and I’m not interested in revealing any trade secrets.
Hey Jack…I never mentioned anything about Tema.com, did I?
In comment #262334 you only implied DropCatch, and so also assumed I had an account there, which is where Tema was auctioned.
“…what’s your alias so that DropCatch can ban you?”
Is there anything more you want to add?
Yeah, DropCatch claims that they verify each account signup to prevent fraudulent accounts.
So are you calling DropCatch a bunch of liars?
You never heard of forged or stolen documents? I already made note of this in comment #262344
“Fraudsters are able to create or acquire passable illegitimate documents, so [fully] trusted verification is not possible.”
So you’re calling DropCatch’s screening process one big joke?
Wow
The whole domain industry is one big joke.
Hey Jack…explain “Wow” to us…
Stupidity has no limits?
Right now, you’re the one looking stupid making senseless comments like “Wow”.
Lame…