Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
I wonder what the BIN on investmentproperty would have been.
Eels.com.au?
- Thread starter Drop.com.au
- Start date
findtim
Top Contributor
snoopy
Top Contributor
Sounds like a pool.com style strategy from a few years ago. I have little doubt this is just to do with a good offer coming in and Netfleet being unable to resist.
It really is time for disclosure proper disclosure by you.
It really is time for disclosure proper disclosure by you.
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
And now the end result is on the front page as a reminder of what happened
cherrytron
Top Contributor
Hello all, I'll just throw my two cents in.
1. It's Netfleet's business, they can do whatever they want.
2. It was probably a mistake to do this with no notice and piss off the regular customers, but at the end of the day, they have an amazing product and no one is going to stop using it or bid any less on a name they want, no matter how many kittens they kill.
3. A simple lapse in judgement on Anthony's part while just doing his job (to bring in some revenue) has created more stress and bad faith, but we all make mistakes.
4. I had dinner with the marketing manager and ceo of parra eels at the weekend, they are delighted to have the domain name but honestly do not know that they have been a part in "this". As Anthony mentioned, they were first time customers and they really didn't understand how it all worked. It sounds like Anthony made a decision under pressure and time constraints to educate and help a new customer and thought he was doing the right thing for the customers and the business, for a second there he forgot all of his friends but hey, I forgive him.
5. If your plan was to buy it and flip it to them (Parra) later, they wouldn't have paid. They didn't even want to spend half as much as they did and still don't fully understand the (aftermarket) value of the name. My advice to them the day before the auction was "You could get in to a situation where you bid against a flipper who thinks they are bidding against another flipper (not you the end user) and it could end up going for 20k". I believe Anthony probably thought he would help them understand, making it easier for a new participant and offer a fixed price they could work with.
6. Anthony's goal of helping a new customer has worked. Steve the marketing manager from Eels said he looked at all the other prices and thought "that seems cheap, I'd pay $50 for that" etc, he also went home and told his wife about it and how it could help their own small business etc. Now that he has experienced this market, he can spread his knowledge among his peers who may wish to acquire a dropping name, and after Anthony's help I imagine Netfleet will be the first recommendation he will make. So in terms of goodwill, helping new customers and building his business and bringing awareness to the industry, Anthony has certainly done the right thing here.
7. (Sorry Neddy) but I am always happy to see (whom I believe) to be the rightful end user of a domain name holding said domain. (We all just wish we were the broker in the middle) but in this one, Netfleet won the game.
8. My next point is going to blow your mind.
9. WHAT A FANTASTIC IDEA!! This could bring incredible revenue to Netfleet over time and prevent the "sniper" bids at auction. Here comes the pain - REVERSE AUCTIONS! Anthony, you could value the top 10 names every day, put a high BIN price on it that drops by (valuation / time to go) until someone buys it or it hits $0 on the drop. Ie. A domain with a pre-auction BIN value at $100,000 basically drops by $70 per minute ($100k / 1440 minutes (24 hours x 60 minutes)) until it is valued at $0 at drop time. The true value of domains would be reached (unless of course Anthony undervalues a name that would have gone for more) and customers could still put their proxy in (if it reaches their max overnight) and it would just sell when it hits.
10. Sorry. I hope they don't implement #9 or the BIN stuff before a domain name I want comes up
The end.
1. It's Netfleet's business, they can do whatever they want.
2. It was probably a mistake to do this with no notice and piss off the regular customers, but at the end of the day, they have an amazing product and no one is going to stop using it or bid any less on a name they want, no matter how many kittens they kill.
3. A simple lapse in judgement on Anthony's part while just doing his job (to bring in some revenue) has created more stress and bad faith, but we all make mistakes.
4. I had dinner with the marketing manager and ceo of parra eels at the weekend, they are delighted to have the domain name but honestly do not know that they have been a part in "this". As Anthony mentioned, they were first time customers and they really didn't understand how it all worked. It sounds like Anthony made a decision under pressure and time constraints to educate and help a new customer and thought he was doing the right thing for the customers and the business, for a second there he forgot all of his friends but hey, I forgive him.
5. If your plan was to buy it and flip it to them (Parra) later, they wouldn't have paid. They didn't even want to spend half as much as they did and still don't fully understand the (aftermarket) value of the name. My advice to them the day before the auction was "You could get in to a situation where you bid against a flipper who thinks they are bidding against another flipper (not you the end user) and it could end up going for 20k". I believe Anthony probably thought he would help them understand, making it easier for a new participant and offer a fixed price they could work with.
6. Anthony's goal of helping a new customer has worked. Steve the marketing manager from Eels said he looked at all the other prices and thought "that seems cheap, I'd pay $50 for that" etc, he also went home and told his wife about it and how it could help their own small business etc. Now that he has experienced this market, he can spread his knowledge among his peers who may wish to acquire a dropping name, and after Anthony's help I imagine Netfleet will be the first recommendation he will make. So in terms of goodwill, helping new customers and building his business and bringing awareness to the industry, Anthony has certainly done the right thing here.
7. (Sorry Neddy) but I am always happy to see (whom I believe) to be the rightful end user of a domain name holding said domain. (We all just wish we were the broker in the middle) but in this one, Netfleet won the game.
8. My next point is going to blow your mind.
9. WHAT A FANTASTIC IDEA!! This could bring incredible revenue to Netfleet over time and prevent the "sniper" bids at auction. Here comes the pain - REVERSE AUCTIONS! Anthony, you could value the top 10 names every day, put a high BIN price on it that drops by (valuation / time to go) until someone buys it or it hits $0 on the drop. Ie. A domain with a pre-auction BIN value at $100,000 basically drops by $70 per minute ($100k / 1440 minutes (24 hours x 60 minutes)) until it is valued at $0 at drop time. The true value of domains would be reached (unless of course Anthony undervalues a name that would have gone for more) and customers could still put their proxy in (if it reaches their max overnight) and it would just sell when it hits.
10. Sorry. I hope they don't implement #9 or the BIN stuff before a domain name I want comes up
The end.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
They probably paid more for that dinner on the weekend!
The fact they didn't want to pay $2k just means they are ignorant.
They got a bargain.
$20k sounds fair. They are a million dollar business aren't they? How much do you reckon they pay that marketing guy? Too much if he can't see the value in that domain.
The fact they didn't want to pay $2k just means they are ignorant.
They got a bargain.
$20k sounds fair. They are a million dollar business aren't they? How much do you reckon they pay that marketing guy? Too much if he can't see the value in that domain.
Last edited:
They can do whatever they want, technically, but in business doing whatever you want (especially if it is to the detriment of your loyal customers) can be a good way to lose loyal customers or at least lose credibility... Fast.
I personally think this would be a terrible idea for buyers using Netfleet. As you said "this could bring incredible revenue to Netfleet over time". Possibly true, although I doubt it, but at whose expense? Thats like saying businesses selling petrol should charge $10 for a liter as that would bring them "incredible revenue". Yet 'we' are the ones having to buy that petrol.. I want Netfleet to do well and succeed but not by making me pay more for domains than I otherwise would simply because they can.
Why cant we just settle for the regular old tried and tested English style auction as it has been up to this point on Netfleet without side buy-it-now deals or the possibility of Dutch (reverse) auctions. Sniping is a part of auctions and in reality if you bid once with the maximum amount you are prepared to pay you will only ever get sniped if you are outbid which by definition means someone was willing to pay more than you for the domain - whats the problem?
findtim
Top Contributor
this was one of the original posts in this thread and has me wondering some things which would be good for drop to answer as i know i'm not the only one thinking this.
1) where does drop stand on this ?
2) if the tide turned on catches would drop change things?
3) has it given drop and idea to do it or are they glad they didn't
4 ) what would happen if drop got that email and said " thanks, hey guys throw up a BIN of $3K REAL QUICK ?
5) is there anti-domainer sentiment ?
Nobody knows what the other bidders were planning to do with it, that is their problem whether they could pass it on or not.
tim
Drop.com.au
Top Contributor
Hey Tim,
To answer your questions -
I can't see a scenario where we would move to BIN pricing for expiring domain names.
Our business is focused on serving the domain investor community and has been for nearly ten years.
Cheers
Andrew
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
David L likes this post .......why?
snoopy
Top Contributor
Because he just made some money from it?
Because I thought it was a nice thing that Anthony did - refer a retail client to a direct competitor just in case NF didn't catch it and the client wasn't burnt by the whole domain thing.
Hey, btw snoopy - you win - your persistent harrassment has paid off. It's too negative around here so I'm off for a while. Congrats. Hope your world is better for it.
Hey, btw snoopy - you win - your persistent harrassment has paid off. It's too negative around here so I'm off for a while. Congrats. Hope your world is better for it.
findtim
Top Contributor
i understand what you meant to say was directed at snoopy, but the context of "around here" suggests ( to me ) that none of us also have no value for you or each other.
i'm the first to say i don't gramma/spell check but maybe just a short clearing of the air before you have an "off for a while" would be nice.
tim
snoopy
Top Contributor
Good on you David, you are usually out of there as soon as soon as a thread isn't going well for you/netfleet.
I hope when you return you'll be willing to clearly disclose your ownership interest when recommending/supporting/talking about netfleet.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Strange to seahorse.com.au at the auction drop already listed as SOLD for $300???
https://www.netfleet.com.au/Seahorse.com.au
https://www.netfleet.com.au/Seahorse.com.au
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
On the frontpage ( not logged in ) it shows bid now
...boy oh boy ..... if it aint broke dont fix it
Ashman
Top Contributor
Even on this occasion it took some time for an apology from Netfleet for questionable business practices.
Community sponsors
Members online
No members online now.
