Drops today - August 2013
- Thread starter Cal
- Start date
neddy
Top Contributor
Firstly, it is good to see an enduser get the domain.
However, there seems to be a huge disparity between Drop and Netfleet.
And what's with the registrant contact email address being ian2@netfleet.com.au?
Noticed a few of these Netfleet email addresses appearing lately - particularly on some higher priced domains that have dropped.
Is this another "marketing initiative"?
johno69
Top Contributor
Why would anyone put a fixed bid in with < 1 min to go so much higher than the current bid amount?
http://www.netfleet.com.au/auction-history/?sid=1035067
Surely you'd go proxy bid right?
Yes it seems like some one can make a deal with netfleet to make a bid
StrategicSales.com.au Caught by ian2
And now its belong to another person..
johno69
Top Contributor
This is also making the figures look a lot better on all these fancy smancy graphs that get published about the market "Hotting Up" etc..
Is it a case of the marketing of netfleet bring the auctions to the attention of end users not really making the prices/profit go up? So are they telling end users we can get this domain for you at $X,XXX then throwing a fixed bid at the last moment?
I don't mind so much if anyone else was doing it, as a service for clients, but with it appearing to be an inside job, with access to inside information on others proxy bid, it all seems like it could go sour pretty fast.
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
seems to be a few things changing this year
neddy
Top Contributor
Some good points Paul.
Firstly, I have to say I'm disappointed that NF haven't responded. Perhaps the mantra is "ignore it and it will go away"?
- I'm all for Netfleet contacting endusers and getting them to bid on domains - both drops and aftermarket.
- I'm all for NF making heaps of money (and staying in business) and providing us with a great platform for drops and aftermarket sales.
But, speaking from the point of view of an active buyer on the drops, I think NF should have no part in making bids on behalf of endusers - particulary if it is done at the last moment -
and particularly as they have access to inside information - other bidders proxy bids.
And if I was the buyer of Bang.com.au; I can guarantee you that I would have rather purchased the domain for $502 than $1972 (the underbidder was at $501 according to the bidding history).
So I guess my question is:
If NF were bidding on this client's behalf, why would they not have made it a proxy bid of $1952 rather than a fixed bid? (Particularly as no one else can make a fixed bid).
And if they placed the proxy bid early in the piece, then it could have been a good auction contest - and no one would be making posts questioning the efficacy of this.
Just my 2 bobs worth.
StuartB
Regular Member
Does anyone know if this a new service that NF are offering?
Make no commercial sense for anyone to make a bid that is $1000 more than the next proxy bid. Unless......
1. The end purchaser (not the Bidder) has been told this is the price it will go for. This would be disappointing and have potential legal issues if the end Purchaser ever found out that they could have bought it for $1000 less.
2. The person bidding has inside knowledge that this is the bid they need to make to outbid already placed hidden proxy bids. This would also have some very serious legal and ethical issues.
3. They are dumb and don't understand the Auction process. But given these bids are made with a NF internal email address, this seems unlikely.
4. This is a new commercial service that NF are offering but have not publicly launched, where they offer to assist in catching dropping domains for a fixed fee (many of the names snapped have been at the same unusual bid $). If this is the case, it could have a serious impact on the attractiveness of the NF service to Domainers.
5. ..........
Make no commercial sense for anyone to make a bid that is $1000 more than the next proxy bid. Unless......
1. The end purchaser (not the Bidder) has been told this is the price it will go for. This would be disappointing and have potential legal issues if the end Purchaser ever found out that they could have bought it for $1000 less.
2. The person bidding has inside knowledge that this is the bid they need to make to outbid already placed hidden proxy bids. This would also have some very serious legal and ethical issues.
3. They are dumb and don't understand the Auction process. But given these bids are made with a NF internal email address, this seems unlikely.
4. This is a new commercial service that NF are offering but have not publicly launched, where they offer to assist in catching dropping domains for a fixed fee (many of the names snapped have been at the same unusual bid $). If this is the case, it could have a serious impact on the attractiveness of the NF service to Domainers.
5. ..........
neddy
Top Contributor
Not to my knowledge. That's why I asked in my original post:
No answer.
Would be good to get one - particularly after the "Eels" situation. It seems another case of moving the goal posts without telling the punters. And Anthony did say back then:
Once again, this is not a beat up on Netfleet thread. I genuinely want you to prosper - as I'm sure do others.
But as customers and stakeholders, we do - as a minimum - deserve transparency - and notice of any changes to your business model and bidding methods.
Imho.
Ashman
Top Contributor
Maybe they are seeking Legal Advice.
johno69
Top Contributor
As there is no alternative, I can't see NF losing any of our business from it. Not like we can just go bid elsewhere and catch the domains. NF are dominating the drops so we have no choice but to keep using them at the moment anyway.
neddy
Top Contributor
You are spot on Paul. Therein lies the rub. At the moment they have a virtual monopoly.
But it wasn't always the way; and it may not always be the way in the future.
It would still make basic business sense to me that NF at least have the courtesy and common sense to involve their existing client base in any changes prior to them initiating them.
findtim
Top Contributor
putting in a fixed bid rather then a proxy is dishonest to the business owner that has only 1 day to decide on whether to buy or not becuase of NF's outbound marketing.
NF bidding for a business i think is here to stay, they said it openly at the dnt sydney meetup, but as i have said previously they also said "we hate snypers" , hmmmm..... how times change quickly.
"virtual monopoly" yep, sad, "silence" hmmm, have they not learnt from the "eels" issue ?
"alternative" , well there is where you renew your domains, yes they make no money on us with that but it is turnover so maybe they don't want that either?
question is whats next?
tim
NF bidding for a business i think is here to stay, they said it openly at the dnt sydney meetup, but as i have said previously they also said "we hate snypers" , hmmmm..... how times change quickly.
"virtual monopoly" yep, sad, "silence" hmmm, have they not learnt from the "eels" issue ?
"alternative" , well there is where you renew your domains, yes they make no money on us with that but it is turnover so maybe they don't want that either?
question is whats next?
tim
Community sponsors
Members online
No members online now.
