Past Auction Failures

[Chris.C]

So I recently raised the point in another thread that having the data from AMA auction even if the domain was passed in is relatively important.

On this point, I know I'm sometimes just as interested in what didn't sell at auctions like NetFleet as I am the price of something that did sell, and I was wondering if there is any possibility of including this data of NetFleet's research section.

Like for example if I'm thinking of buying or registering a domain, I would love to be able to do some research via NetFleet to find out if similar domains have actually gone to auction in the past and passed in for $0. That's kind of important to know I think.

Sometimes I look at the metrics of a domain and think, the metric looks great but if I needed to sell it would it sell well at auction and would I be able to recoup my costs...

Obviously thousands of domains go up for sale each day an d 99% of them don't get bids, so it might be a bit much to include them all in the research data but maybe if some filter was set on it like it would record that the domain failed at auction if the domain had 10+ exacts and didn't receive a bid.

What do other people think?

 

[snoopy]

It it probably a pretty big negative for the owner of a domain with no bids to have it published. If 99% don't get bids then that being public is going to be embarrassing as well.

 

[findtim]

It it probably a pretty big negative for the owner of a domain with no bids to have it published. If 99% don't get bids then that being public is going to be embarrassing as well.

+1, but also putting a domain on AMA and not doing any promotion yourself is just plain lazy ( i'm not talking about you chris C, just general from what i have seen )

tim

 

[DavidL]

It it probably a pretty big negative for the owner of a domain with no bids to have it published. If 99% don't get bids then that being public is going to be embarrassing as well.

Agree but 'embarrassing'?

 

[snoopy]

Agree but 'embarrassing'?

When an auction is held and the clearance rate is 1% that is embarrassing. There is no other industry on earth other than the domain industry that holds auctions like this where the vast majority doesn't sell and never had any chance of selling. That is a major reason why it is standard for the industry to not publicise the *full* results of auctions - embarrassment at the fact that 99 out of 100 names in the auction were judged to be worthless or overpriced. Instead the names that sell get reported. The other reason being that owners will not want the fact that nobody would even bid $10 being publicised.

 

[Data Glasses]

'no such thing as bad publicity' does not apply to domaining, nothing to be gained exhibiting failures

 

[AnthonyP]

When an auction is held and the clearance rate is 1% that is embarrassing.

As the market leaders I assume you are talking about us. Our clearance rate is closer to 10% for all aftermarket auctions and closer to 20% for no-reserve aftermarket auctions, only the expired domain auctions are at 1-2% There are past threads discussing this.

There is no other industry on earth other than the domain industry that holds auctions like this where the vast majority doesn't sell and never had any chance of selling. That is a major reason why it is standard for the industry to not publicise the *full* results of auctions - embarrassment at the fact that 99 out of 100 names in the auction were judged to be worthless or overpriced.

Contrary to what you are saying I am quite happy to discuss clearance rates, I am not embarrassed at all about our progress, this is early days still for the .au Aftermarket and auctions in particular. I think of the auctions as a learning process for seller and buyers due to the difficulty in judging the price of domain names. Perhaps no other industry on earth has such a hard time working out what a domain is worth?

Instead the names that sell get reported. The other reason being that owners will not want the fact that nobody would even bid $10 being publicised.

Of course only the sales get reported as they are interesting and relevant. Not getting a $10 on one day of one week in one auction on one platform is not indicative of a total failure. The audience can change two weeks later and the domain will sell, in fact we see many turned in domain selling after being through the auction 3 times or more which is why we have relaxed the rules on how frequently you can re-list a domain. Perhaps on days it is hard to see one tree amongst the forest? It is hard enough getting sellers to agree to us publishing the sales, never mind getting them to agree to publish the turned in domains.

 

[findtim]

i hope i am on topic, Chris C i just don't think you can be ruled by a "clearance rate" , it certainly isn't NF or drops fault, the fault is more likely that someone registered a stupid name and thinks its actually worth something.

"horses for courses" , different days different people different values.

i see names that i REALLY like but don't bid as its not my game, i see names that others think suck and i'm willing to pay much more for them.

to many variables, you're a numbers guy but i just don't think AMA or drop auctions can be refined down to a standard stat, past results mean very little in my view, a domain that has an "s" at the end of a past $5k sale means nothing depending on the word, some "s" domains by nature are worht more, some are worth less, stats can't help you there.

in the end it is what has been said a million times, its the buyer and the underbidder that decide the price.

tim

 

[snoopy]

As the market leaders I assume you are talking about us. Our clearance rate is closer to 10% for all aftermarket auctions and closer to 20% for no-reserve aftermarket auctions, only the expired domain auctions are at 1-2% There are past threads discussing this.

Contrary to what you are saying I am quite happy to discuss clearance rates, I am not embarrassed at all about our progress, this is early days still for the .au Aftermarket and auctions in particular. I think of the auctions as a learning process for seller and buyers due to the difficulty in judging the price of domain names. Perhaps no other industry on earth has such a hard time working out what a domain is worth?

It was Chris's statement that 99% don't get bids,

"Obviously thousands of domains go up for sale each day an d 99% of them don't get bids,".

I don't monitor what % you sell but pretty much all auction venues get extremely low clearance rates. The issue isn't difficulty in valuing name, the issue is auction house doing very little to filter names.

At the moment it is like an art auction where anything is accepted. Someone comes along with their kids prep painting and it gets accepted into the auction even though it is obviously worthless.

Of course only the sales get reported as they are interesting and relevant. Not getting a $10 on one day of one week in one auction on one platform is not indicative of a total failure. The audience can change two weeks later and the domain will sell, in fact we see many turned in domain selling after being through the auction 3 times or more which is why we have relaxed the rules on how frequently you can re-list a domain.

If a name takes 3 goes to get a $10 bid it shouldn't be in the auction.

 

[snoopy]

i hope i am on topic, Chris C i just don't think you can be ruled by a "clearance rate" , it certainly isn't NF or drops fault, the fault is more likely that someone registered a stupid name and thinks its actually worth something.

"horses for courses" , different days different people different values.

i see names that i REALLY like but don't bid as its not my game, i see names that others think suck and i'm willing to pay much more for them.

to many variables, you're a numbers guy but i just don't think AMA or drop auctions can be refined down to a standard stat, past results mean very little in my view, a domain that has an "s" at the end of a past $5k sale means nothing depending on the word, some "s" domains by nature are worht more, some are worth less, stats can't help you there.

in the end it is what has been said a million times, its the buyer and the underbidder that decide the price.

Someone running a domain auction should have an idea on the value of what they are selling.

Auction houses can do it, but it takes work, back a few years ago Moniker/Traffic auctions used to get 60%-70% clearance rates. Of the remaining 30-40% a lot still got bids but didn't meet reserve, the ball has been dropped badly since but it clearly can be done. That kind of % is more comparable to how auctions generally work out side of the domain industry. I think it has become par for the course that people will take anything, do very little research and hope for the best, it doesn't make for a very compelling auction though and as I said earlier, "embarrassing" for the industry if people from outside knew..

 

[DavidL]

I can see the CEO of ebay blushing everytime he sees his results.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/Domain-Names-/3767/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=domain+name

 

[AnthonyP]

The issue isn't difficulty in valuing name, the issue is auction house doing very little to filter names.

The digital world is very different to the real world as there is very little cost to scaling up so there is very little need to filter. The low cost for providing listings and the relative simplicity for buyers to filter themselves makes us more like ebay or grays online and we are not embarrassed if something is turned in.

At the moment it is like an art auction where anything is accepted. Someone comes along with their kids prep painting and it gets accepted into the auction even though it is obviously worthless.

"Obviously worthless" is a subjective view, most people will never own a beautiful work of art sold for millions via Christie's, yet almost everyone has a pretty picture up on their wall.

In the digital world it is possible for ebay to sell both an obviously worthless $4 kids toy jet and a $4.9m private jet using the same system.

If a name takes 3 goes to get a $10 bid it shouldn't be in the auction.

Why not? This is not a real world auction room, audiences change, people miss a domain on one day and see it the next, why is it not worthy?

In a real world auction you have to wait a few minutes for each and every lot to end, where as in the digital world we can end two thousand auctions at the same time or even at two thousand different times, this is the beauty of online.

 

[snoopy]

"Obviously worthless" is a subjective view, most people will never own a beautiful work of art sold for millions via Christie's, yet almost everyone has a pretty picture up on their wall.

It isn't subjective, it can be easily measured by putting it up for sale. Those running auction should know the difference most of the time between a name worth something and a name worth nothing. The reason why domain auctions get 1%-20% etc clearance rates is because there is no quality control.

Why not? This is not a real world auction room, audiences change, people miss a domain on one day and see it the next, why is it not worthy?

In a real world auction you have to wait a few minutes for each and every lot to end, where as in the digital world we can end two thousand auctions at the same time or even at two thousand different times, this is the beauty of online.

Because it turns audiences off when it is the same names auctioned multiple times with no interest.

 

[AnthonyP]

It isn't subjective, it can be easily measured by putting it up for sale.

This is the whole point of the auctions, putting it up for sale so you can see if it is valuable to the market right now.

Those running auction should know the difference most of the time between a name worth something and a name worth nothing. The reason why domain auctions get 1%-20% etc clearance rates is because there is no quality control.

You are comparing apples and bytes in an attempt to make an argument here. We are in a digital world selling a digital product to a digital market via a digital medium.

Do you really think Google is embarrassed that only the top 5 or 6 results on a search page are clicked on? This only represents a minute percentage of millions of results.

Because it turns audiences off when it is the same names auctioned multiple times with no interest.

I used to think that too, until one day I realized that we and many other digital service providers are providing tools to help people sort through digital data to find what they are looking for.

Search engines help us to work our way through the gigabytes of digital data produced online. Social media is starting to help sort the wheat from the chaff too. The aim of a modern internet based sales platform should be to provide a user interface which is accessible to both search engines and humans plus a solid service in the background to ensure the product gets delivered. Where would Facebook be today it was only for Harvard students?

 

[snoopy]

You are comparing apples and bytes in an attempt to make an argument here. We are in a digital world selling a digital product to a digital market via a digital medium.

Do you really think Google is embarrassed that only the top 5 or 6 results on a search page are clicked on? This only represents a minute percentage of millions of results.

What do Google search results have to do with auction clearance rates? You think I am the one making bad comparisons?

 

[AnthonyP]

What do Google search results have to do with auction clearance rates? You think I am the one making bad comparisons?

The point is that online you do not need the absolute filters required in the offline world.

You can run an online store with 5 000 different t-shirts, in a physical store you might only stock 50 different designs. There are thousands and thousands of example online where the scale is way beyond what is plausible or even possible in a traditional store.

There are lots of people buying, selling and trading on the "long tail" of results be it in search results, t-shirts or domain names.

My point is that the scale of online is massive, so low clearance rates are not causing industry wide embarrassment, we rightly judge success on the actual sales made.

 

[DavidL]

The point is that online you do not need the absolute filters required in the offline world.

You can run an online store with 5 000 different t-shirts, in a physical store you might only stock 50 different designs. There are thousands and thousands of example online where the scale is way beyond what is plausible or even possible in a traditional store.

There are lots of people buying, selling and trading on the "long tail" of results be it in search results, t-shirts or domain names.

My point is that the scale of online is massive, so low clearance rates are not causing industry wide embarrassment, we rightly judge success on the actual sales made.

Great point well made.

 

[snoopy]

Great point well made.

I wonder if there need to be some kind of note under your posts so people can clearly see you are a part owner of Netfleet?

 

[DavidL]

I wonder if there need to be some kind of note under your posts so people can clearly see you are a part owner of Netfleet?

Typical snoopy... can't win the argument so you lower yourself to smear and suggestions of something underhand.

If you think that I don't genuinely agree with his point but am just pretending I do then...

...well, I guess there's not much I can do.

Except be thankful I don't live in a world like yours where everybody is distrusted, everybody is to be criticised and every glass is half empty. Mate, honestly, it's your loss and your problem, not mine

Now, why don't you respond to Anthony's point? Oh, I know why, because you actually agree with it but could never bring yourself to admit it. Am I right?

 

[snoopy]

Typical snoopy... can't win the argument so you lower yourself to smear and suggestions of something underhand.

If you think that I don't genuinely agree with his point but am just pretending I do then...

...well, I guess there's not much I can do.

Except be thankful I don't live in a world like yours where everybody is distrusted, everybody is to be criticised and every glass is half empty. Mate, honestly, it's your loss and your problem, not mine

Now, why don't you respond to Anthony's point? Oh, I know why, because you actually agree with it but could never bring yourself to admit it. Am I right?

David,

The issue I have raised it is about you posting about netfleet in a strongly supportive way or more commonly here a promotional way, (eg extremely "rosey" opinions on expiring names) without saying anything about your part ownership of the site.

Anthony is your employee is he not?

Regarding Anthony's post it is pretty clear I disagree with it, he thinks it is not an embarrassing thing the vast majority of names in an auction to get no bids, I think it is.

Ironic that you'd now be complaining about me not continuing to argue with someone, given that you are typically the one with the "I'm sick of your arguing, this is my last post" line.