auctions GoDaddy Expired Auctions can be tricked

Furquan · Jul 10, 2023

Twitter user and Chinese domain investor posted that Godaddy Auctions allows people to use two bidder accounts on the same name and a lot of people are using it for tricking the auctions.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1678228128194256896

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Michael said:
I'm not sure what you're driving at. I understand exactly how it works and the repercussions it has. That's why I'm saying a re-auction is the only way to do it. To be clear I mean an open re-auction, not just between the bidders of the failed auction.

This main point is this is a problem that has existed for many years.

My guess is the scheme is going to target domains with obvious value, like NNNN.com for example.

People are only going to do this when it is worthwhile.

In that 5047.com example the 2nd bidder essentially made at least a few thousand dollars from the top bidder not paying.

If the secondary bidder was involved or not, who knows, but the system needs to be fixed.

As the system is designed now, it incentivizes abuse.

Let's take a look at GoDaddy expired auctions right now -

9081.com $29,000 (10 days left)
Doye.com $28,500 (8 days left)
7860.com $21,500 (9 days left)
8794.com $12,750 (4 days left)
98s.com $8,200 (9 days left)

Who knows what to actually believe on these.

Let's take a look at Doye.com for example.

Bidder 3 and Bidder 9 drove it from $165 to $27,500 in 20 minutes...right after being listed, with (10) days left.

2023/07/15 09:12 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$28,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 04:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$28,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:28 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$27,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:28 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$27,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:28 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$26,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:28 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$26,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:28 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$25,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:27 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$25,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:27 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$24,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:27 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$24,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:27 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$24,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:27 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$24,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:26 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$23,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:26 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$23,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:26 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$23,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:24 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$23,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:24 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$22,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:23 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$22,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:23 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$22,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:23 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$22,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:23 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$21,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:23 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$21,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:22 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$21,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:22 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$21,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:22 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$20,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:22 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$20,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:22 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$20,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:21 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$20,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:19 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$19,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:19 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$19,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:19 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$19,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:18 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$19,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:18 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$18,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:18 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$18,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:18 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$18,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:17 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$18,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:17 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$17,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:17 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$17,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:17 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$17,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:17 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$17,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:12 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$16,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$16,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$16,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$16,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$15,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$15,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:11 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$15,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$15,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$15,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$14,750
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$14,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$14,250
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$14,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$13,750
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$13,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$13,250
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$13,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$12,750
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$12,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$12,250
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$12,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$11,750
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$11,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$11,250
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:10 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$11,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:09 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$10,750
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:09 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$10,500
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:09 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$10,250
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$10,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$10,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$9,100
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$9,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$8,100
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$8,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$7,100
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$7,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$6,100
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$6,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$5,100
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:08 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$5,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$1,025
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$1,000
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$185
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$180
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$175
Comment: Automatic Bid
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 3	$170
Comment:
2023/07/15 03:07 PM (PDT)	2023/07/25 09:31 AM (PDT)	Bidder 9	$165

Michael · Jul 17, 2023

bmugford said:
This main point is this is a problem that has existed for many years.

My guess is the scheme is going to target domains with obvious value, like NNNN.com for example.

People are only going to do this when it is worthwhile.

In that 5047.com example the 2nd bidder essentially made at least a few thousand dollars from the top bidder not paying.

If the secondary bidder was involved or not, who knows, but the system needs to be fixed.

As the system is designed now, it incentivizes abuse.

Let's take a look at GoDaddy expired auctions right now -

9081.com $29,000 (10 days left)
7860.com $21,500 (9 days left)
8794.com $12,750 (4 days left)

Who knows what to actually believe on these.

Brad

During the window I looked at there were four NNNN.com auctions at GoDaddy and only one of them was rolled back. And I'm guessing it was probably actually a standard non-paying bidder, as it wasn't wildly above wholesale. But obviously no way to be sure.

Here are some other liquid/short name rollbacks going back another 35 days from the initial window:

26x․com from $4,444 to $550
oAir․com from $9,088 to $15
6v․net from $8,100 to $15
8y․net from $7,500 to $520
6y․net from $7,200 to $15
NDTC․com from $3,800 to $45
GBQP․com from $4,750 to $60
2006․com from $91,000 to $20,250
2875․com from $31,399 to $8,100
994488․com from $4,850 to $128
TD7․com from $4,000 to $15
ZS8․com from $6,600 to $1,100
588888․com from $34,500 to $45
TWCI․com from $3,250 to $265
883․cc from $55,500 to $15,050
OHTY․com from $3,000 to $62
F6․net from $9,088 to $32

Pretty nutty...

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Michael said:
Here are some other liquid/short name rollbacks going back another 35 days from the initial window:

26x․com from $4,444 to $550
oAir․com from $9,088 to $15
6v․net from $8,100 to $15
8y․net from $7,500 to $520
6y․net from $7,200 to $15
NDTC․com from $3,800 to $45
GBQP․com from $4,750 to $60
2006․com from $91,000 to $20,250
2875․com from $31,399 to $8,100
994488․com from $4,850 to $128
TD7․com from $4,000 to $15
ZS8․com from $6,600 to $1,100
588888․com from $34,500 to $45
TWCI․com from $3,250 to $265
883․cc from $55,500 to $15,050
OHTY․com from $3,000 to $62
F6․net from $9,088 to $32

Pretty nutty...

Yeah, this is the problem.

OAIR.com $15. TD7.com $15.
(3) CC.net for under $32.

These NNNN.com are worth far more than their adjusted prices.

Complete nonsense.

It shows exactly how the system can be abused for desirable domains.

Some people are making thousands and thousands of dollars with this scheme.

Thanks for sharing this info.

Brad

Michael · Jul 17, 2023

bmugford said:
Yeah, this is the problem.

OAIR.com $15. TD7.com $15.
(3) CC.net for under $32.

These NNNN.com are worth far more than their adjusted prices.

Complete nonsense.

It shows exactly how the system can be abused for desirable domains.

Some people are making thousands and thousands of dollars with this scheme.

Thanks for sharing this info.

Brad

If you look at the CC.net ones that were obviously gamed, unsurprisingly they're under privacy. But three of them are pointed at 4.cn and two of the three have this very specific description in the listing:

买域名找4.cn-luky

If you do a Google search for this:

site:4.cn "买域名找4.cn-luky"

You get a bunch of results. If you check the domains that have this exact description in their listing, most of them are under privacy, but so far I've found three that were not:

73297.com
37592.com
31912.com

All of them had the same registrant, whose email is associated with several CC.com and CC.net. Weird huh.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Michael said:
If you look at the CC.net ones that were obviously gamed, unsurprisingly they're under privacy. But three of them are pointed at 4.cn and two of the three have this very specific description in the listing:

买域名找4.cn-luky

If you do a Google search for this:

site:4.cn "买域名找4.cn-luky"

You get a bunch of results. If you check the domains that have this exact description in their listing, most of them are under privacy, but so far I've found three that were not:

73297.com
37592.com
31912.com

All of them had the same registrant, whose email is associated with several CC.com and CC.net. Weird huh.

Thanks for that information.

Maybe it is about time that GoDaddy starts doing some research.

Surely, with their resources they can get to the bottom of who is abusing the system and then fix the system itself.

Any comments?

@Paul Nicks @James Iles

Brad

Sutruk · Jul 17, 2023

D Haynes said:
This is what Dynadot are trying to combat by offering the domain to the 2nd bidder for their top bid instead of retracting all the top bidders bids.

This isn't the solution, as one of the bidders can be bidding jut to inflate the auction. Then finally not paying for the domain. And the second bidder doens't have to pay for their top second bid, thanks to the other "fake" bidder.

bmugford said:
Thanks for that information.

Maybe it is about time that GoDaddy starts doing some research.

Surely, with their resources they can get to the bottom of who is abusing the system and then fix the system itself.

Brad

The only serious and professional way to manage an "unpaid" auction is to repeat the auction. Dropcatch and Snapnames realized that some time ago.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Sutruk said:
The only serious and professional way to manage an "unpaid" auction is to repeat the auction. Dropcatch and Snapnames realized that some time ago.

I think we can all agree the current system is flawed.

People are doing it because they are being rewarded for doing it.

The bidding games would quickly stop when there is no incentive to do it.

Brad

Furquan · Jul 17, 2023

bmugford said:
I think we can all agree the current system is flawed.

People are doing it because they are being rewarded for doing it.

The bidding games would quickly stop when there is no incentive to do it.

Brad

The amount of argument I am getting in closed groups is insane. Lol

those people want it not to be closed and they are arguing is best for them.

Idk why they don't want that loophole to be closed.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Another highly questionable auction.

B66.com - $50,000 current bid. Newly listed, ends in 10 days.

It seems clear that the people using this scheme are rushing to get their bids in early. This is exactly the opposite of how every other domain auction works.

In my mind, I am not able to trust the results on any of these short domains.

Brad

Sutruk · Jul 17, 2023

D Haynes said:
This is what Dynadot are trying to combat by offering the domain to the 2nd bidder for their top bid instead of retracting all the top bidders bids. Shill bidding will always be a problem but I'm not sure there's a way to combat it and make everyone happy

I have to point out that I would support this case only if the auction house offers the domain to the 2nd highest bidder for their top bid as an option, and never as a must.

I mean, the proper process should be:

1. Offer the domain to the second bidder for their top bid, but as an option, not as a must.
2. If the second bidder rejects, then repeat the auction.

Sometimes, if the winning bidder has inflated the auction so much, the second highest bidder may not want to purchase the domain for their second top bid.

But, other times, the second highest bidder would like to purchase the domain for their top bid, because the winning bidder (and non payer) did not inflate the auction that much.

And I say this because it once happened to me, when I was the second highest bidder. And in that case I would have purchased the domain for my top bid, which I finally couldn't because the auction was not repeated for that domain.

Sutruk · Jul 17, 2023

bmugford said:
Another highly questionable auction.

B66.com - $50,000 current bid. Newly listed, ends in 10 days.

It seems clear that the people using this scheme are rushing to get their bids in early. This is exactly the opposite of how every other domain auction works.

A proper and clean auction always should show a "nickname" of every and each bidder.
I mean, obfuscating or just giving ID numbers to the bidders doesn't help in terms of clarity and fairness.
Nodoby will know who has failed to pay, and if they were in fact "banned" from the platform, or just allowed to continue their shaddy games.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Sutruk said:
A proper and clean auction always should show the "nickname" of every and each bidder.
I mean, obfuscating or just giving ID numbers to the bidders doesn't help in terms of clarity and fairness.
Nodoby will know who has failed to pay, and if they were in fact "banned" from the platform, or just allowed to continue their shaddy games.

Yeah, when you combine this auction design with anonymous bidding it makes it much worse.

Again, these were my comments from 2014 on this issue.

I have seen this type of bidding activity before many times. I explained what normally happens in the other thread. I have also pointed out specific examples of this in the past to various parties @ GoDaddy.

In summary, this normally involves at least two bidders running an auction up past a reasonable price, then the high bidder does not pay and the 2nd bidder gets it for a huge discount with their bids removed.

One thing you have to realize in this specific situation is it took 2 bidders to run the price up to $106,000. Even if one bidder is a shill, the current high bidder also had to bid for the price to make it there.

Is it plausible someone would legitimately bid $100K+ on this domain name? I don’t think so.

The fact that GoDaddy allows public anonymous bidding just leaves this open to games like this. Changes really need to be implemented to stop this sort of thing from happening as often as it does.

and

@ Richard

That is exactly why the bidders are doing this. They run away from the pack in a 2 way bidding war to block any other bidders from getting between them.

Let’s say you were willing to pay $7K, and 2 other people were willing to pay $10K and $12K. With two bidders running the bid up to an absurd level it blocks any other legitimate bidders. Then when the non paying bidder is removed, the new winner gets the option to buy it with all those bids removed for far less than it would have sold for otherwise.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

Sutruk said:
I have to point out that I would support this case only if the auction house offers the domain to the 2nd highest bidder for their top bid as an option, and never as a must.

I mean, the proper process should be:

1. Offer the domain to the second bidder for their top bid, but as an option, not as a must.
2. If the second bidder rejects, then repeat the auction.

Sometimes, if the winning bidder has inflated the auction so much, the second highest bidder may not want to purchase the domain for their second top bid.

But, other times, the second highest bidder would like to purchase the domain for their top bid, because the winning bidder (and non payer) did not inflate the auction that much.

And I say this because it once happened to me, when I was the second highest bidder. And in that case I would have purchased the domain for my top bid, which I finally couldn't because the auction was not repeated for that domain.

That would probably be the easiest solution.

I mean, it is not that hard to see the type of domains that are being targeted.

The domains like NNNN.com, LLLL.com, CCC.com, CC.net, etc. These type should obviously be receiving extra scrutiny.

I assume other domains with obvious value would likely be targeted as well.

No one is using this scheme to get a $100 domain for $30.

They are doing it to get OAIR.com for $15, F6.net for $32, TD7.com for $15, NDTC.com for $45, etc.

People would quit running the auctions up and not paying, if there was no longer a reason to do it.

Brad

mdent · Jul 17, 2023

There is actually an easy solution to this issue, I'm surprised nobody is doing it.

Allow bids UNDER the current price.

At any time during the auction, you may enter any amount as your proxy bid, regardless of the current price.

Here's an example scenario to demonstrate how it works:

Let's say they're auctioning a decent 4L domain, liquid value around $500. ShillBidder & BullshitKing enter in a bidding war right as the auction becomes available, and they finally stop $5000, with ShillBidder in the lead. If they were to roll back all bids from ShillBidder, BullshitKing would take the domain for $20.

However, BuyEverything entered a late proxy bid of $350, HugeEverything entered a late proxy bid of $450, and I also entered a late proxy bid of $495. The auction ends.

When ShillBidder doesn't finalize the purchase, they are removed from the auction, penalized, and we go to the next highest bidder, which is BullshitKing. Since I was able to enter the auction after their shill bidding, the auction is only rolled back to my bid plus the $5 increment, $500 total. If BullshitKing also declines to complete to purchase at this price, their bids are also removed, and the auction is rolled back to me. I complete the purchase at the high bid of HugeEverything plus increment, $455 total. If I also turn out to be a scam artist, HugeEverything gets a crack at the domain for $355. Etc.

I think it's an intuitive system that can be explained simply to retail customers, too.

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

mdent said:
There is actually an easy solution to this issue, I'm surprised nobody is doing it.

Allow bids UNDER the current price.

At any time during the auction, you may enter any amount as your proxy bid, regardless of the current price.

Here's an example scenario to demonstrate how it works:

Let's say they're auctioning a decent 4L domain, liquid value around $500. ShillBidder & BullshitKing enter in a bidding war right as the auction becomes available, and they finally stop $5000, with ShillBidder in the lead. If they were to roll back all bids from ShillBidder, BullshitKing would take the domain for $20.

However, BuyEverything entered a late proxy bid of $350, HugeEverything entered a late proxy bid of $450, and I also entered a late proxy bid of $495. The auction ends.

When ShillBidder doesn't finalize the purchase, they are removed from the auction, penalized, and we go to the next highest bidder, which is BullshitKing. Since I was able to enter the auction after their shill bidding, the auction is only rolled back to my bid plus the $5 increment, $500 total. If BullshitKing also declines to complete to purchase at this price, their bids are also removed, and the auction is rolled back to me. I complete the purchase at the high bid of HugeEverything plus increment, $455 total. If I also turn out to be a scam artist, HugeEverything gets a crack at the domain for $355. Etc.

I think it's an intuitive system that can be explained simply to retail customers, too.

I agree there are other potential solutions, but I am not sure how hard they would be implement.

That kind of requires a redesign of the entire system.

The other solution is a lot more simple, at least in the short term to address this issue.

As is, the system is broken.

I would like GoDaddy to acknowledge the issue and let us know what they plan to do to fix it.

I have seen some people on social media refer to this scheme as a "tactic" or "strategy", as if it is some legitimate part of the auction process. Some have suggested they might try it.

Without action by GoDaddy, this problem is only likely to get worse.

Brad

bmugford · Jul 17, 2023

All you have to do is scan the GoDaddy Auctions to see many domains where the bidding makes no sense.

How about SquareX.com.

Bidder 9 and bidder 13 pushed it from $125 to $11,500.

They pushed it to $10,000 in 5 minutes.

Brad

Furquan · Jul 19, 2023

Another one I reported on Twitter.

Bidders 9 and 8 took it to $8200 under 18 minutes

98s .com

Common @GoDaddy how many samples you needs to stop losing money

Furquan · Jul 19, 2023

Another one... B66 .com

Bidders 12 and 13 doubled it to $50k+ within some minutes.

https://in.godaddy.com/domain-auctions/b66-com-494482609?src=AuctionsLegacy

zomainhacks · Jul 19, 2023

Why are they letting this happening?

It doesn't make their interest and discourages honest bidders.

It should be a top priority issue to be fixed.

bmugford · Jul 19, 2023

Shane tweeted about this as well.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1681675184699236353

bmugford · Jul 19, 2023

A couple funny comments from barman and Andre.

As is, the expired auction system deserves to be mocked.

What is going on is ridiculous.

bmugford · Jul 19, 2023

Other articles about this -

https://domainnamewire.com/2023/07/19/domain-name-auction-gaming-and-what-can-be-done-about-it/

https://www.domainblog.com/2023/07/...on-games-and-getting-liquid-names-dirt-cheap/

SuperDudePro · Jul 19, 2023

It seems like 2 accounts isn't very efficient. If there are 3, then at 8 days left Bidder 1 puts in a $12 bid. Then bidder 2 and bidder 3 shoot it to a too high price, but not outrageous. Probably even better if Bidder 1 stays in for a couple of bids to make it seem more legit.

Nobody enters a bid after Bidder 2 and Bidder 3 drive the price too high. Bidder 1 gets it for whatever price they wanted to pay.

If GoDaddy was to reauction, would they just do it in a one-day auction? Isn't the problem that it's too close to the drop date to run a full auction at that point?

bmugford · Jul 19, 2023

SuperDudePro said:
It seems like 2 accounts isn't very efficient. If there are 3, then at 8 days left Bidder 1 puts in a $12 bid. Then bidder 2 and bidder 3 shoot it to a too high price, but not outrageous. Probably even better if Bidder 1 stays in for a couple of bids to make it seem more legit.

Nobody enters a bid after Bidder 2 and Bidder 3 drive the price too high. Bidder 1 gets it for whatever price they wanted to pay.

If GoDaddy was to reauction, would they just do it in a one-day auction? Isn't the problem that it's too close to the drop date to run a full auction at that point?

Yeah, it can be done with (2) or more accounts. It is just easier to spot when it is only (2) bidders.

How much is a burner GoDaddy auction account $4.95?

Is there even any verification in place to stop a new account from bidding an extreme amount of money?

The bidding is clearly being rigged for many valuable domains. The proof is the rollbacks.

Look at the top auctions now, there is some seriously questionable bidding pushing auctions to the moon in minutes.

Even if it is 1/1000 auctions that doesn't tell the actual story. The vast majority of domains suck and are not worth much, if anything.

The scheme is targeting the most desirable domains.

Brad

bmugford · Jul 19, 2023

SuperDudePro said:
If GoDaddy was to reauction, would they just do it in a one-day auction? Isn't the problem that it's too close to the drop date to run a full auction at that point?

Maybe they should start by flagging certain types of domains, that are most likely to be targets of this scheme.

There also needs to be something in place to prevent extreme rollbacks.

It is only happening because it works. The ball is in GoDaddy's court to fix it, or the abuse is only going to get worse.

This scheme is blocking legitimate bidders from placing legitimate bids on quality domains.

Brad

auctions GoDaddy Expired Auctions can be tricked

JokerTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

NameBio.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

NameBio.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

Top Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

JokerTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

Top Member

Top Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

Top Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

JokerTop Member

JokerTop Member

Top Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

Established Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

www.DataCube.comTop Member

Similar threads

We're social

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement